Anyone seen this before

[martygturner]

As i pointed out to you John.. we have an ageing network, just how old are most connections, mine is date stamped 1961 and until we put in an EV charger the service fuse had never been changed.....Regulations take account of reality not electrical theory.

 

[EFLImpudence]

.Regulations take account of reality not electrical theory.

Do they?

OR

What does that mean?

What about electrical fact?

The text you quoted said we should ignore the regulations and just do what the DNO says whether necessary or not.

 

[martygturner]

Do they?

OR

What does that mean?

What about electrical fact?

The text you quoted said we should ignore the regulations and just do what the DNO says whether necessary or not.

In this case yes... we are connecting to THEIR network....so its up to them to say what the facts are... as they have the right to terminate your connection...

 

[JohnW2]

As i pointed out to you John.. we have an ageing network, just how old are most connections, mine is date stamped 1961 and until we put in an EV charger the service fuse had never been changed.....

Are you suggesting that the fuse can no longer be regarded as reliable (i.e. to do what it says on it's tin)because of its age? . If so, why would the DNO regard it as OK for protecting 2 or 3 metres of cable, but not for a longer cable, given that the same current would be flowing through the entirety of the cable, regardless of its length?

In any event, if (very rarely) anything 'goes wrong' with a fuse, that is invariably manifested by it being more, not less, likely to 'blow' - so it could possibly blow when it shouldn't (too low a current), but incredibly unlikley that it wouldn't blow when it should.

Regulations take account of reality not electrical theory.

We're talking about electrical facts, not theory.

 

[morqthana]

The text you quoted said we should ignore the regulations and just do what the DNO says whether necessary or not.

No, the text he quoted was about the DNO's design rules.

You're the one who wants to ignore what the regulations say.

 

[EFLImpudence]

No, the text he quoted was about the DNO's design rules.

Ok.

You're the one who wants to ignore what the regulations say.

No, reread what I wrote and quote if you can find such a thing I said.
If not, please stop; it is getting tedious.

But that is the point. the quote is not saying follow the regulations but what the DNO says.

 

[morqthana]

Are you suggesting that the fuse can no longer be regarded as reliable (i.e. to do what it says on it's tin)because of its age? . If so, why would the DNO regard it as OK for protecting 2 or 3 metres of cable, but not for a longer cable, given that the same current would be flowing through the entirety of the cable, regardless of its length?

Doesn't matter why the DNO says what it does.

What matters is what the regulations say.

 

[JohnW2]

Doesn't matter why the DNO says what it does. What matters is what the regulations say.

As you say, if one wants (or has) to comply with any rules/regulations/laws, then one has to comply with what those rules/regulations/laws say, not matter how daft is what they say. I have never suggested otherwise.

 

[morqthana]

No, reread what I wrote and quote if you can find such a thing I said.

OK.

Repeatedly, consistently, over a period of several days you have ridiculed the DNO's rule, denied its justifiability, and questioned the right of them to have it, and therefore similarly ridiculed and questioned the wiring regulation which has the DNO rule in it:

Can the DNO alter physics to get you to install an identical fuse that will protect them?

No, but it's their equipment, so they can say how people may or may not use it.

How does that work?

No - I mean how do they programme their fuse to ignore the installation faults that they do not want it to cover and for which the customer has to install his own fuse?

By having something in the Terms & Conditions which you agree to when you become a customer.

Do you have to sign and promise that only some of your electricity will used their fuse?

from the POV of whether they are allowed to have, and "enforce", a rule which says that you can't have meter tails over a certain length without your own fuse.

But - how does it work and how does their fuse know.?

Their fuse is theirs, the cables from the meter are yours. They don't have to let you use their fuse to protect your cables if they don't want to.

But - how do they prevent it being used?

None of these variations explains the need for two identical fuses in the same place.

but surely it’s just the DNO saying ‘you can’t rely on our fuse for protection of your tails if they exceed 3metres’ therefore just passing the responsibility onto you

How does it work for the first three (or two) metres then.

"You may NOT use OUR fuse to protect YOUR cables", what do you do?

How do you prevent it doing so?

And you've been doing all that because you don't want to ignore what the regulations say?

I don't think so.

but surely it’s just the DNO saying ‘you can’t rely on our fuse for protection of your tails if they exceed 3metres’ therefore just passing the responsibility onto you

Nooooo!

Yes.

That's you attempting to deny what the DNO is saying.

But not because you want to ignore the regulation which says you have to follow what the DNO says? Really?

Simple question for everyone:
If an electricity distributor says to you
"You may NOT use OUR fuse to protect YOUR cables", what do you do?

I would remove the DNO fuse and insert another.

That's you saying you'd carry out a criminal act in order to get round a DNO requirement in a wiring regulation.

But not because you want to ignore that regulation? Really?

But that is the point. the quote is not saying follow the regulations but what the DNO says.

View attachment 385312

No, the quote is explaining what the DNOs say. It is the wiring regulations which say what you have to do, not whatever document martygturner quoted.

And if the regulations say you need the DNO to approve something, and their position varies from place to place, then of course it is essential to know what their position is in your area.

 

[EFLImpudence]

So, you can't. Thank you.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Could someone please point out where in BS7671 this DNO rule is stated. I can't find it at the moment.

 

[morqthana]

So, you can't. Thank you.

But I have.

I have shown that repeatedly, consistently, over a period of several days you have ridiculed the DNO's rule, denied its justifiability, and questioned the right of them to have it, and therefore similarly ridiculed and questioned the wiring regulation which has the DNO rule in it.

I have shown that you have said you would carry out a criminal act in order to get round a lack of DNO agreement which would mean you having to comply with a regulation you don't like.

Any claim from you that you've not done all that because you don't want to comply with that regulation would be a patently false claim.

 

[JohnW2]

Could someone please point out where in BS7671 this DNO rule is stated. I can't find it at the moment.

As far as I am aware, it doesn't "state the DNO rule". However, it says that one of the conditions for relying on the DNOs fuse to protect the tails is that the DNO 'agree' that it can provide such protection - and everyone is assuming (I presume correctly) that, in view of their 'rule', they do/would not agree if the cable were longer than 3m (2m for some DNOs, I think).

 

[morqthana]

Could someone please point out where in BS7671 this DNO rule is stated. I can't find it at the moment.

If you have a copy of the regulations please scan and upload the regulation in question to show that NICEIC have misquoted it. Same for the quote that UKPN gave.

I've asked for anybody who can to quote the applicable regulation(s) in full,

But from what UKPN and NICEIC claim are quotes from them and they do not appear to contain any DNO "rules", or any mention of length.

Only a requirement to respect the right of the DNO to agree, or not, to the use of their fuse for the customer's purposes.

 

[JohnW2]

Only a requirement to respect the right of the DNO to agree, or not, to the use of their fuse for the customer's purposes.

Which, as I think most of us agree, is just plain daft. Even more daft is that the DNO seem to agree that their fuse can be used to protect customers' tails which are 3m long, but not if they are 4m (or more) long.

Before you repeat yourself yet again, I agree that rules and regulations are rules and regulations, and that one theoretically ought to comply with them, regardless of how daft they are ... but that doesn't alter the fact that they seem to be daft!