access to live terminals?

Good example, that Regulation does say for 'type approval' of a 'standard plug' the plug should confirm to BS 1363. However it does also have the text below which I think gets us back to the same situation as I described above - the standard is a great way to show conformance, but the standard is not required as there are acceptable alternative ways.

(3) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraphs (1) and (2) above, a type of standard plug may be approved by a notified body where plugs of that type do not conform to BS 1363 if when determining an application for approval the notified body is satisfied–

(a)that–

(i)the plugs are constructed using an alternative method of construction which provides an equivalent level of safety in respect of any risk of death or personal injury to plugs which conform to BS 1363 and is such that plugs of that type may reasonably be expected to be safe in use;
 
Sponsored Links
Good example, that Regulation does say for 'type approval' of a 'standard plug' the plug should confirm to BS 1363. However it does also have the text below which I think gets us back to the same situation as I described above - the standard is a great way to show conformance, but the standard is not required as there are acceptable alternative ways.
.... (i)the plugs are constructed using an alternative method of construction which provides an equivalent level of safety in respect of any risk of death or personal injury to plugs which conform to BS 1363 and is such that plugs of that type may reasonably be expected to be safe in use;
Whilst that clearly indicates that conformity with BS1363 is not necessarily required in terms of "method of construction", if the plug is required to "provide an equivalent level of safety" (to that required by BS1363) I imagine that probably means that it would have to be able to pass the tests specified in BS1363, doesn't it?

Kind Regards, John
 
I imagine that probably means that it would have to be able to pass the tests specified in BS1363, doesn't it?

That would likely be a way to demonstrate 'an equivalent level of safety', however you may also be able to come up with your own similar tests and it would be up to you to convince the notified body. It has probably never happened, but perhaps testing to a different, stricter, military spec for example may also be a way to demonstrate safety?

In reality everyone is just going to use BS 1363.
 
That would likely be a way to demonstrate 'an equivalent level of safety', however you may also be able to come up with your own similar tests and it would be up to you to convince the notified body. It has probably never happened, but perhaps testing to a different, stricter, military spec for example may also be a way to demonstrate safety?
Well, yes, testing to a higher level of safety is presumably always going to be fine (since the implication surely is that it would also pass a less demanding test).

However, if a plug were not able to pass the BS1363 tests, then I think one would probably struggle to convince anyone that it had 'an equivalent level of safety', wouldn't one? In other words, the ability to pass (at least) the BS1363 tests presumably effectively is "required", isn't it?

Kind Regards, John
 
Sponsored Links
I agree, you're probably going to end up with something that has the ability to pass BS 1363 tests.

The actual requirement is BS 1363, or "an alternative method of construction which provides an equivalent level of safety in respect of any risk of death or personal injury to plugs which conform to BS 1363 and is such that plugs of that type may reasonably be expected to be safe in use"

So you may not have applied BS 1363 to get to the point of approval, even though whatever you have applied would most likely get you to a product that could pass BS 1363.

This is all a bit academic and only relates to the comment below

Maybe not, but often laws require the adherence to standards.

Where my earlier comments were that the actual law is usually pretty generic in its requirement (e.g. be safe) and standards are not laws and are not required, just a really useful (sometimes!) way to demonstrate you are within the law.
 
I agree, you're probably going to end up with something that has the ability to pass BS 1363 tests.
Quite - but, as you say, this is all getting a bit academic, since what we have agreed on is really a way of saying that the law effectively does "require" that a plug is capable of passing the BS1363 tests. However, the might be greater difficulties in relation to other 'requirements' of BS1363 (e.g. in relation to construction) - which the text you have posted indicates that an 'approvable' plug might not satisfy those BS1363 requirements.

Kind Regards, John
 
I don't have BS1363 but it's on BSOL if needed, although they are funny about you stockpiling them for the sake of it. The discussion was more around Regulations such as The Electrical Equipment (Safety) Regulations 2016 which I do have.
 
upload_2019-6-9_0-43-14.png
 
Good example, looks like you have done a fair amount of research. Based on that research, what's your view on how many of the regulations actually require a BS standard?
 
ISTR that none of the actual regulations/laws require a specific standard - it it just that the standard was created in order to create a standard way of adhering to the specific laws.
And BTW - AFAIK we are still currently in the EU so EN standards are also applicable in the same way.
 
ISTR that none of the actual regulations/laws require a specific standard - it it just that the standard was created in order to create a standard way of adhering to the specific laws.
When he was alive, many decades ago, my father was a Standards Engineer and he led me to believe that legislation and regulations usually (always?) tried to avoid including requirements based on 'external' things, like Standards, over which they had no control - not the least because those things could theoretically change dramatically overnight. Whether that was true then, or now, I don't know.

However, it's at risk becoming a 'circular' situation - if, as does not seem uncommon, legislation requires "compliance with relevant Standard(s)" {without citing specific Standard(s)} but if, as you say, the 'relevant Standard' is created as a means of demonstrating a way of adhering to the law!!

And BTW - AFAIK we are still currently in the EU so EN standards are also applicable in the same way.
I'm not sure that the politics, per se, makes any great difference. As far as I can see, UK laws or regulations could, if they wanted, require compliance with Japanese or Mongolian Standards if they so wished - so I imagine that there's no reason why they could not require compliance with European Standards even if we were no longer in the EU.

In practice, of course, UK manufacturers of products will presumably still want to demonstrate compliance with EU Standards and regulations even if we leave the EU, if they want to be able to continue to sell their products (on the basis of whatever 'trade agreement' :) ) to the EU.

Kind Regards, John
 
Good example, looks like you have done a fair amount of research. Based on that research, what's your view on how many of the regulations actually require a BS standard?
No research at all.

Just random "Ah, what about..."s, hoping to find at least one example of a law requiring adherence to a standard :mrgreen:
 

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