18th 544.1.2

That depends for whom the regulations are written. They are, without electrical knowledge, just words. If someone can't understand them then they cannot use them.
I am sure legal documents are written for the express purpose of making them confusing (or unintelligible) for ordinary people.

Nevertheless, someone cannot dismiss the correct interpretation when it is explained to them - on the grounds that the author was more intelligent or knowledgeable when the regulation, in fact, states what that someone is being told.




I would like to know what a person is thinking when 'bonding' a door hinge. It's difficult not to be rude.

The omitted part (in the Gas Regulations) of 411.3.1.2 also states "MPB conductors complying with Chapter 54 shall..." so, merely quoting the list of parts is even more careless by the person responsible - indicating that a change of job might be a good idea..
 
Sponsored Links
I take that to refer that Extraneous-conductive-part is a conductive part that is ouside of the electrical installation, eg a pipe that may, or may not enter from the outside which may produce a potential difference between the electrical Main terminal and that metal pipe. It says that is generally to ground but it does not say the PD might come from elsewhere.

Alan can you explain where else a PD might come from, if not Ground.

One option is a cable possibly from somewhere, with a metal sheathing, similar to a BT cable.
That is covered in the regs that it MAY need bonding with permission.

Also
Do you think that a copper vent pipe poking through an external wall is An Extraneous conductive part.
Do you think a stainless steel cooker hood vent protruding through a restaurant roof is an Extraneous conductive part.
 
Alan can you explain where else a PD might come from, if not Ground.

One option is a cable possibly from somewhere, with a metal sheathing, similar to a BT cable.
That is covered in the regs that it MAY need bonding with permission.

Also
Do you think that a copper vent pipe poking through an external wall is An Extraneous conductive part.
Do you think a stainless steel cooker hood vent protruding through a restaurant roof is an Extraneous conductive part.
Lets be sensible for a moment!

I can give you scenarios easily enough then you decide where the difference comes from. For the moment I'll go along with the no bonding concept for the moment.

1. Plumbing
Common fault I used to go to plumbing wise was the replacement of immersion heaters in cylinders and single point of use water heaters. Often cause of failure not necessarily just actual open circuit but where the water had corroded through the sheath of the heater.

Immersion heaters are often installed with PTFE tape or lashing of gunge. The heater itself is connected to earth via its own connection but the effectivness of this is often reduced either by the fitting method or corrosion around the area caused by water corrosion over time.

These heaters may go years and never used but the corrosion still happens on the sheath normally around centre or towards ends.

Now if they fail anywher from around centre portion to neutral end the heater will continue working, ok noisily and customers would often say that. Earth conection efficiency has been reduced so the current will now flow in part via the flexible cable earth and the hopefully bonded pipework. With your no bonding concept all will try to flow down the flex but the pipework, since no path to earth, simply rises in potential to a dangerous level. PME system no RCD so how long can toy MCB, of fuse if that old, survive increased current, due to effectivly shortened element. Indefinitly?

2. Elecrtic central heating boilers - exactly same as above

3.
I have some cables running across a heating flow and return. What would you do to protect them? They are first floor joists that they running in by the way. Thanks.

Under floorboards this could go on for decades undetected cable sheath being heated and cooled many times daily. Sheath not designed for that situation so sooner or later fails leaving uninsulated wire, (went to many a jobs in 60's with VIR cables and all that was left under floorboards was lengths of naked wire! Same will happen eventually to PVC if heated and cooled too many times.) near pipe, live touches unbonded pipe, nowhere for current to flow so RCD, if fitted not activated MCB detects nothing so does nothing. All the while the pipe is at mains potential all ready for someone to touch their kettle and turn on the tap touch any bit of metal and an earthed object.

More examples of isolated metalwork at a different potential to electrical earth wanted?

Comment I posted earlier, and got a credit for. Why do we need earthing? If there was no earthing the world would be a safer place. Well apart from the fact the distribution companies cannot guarantee they could have an undetected earth fault on their network.

If one could predict what would cause a dangerous fault then somebody would design into the offending object a means of preventing it. That is not possible 100% of the time so a fail safe backup was devised - Equipotential Zone - but this can only work if all internal metalwork is bonded together hence power companies requiring it. Yes even Equipotential Zones don't make for a 100% safe enviroment but is best on offer at the moment apart from making regulations to prevent anything, non electrical being, constructed in non conductive materials. Not going to happen.

BT sheath has no requirement for bonding since it is not normally possible to physically touch the sheath plus the ends are normally sealed with heat-shrink. Important thing is it can only be touched internally if BT property is disturbed in any case externally if tou touch it where the sheath has degraded needs you to be on the same earth as the cable is burried in, or you are sufficiently insulated.
 
