On a Lighter Note - There are Two literal meanings of "Full-Din-rail" here!!

No, but they often give you instructions on how to adjust them. Whether you choose to follow them or not, is not their fault.
True. However, it still seems rather odd to me that to install a Main Switch (which is obviously 'dimensionally very similar') 'of the wrong make' apparently invalidates the 'type tested' status but that to hack away at the busbar apparently does not invalidate it!

Kind Regards, John
 
Sponsored Links
Given your attitude to precision, I'm surprised at you. What I "actually wrote" and "actually asked" was quite clear, but you chose to totally disregard the qualification in what I had actually written/asked.
What you wrote was " 'fits' ", i.e. in inverted commas.

So your qualification was not that it fits, it was that it 'fits'.
 
True. However, it still seems rather odd to me that to install a Main Switch (which is obviously 'dimensionally very similar') 'of the wrong make' apparently invalidates the 'type tested' status but that to hack away at the busbar apparently does not invalidate it!
It's not hacking away at it - it is cutting it to the required lengths as per the maker's instructions.

Whereas fitting a 3rd-party device, whether it is dimensionally very similar or 'dimensionally very similar' is outwith the scope of any manufacturer to control or instruct on, so it is quite reasonable for doing so to invalidate type approval status.
 
However, are you saying that they would still have to be regarded as not being 'type tested', hence not a "CU" per BS7671 definition?
If that is what the rules say, then yes. Is this another example of you not liking what the rules say, deciding that you wished they said something different, and then looking for an interpretation, or a way to rationalise a decision by you that because they actually meant what you would like them to mean then they must actually mean that, so you are OK to do what you want rather than what they say?


I do wonder if if we're not at risk of losing sight of common sense. If, in 'everyday' terms, the component 'fits', then I would suggest that the way in which the component is installed (terminal tightness etc.) is a very much more important factor (in terms of safety) than are such issues as dimensional tolerances and materials.
Be that as it may, if the manufacturer only submits for evaluation, or only self-certifies, CUs with his own devices in it, then whether you like it or not, and whether it makes any sense to you or not, that is how it is and pursuing arguments along the lines of "it must be just as safe" is utterly pointless.


We've been over all the theoretical possibilities in the past, but I wonder whether there has ever been a real-world case in which it has been proven that some sort of 'failure' of a CU was the consequence of it having been populated with one or more 'wrong make' (but 'dimensionally similar') components?
Be that as it may, if the manufacturer only submits for evaluation, or only self-certifies, CUs with his own devices in it, then whether you like it or not, and whether it makes any sense to you or not, that is how it is and pursuing arguments along the lines of "has it ever been a problem in real life" is utterly pointless.
 
Last edited:
Sponsored Links
User cuttable busbars and Full Din-Rails are the In Thing nowadays, if there were unsafe, the manufacturer's would not be allowed to sell them.
 
User cuttable busbars and Full Din-Rails are the In Thing nowadays, if there were unsafe, the manufacturer's would not be allowed to sell them.
Oh my goodness - what world do you live in? :)

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

 
Back
Top