Non-combustible cutouts??

[JohnW2]

Perhaps a little tongue-in-cheek, but in the interests of consistency ...

... given that they carry an installation's entire current load, usually contain the highest-rated OPD within the premises and (presumably) contain screwed terminals, I wonder if cutouts within domestic premises should qualify as being within the spirit of "consumer units and similar switchgear assemblies" and, if so, whether the LFB (and/or other fire brigades) should be pressing for appropriate regulations to be revised such that DNOs would be required to replace their plastic cutouts with the sort of 'non-combustible' ones which they have been trying to get rid of for decades?

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

The LFB may find that the DNOs are less malleable under ignorant pressure than JPEL/64.

 

[EFLImpudence]

I wonder if cutouts within domestic premises should qualify as being within the spirit of "consumer units and similar switchgear assemblies"

There is no spirit, they are not.

 

[JohnW2]

There is no spirit, they are not.

The regulation may not have spirit, but the LFB undoubtedly does have.

I wonder if they have any alleged 'statistics' (or even anecdotes, which may be more to the point with CUs) relating to house fires that have originated in cutouts?

Kind Regards, John

 

[securespark]

They dare not release the figures, assuming they have any.
They probably blamed the fire on the CU...

 

[JohnW2]

They dare not release the figures, assuming they have any. They probably blamed the fire on the CU...

To be a bit more serious, if the photo we saw yesterday (insulation visible on four ends of cutout tails, to a ridiculous extent in one case) is anything to go by, there are clearly people out there (probably not DNO personell) working on cutout tails who take very little care/pride in their work - so goodness knows how careful they are to make sure that the terminations are secure. It would therefore not surprise me at all if there were at least some fires originating in plastic cutouts (and/or meters, maybe even more than those originating ion plastic CUs ).

Kind Regards, John

 

[securespark]

It would have to be very loose and carry a huge current to cause an issue.

One board change I was on, the tails fell out when I pulled on them gently....

 

[EFLImpudence]

Is there a possibility cut-outs are made from some kind of at least flame-retardant material?

 

[JohnW2]

It would have to be very loose and carry a huge current to cause an issue.

It would obviously carry at least as much current as anything in the CU(s).

If we assume that the fires allegedly originating in CUs are predominantly due to loose connections, in view of the photo I mentioned, how confident can you be that connections within some cutouts might not be at least as loose?

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

Is there a possibility cut-outs are made from some kind of at least flame-retardant material?

Who knows, and it's clearly a matter of degree, since I think that even the now-maligned plastic CUs were required to be made out of a material with some degree of flame-retardant properties.

Even if I'm wrong in saying that, if plastic cutouts are made out of a material which is deemed to be acceptable (in the respect in question), then why could CUs not have been required to be made out of the same material (rather than metal)?

Kind Regards, John

 

[securespark]

What photo?

I'm not sure what you're saying.

I am saying that I have found tails connected to a meter that were so loose they came out with slight pressure on the tails.

While not quite the cutout, these connections are not in the CU either.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Even if I'm wrong in saying that, if plastic cutouts are made out of a material which is deemed to be acceptable (in the respect in question), then why could CUs not have been required to be made out of the same material (rather than metal)?

...because of the impossible non-combustible requirement and inclusion of "ferrous metal, e.g.steel etc.". They could, after all, have said "asbestos etc." -

unless there were an ulterior motive of which we are unaware.

 

[JohnW2]

What photo?

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

...because of the impossible non-combustible requirement and inclusion of "ferrous metal, e.g.steel etc.". They could, after all, have said "asbestos etc." -

Yes - but, as far as we can tell, they were being guided//advised/instructed/'forced' by the LFB - so if the latter were happy with the (non-metallic) material used for making modern cutouts, why would then have not suggested/advised/demanded that domestic CUs should be required to be made out of the same?

Kind Regards, John

 

[EFLImpudence]

I, of course, don't know.

Perhaps they have not encountered cut-out fires (to little room and oxygen?) so they did not bother.
Perhaps they suggested it to the regulation body but they said "Oh we'll just go with metal ones".
Perhaps they are in a fierce battle with the DNOs who flatly refuse to have metal cut-outs.