Do you think that a copper vent pipe poking through an external wall is An Extraneous conductive part.
No I was refering to the copper discharge pipe from an unvented cylinder to ground level ot into a soakaway unit around 500mm from building wall. Even the all electric ones would only be installed by a suitably qualified person. Electrician would only be involved wiring the immersion heater elements and no more, if that.
 
Sponsored Links
Immersion heaters are often installed with PTFE tape or lashing of gunge. The heater itself is connected to earth via its own connection but the effectivness of this is often reduced either by the fitting method or corrosion around the area caused by water corrosion over time.
Nonsense.

Earth conection efficiency has been reduced so the current will now flow in part via the flexible cable earth and the hopefully bonded pipework.
No. It would be better to limit the current flow to the cable.
That it is connected to the tank is an unfortunate unavoidable consequence.

With your no bonding concept all will try to flow down the flex but the pipework, since no path to earth, simply rises in potential to a dangerous level.
No one has suggested a no bonding concept. Just that it should not be connected to parts which do not require it.
So, it would be better if it could be prevented from flowing through the pipes.
That the immersion is connected to the tank means the current will flow through the pipes no matter what you do. That it has nowhere to go doesn't mean it isn't there when you touch it.

More examples of isolated metalwork at a different potential to electrical earth wanted?
Isolated metalwork has no potential unless YOU connect it to something that has.

Comment I posted earlier, and got a credit for. Why do we need earthing? If there was no earthing the world would be a safer place.
Yes, if there was no NEED for earthing; unfortunately there is.
Best not to earth parts which don't need it.

If one could predict what would cause a dangerous fault then somebody would design into the offending object a means of preventing it.
Until then we have EARTHING.

That is not possible 100% of the time so a fail safe backup was devised - Equipotential Zone - but this can only work if all internal metalwork is bonded together hence power companies requiring it. Yes even Equipotential Zones don't make for a 100% safe enviroment but is best on offer at the moment apart from making regulations to prevent anything, non electrical being, constructed in non conductive materials. Not going to happen.
Nonsense.

BT sheath has no requirement for bonding since it is not normally possible to physically touch the sheath plus the ends are normally sealed with heat-shrink. Important thing is it can only be touched internally if BT property is disturbed in any case externally if tou touch it where the sheath has degraded needs you to be on the same earth as the cable is burried in, or you are sufficiently insulated.
Nonsense.
 
That depends for whom the regulations are written. They are, without electrical knowledge, just words. If someone can't understand them then they cannot use them.
Indeed. However, the regs are written for those who 'have to' work to them (primarily electricians) - so, as I said, if (as appears to be the case) an appreciable (maybe substantial) proportion of electricians (presumably with the reading ability and intelligence expected of electricians) have misinterpreted those regas for many years, I stick tio my view that thoise regs are not really 'fit for purpose (fit for the purpose and audience for which they were written).
I am sure legal documents are written for the express purpose of making them confusing (or unintelligible) for ordinary people.
I'm sure that was true historically, and remains so to a fair ecxtent. However, as you know, there have been serious attempts top change that situation over recent decades (at least, in the UK) and things are definitely getting better.
Nevertheless, someone cannot dismiss the correct interpretation when it is explained to them - on the grounds that the author was more intelligent or knowledgeable when the regulation, in fact, states what that someone is being told.
Quite so. That's why I have 'given up' in this particular case.

Kind Regards, John
 
Indeed. However, the regs are written for those who 'have to' work to them
That should be the case, but it doesn't appear to be.

There are so many of these misleading poorly written regulations, it is difficult to accept that it is accidental; so, who knows.
 
That should be the case, but it doesn't appear to be. There are so many of these misleading poorly written regulations, it is difficult to accept that it is accidental; so, who knows.
Well, as you say, that should be the case - so I think I will stick to my view that they are not really "fit for (what should be their) purpose"!

Kind Regards, John
 
For anyone else who also does not understand the principles, please ignore Alan's posts.
Plus also then ignore any paperwork supplied by electricity boards requiring this bonding lark to be carried out. They don't know what the hell they are on about. Enjoy your shocks in comfort. Remember DIYers know best.

With that I'm out, as they say on that show.
 
Another observation ... if I came across a gas engineer/fitter who was incapable of understanding basic concepts of electrical safety issues, even after they had been explained to him/her umpteen times, I would have no confidence that they were capable of grasping/understanding concepts and aspects of gas safety matters (which someone had presumably tried to teach them), and therefore would not want them going anywhere near my gas installation.

Kind Regards, John
 

DIYnot Local

Staff member

If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.

Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.


Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local

 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top