sockets to the 17th

[chapeau]

But as you said, that was a 'ridiculous extreme' intepretation. The wiring regs are actually pretty well written I would say. The problem is, and you get this on here all the time, people think they can intepret them when they cannot. That is why they publish authoritative guides like the OSG to tell people how to do things and not fall foul of the regs.

Now you may disagree with what the regulations say (eg RCD requirements), but they are in the whole quite clear. Taken with books like the OSG there should be very little to argue about in a DIY situation which this site is all about.

But people like to prove they are clever so they do, and ironically in the process tend to demonstrate how unclever they actually are

And anyway, at the end of the day, us DIYers don't need to follow the regs

 

[ban-all-sheds]

if you screw a metal plate over the front of a socket that is fed in steel conduit, then that wont need an RCD, maybe that is what is being implied?

It would if you ever removed the steel plate to be able to use the socket..

 

[ban-all-sheds]

And anyway, at the end of the day, us DIYers don't need to follow the regs

Not to any extent?

To what standards do you think people should work in order to ensure that they have complied with the law?

 

[ColJack]

er... the one i listed above..

under the 17th sockets can be omitted from an RCD by means of machanical protection i.e steel conduit.

The regulation you quoted says nothing about sockets not needing RCD protection by reason of mechanical protection...

stop being awkward BAS..
that reg says you dont' need RCD if the socket is labled
the other regs say that you don't need to RCD protect the CABLE to the socket if it's in earthed steel conduit.
ergo if a socket if fed by a cable in a steel conduit and labled for a specific use then it doesn't need to be RCD protected.. end of..

To what standards do you think people should work in order to ensure that they have complied with the law?

the law doesn't say you have to work to ANY standard to comply with it.. just that the work must be done safely and with the safety of the users in mind.
ONE way to assure that is to work to a recognised standard. as you well know and often point out yourself..

 

[skenk]

Some people were taking it to the ridiculous extreme of saying that all sockets on a ground floor needed to be RCD protected because somebody could run an extension lead outside from any one of them.

Ridiculous extreme? I was taught that was was standard practice (under the 16th).

When I need power outdoors (eg to hoover the van) I drop a cable out a 3rd floor window (due to the position of my flat). I would certainly argue that any socket on the gnd floor could be likely to be used for outdoor eqpt, at least any socket in a room with a window.

 

[holmslaw]

garlicbread

All normal sockets for general use need to have 30mA RCD protection.

You got your answer in the second post.

 

[Paul_C]

Ridiculous extreme? I was taught that was was standard practice (under the 16th).

Certainly not standard practice as far as I'm aware. Just some people adopting that stance.

I would certainly argue that any socket on the gnd floor could be likely to be used for outdoor eqpt, at least any socket in a room with a window.

What if there is a conveniently located socket just inside the door? Or a socket outside? Would you reasonably expect people to trail extension leads through windows to use less easily accessible sockets?

Besides, if the IEE had intended the 16th-edition rule to apply to all ground-floor sockets, why go with the wording that was used? Why not just state flat-out that all socket outlets in ground-floor locations should be RCD protected?

 

[skenk]

What if there is a conveniently located socket just inside the door? Or a socket outside? Would you reasonably expect people to trail extension leads through windows to use less easily accessible sockets?

Depends how long the extension lead is and where power is required. Easier to trail out the window for a use close to the window than trail 20m or whatever around the house.

Besides, if the IEE had intended the 16th-edition rule to apply to all ground-floor sockets, why go with the wording that was used? Why not just state flat-out that all socket outlets in ground-floor locations should be RCD protected?

As I said, I drop a cable out of my window in an upper flat . . .

 

[Paul_C]

And that's why I feel that rules such as that 16th-edition one are far too vague, since clearly their interpretation is rather subjective.

In order to decide whether a non-RCD socket was compliant with the regs. or not, you had to make a judgment about whether it could reasonably be expected to be used to feed equipment outdoors, which suggests that one requires knowledge of how the installation was going to be used.

While that particular issue may have gone with the 17th edition, there's now similar room for arguments over RCD's in the whole skilled/instructed vs. normal person issue in commercial premises.

 

[chapeau]

Not that it is relevant to a DIYer doing stuff in a house (where people are to be considered 'ordinary' and there is no doubt about that ), but there is indeed guidance from the HSE on what constitutes a 'skilled' (or competent) person in a work setting wrt Electricity

See

Memorandum of guidance on the Electricity at Work Regulations 1989
Guidance on Regulations

ISBN ISBN 978 0 7176 6228 9

Page 43

 

[ban-all-sheds]

stop being awkward BAS..

I'm not being awkward - garlicbread has got two entirely separate things confused.

Mechanical or RCD protection etc applies to cables, irrespective of what they supply.

RCD protection of sockets applies irrespective of what type of cable, or installation method is used.

To say "under the 17th sockets can be omitted from an RCD by means of machanical protection i.e steel conduit" shows that garlicbread hasn't grasped the rules at all.