Bonding Alkythene/plastic water service?

mnb

Joined
12 Mar 2005
Messages
121
Reaction score
10
Location
Aberdeenshire
Country
United Kingdom
I noticed that it was recommended to bond the plastic water service as it entered the property. Is this bldg. or elec regs. or just good practice?
 
Sponsored Links
Electrical. But note it says bond it once it changes to metal, assuming it does.
 
mnb said:
I noticed that it was recommended to bond the plastic water service as it entered the property. Is this bldg. or elec regs. or just good practice?

And pray tell what would be the point of bonding a material that acts as an insulator?

You are planning to undertake DIY electrical work when you don't have the common sense to realise the foolishness of your question!! The mind really boggles sometimes...sheesh :confused:

There is no point bonding water services that are supplied in plastic pipe, the metal pipework in your gome should be cross bonded, and it is recommended a main bond be taken to the METAL pipework on the consumer side of your stop-cock...but lets have some brains applied here please.
 
not trying to be clever fwl

but if the pipe incoming is plastic and the pipe outgoing is plastic ,but the stop tap is metal

then where do you stand as regards bonding ?
 
Sponsored Links
Immersions needs no bonding, people seem to bond everything they can - no need.

The stop tap mentioned above would need no bonding.

Kitchens do not need any bonding (unless of course the main water/gas enters in here, and then it needs main equipotential bonding).

Bathrooms require supplymentary bonding - this can take many forms depending on what circuits you have, radiators, metal pipework etc. Every bathroom would be differnent, so I wont comment.
 
FWL-engineer, There's nothing wrong with my brain nor my common courtesy. In fact, i think before i speak which you obviously dont. The question was raised in an earlier thread and the claim was made that the plastic service pipe should be bonded where it entered the building, no elaboration offered.
Whatever my views, i put this question to the Forum for clarification on anomalies such as Kev raised or perhaps some new belt and braces, local, bldg. regs ruling.
However, if you are some kind of disturbed inadequate who uses Forums to relieve the weight of whatever nit-wit notions of superiority plague your waking hours then i am sorry indeed.
 
The whole subject of bonding needs to be clarified as there are so many conflicts and grey areas since when i learnt the trade.
Some say that there is no need to bond past the main incomers but what purpose does that achieve especially when there is talk that water does not introduce a hazard as was believed before but which i still believe is true today, if water doesn't introduce a hazard anymore then why bother bonding the incomers?
The way i see it is, you are trying to achieve an equipotential zone and therefore the metalwork, pipes etc should read the same impedance to earth therefore if some metalwork reads a different impedance to earth due to bad connection or whatever then there is a danger of potential difference or voltage across these pieces and an equipotential zone has not been achieved.
 
kendor said:
there is talk that water does not introduce a hazard as was believed before but which i still believe is true today
So what exactly is your opinion of the results of the tests carried out by the Electrical Research Association on behalf of the IEE?
 
ban-all-sheds said:
kendor said:
there is talk that water does not introduce a hazard as was believed before but which i still believe is true today
So what exactly is your opinion of the results of the tests carried out by the Electrical Research Association on behalf of the IEE?
not a lot frankly!
 
ban-all-sheds said:
You think the ERA are wrong do you?
and whats wrong with that? you seem to disagree with the authorities from time to time
 
I may disagree with their pronouncements/policies/attitude/etc., but if a research association says "we have measured the resistance of water in a 15mm plastic pipe and found it to be 115kohms/m", I can't find much basis on which to disagree.

Feel free to add to the list, if you can think of any more reasons, but right now all I can think of is that you disagree because

a) You think they are lying
b) You think they are incompetent
c) You think their instruments were faulty

This is not a case of disputing an opinion or a decision, you are disputing what someone has told you is a fact. You are claiming that the figures published by the ERA are false, in which case you must be able to show why this is, or what evidence you have which leads you to the conclusion that they have published incorrect figures.
 

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