PIR Question

[Pietros]

Hi all,

Just need to gather a few opinions on interpretation of regulation 514-10-01

My boss insists that I record a code 4 for any 3-phase distribution boards not fitted with a 'DANGER 400V' label.

I pointed out that the regulation mentions situations where a higher voltage would not be expected.

Am I right that any persons likely to be removing the cover of such a distribution board should reasonably expect a higher voltage and therefore this would not be a defect?

Thanks in advance for your thoughts!

 

[333rocky333]

The wording in the current 16th regs is now different to the original 16th.

The reg has been rewritten as Uo exceeding 230 volt.
You might want to look at this old post
http://www.diynot.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=128711&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

 

[GaryMo]

Ask your boss to show you the regulation which requires that a 400v warning label is placed on a three phase DB.
Tell him it'll be his homework for the evening

 

[fattony]

Tell him it'll be his homework for the evening

can imagine that going down a treat

 

[GaryMo]

Lol It would have to be said though!

 

[Pietros]

So it looks like I was correct as usual!

Thanks for the replies!

I notice in the 17th Edition the wording for that regulation has changed again-Uo is replaced by the term 'nominal voltage' is 'nominal voltage' U or Uo???

Answers on a postcard.......

 

[securespark]

In the 17th, Uo is defined as the

"nominal ac rms line voltage to earth".


In the 16th, Uo is defined as the

"nominal phase voltage (to earth for TN systems)".

 

[333rocky333]

when that reg first came out in the red 16th it simply said
"every item of equipment or enclosure within which a voltage exceeding 250 volt exists."

No fancy words or symbols then.

The nominal voltage is
The "voltage by which an installation (or part of an installation) is designated"