What, if any, regulations have been flouted on this install

[P.S.]

Was asked to look at this Enterview door entry system ;
1 external speaker/camera
1 door release
4 x internal intercoms

All intercoms ring, have 2 way speech but show a blue screen on video.

I did some research and obtained a copy of the install manual. It advises a voltage test at each intercom, as this is critical. Logically, as all intercoms show a blue screen it's likely to be the camera or wiring from it.

Before carrying out any any physical checks or tests, I thought I would make myself familiar with the cable runs, general wiring and placement of the PSU's etc.

What I found was this, in a cupboard under the stairs, with just a turn button catch on the door. . I'm pretty shocked at the way this has been wired up.

http://imgur.com/a/VUO3m

Being that the premises are a nursery should this electrical work have been notifiable and even if not, what, if any, regulations have been flouted as a lever to get the original installation company to put it right and safe just on the electrical level.

As for the original fault, just tracing out the low voltage wiring they have used much of the existing twisted pair and the installation guide recommends 2 pairs of cat5 for runs up to 10meters, for which at least two handsets look to exceed.

I've refused to do any work on this as do not want to be the last person to, and therefore become responsible for it.

Any comments appreciated

Pete

 

[PrenticeBoyofDerry]

The cables that are unsheathed should be basic conductor insulation visible from outside the accessory/enclosure. Then we have bare conductors that are exposed, so another concern. I would expect all terminals to also be enclosed.

 

[P.S.]

Yes, I thought at the very least all the PSU's should be in their own enclosure - It's just very shoddy imo

 

[bernardgreen]

Extremely shoddy

Each power supply should be individually wired to a mains distribution panel. Daisy chaining as has been done is poor design.

Consideration should be given to providing individual fuses per supply so that failure of one supply does not remove power from other supplies by blowing the common fuse.

 

[Nozzle]

The PSU ARE in their own enclosure, air vents should not be covered. However there are bare conductors showing (naughty) and mains cables and signal cables sholdn't be routed together.

Nozzle

 

[ericmark]

The units are clearly designed to be fitted inside an enclosure, I had the same with a PLC at Uni. When I measured the cooling holes did not comply with the IP limits when facing up, on going onto the PLC manufacturers web site it clearly said it must be fitted in an enclosure.

Although for University students there was little or no danger, we had open days where schools visited, this did present a problem.

As far as you go to comply with regulations all it likely needs is a lock on the door. Daft as it may seem a nursery is not covered by Part P it's not a dwelling, it is however covered by EAW regulations, these vary as to who is in charge, so in a firm where there is an electrician on the pay role you can build your own panel it does not need type testing, but if an ordinary person is in charge then things change. It is not cut and dried and trying to quote regulations and laws is hard.

 

[stem]

Apart from no sheathing for the 230v wiring and running 230v and 12v wiring in the same trunking, the wrong power supplies have been used. ESP make two versions for the Enterview. Those shown are designed to be housed inside an enclosure. Where they are in an accessible location, in order to prevent inadvertent contact with live terminals, the boxed version should have been used.

 

[ericmark]

412.2.2 Enclosures IPXXB or IP2X, use of a tool or key. 416.2.2 A horizontal top surface of a barrier or enclosure which is readily accessible shall provide a degree
of protection of at least IPXXD or IP4X. 417.1 supervised by skilled persons.

417.2.2 An obstacle may be removed without the use of a key or tool but shall be secured so as to prevent
unintentional removal.

This is from original BS7671:2008 not amendment 3 so numbers may have changed. I am told the following of manufacturers instructions has changed?

We all know it is wrong but what you need is the regulation to show it is wrong.

 

[P.S.]

Thanks for the comments thus far.

...and yes the cables in the trunking should be segregated as the twisted pair does not meet the highest voltage present in the trunking (if I understand band1 and band2 circuits correctly)

So, in essence, and without going into any detail, it doesn't comply with BS7671 ? which should be enough to go back to the original installers with and let them figure out why (and put it right ! ), else have a report drawn up from a qualified engineer - but that's doing half the job for them !

Is there a government body that this/the installers can/should be reported to, in light of the fact that it isn't covered under part P ?

 

[stillp]

If it's a nursery then report them to Ofsted.

 

[333rocky333]

A doorbell button is a bit rough as a door release.
Is this operating a fire door or on a fire escape route, indicated by the fire exit signs, sometimes you also need a manual emergency release by the door for use in an emergency, you may also find it needs interfacing with the fire alarm so it unlocks automatically.

 

[winston1]

Extremely shoddy

Each power supply should be individually wired to a mains distribution panel. Daisy chaining as has been done is poor design.

Consideration should be given to providing individual fuses per supply so that failure of one supply does not remove power from other supplies by blowing the common fuse.

I would have thought the power supplies are internally protected.

 

[bernardgreen]

I would have thought the power supplies are internally protected

Stick your finger on the bright copper visible on the top right hand side of the power supplies. Internal protection will not protect you

 

[winston1]

Stick your finger on the bright copper visible on the top right hand side of the power supplies. Internal protection will not protect you

Nor will external of course.

 

[P.S.]

A doorbell button is a bit rough as a door release.
Is this operating a fire door or on a fire escape route, indicated by the fire exit signs, sometimes you also need a manual emergency release by the door for use in an emergency, you may also find it needs interfacing with the fire alarm so it unlocks automatically.

The release is on a yale lock and so an emergency door release isn't needed. .. However .....
I'm going back in a couple of day's to continue with another door entry system that the same company had "played" with, bypassing an emergency door release for a maglock, as it was activated by mistake, and they didn't know it just needed resetting, so they bypassed it !!!! In "playing" further also seemed to damage the intercom door release circuit too !!!! (Looks for cowboy emoji)

The original installation company were contacted today and advised of their shoddy and dangerous work (and would be sued if they didn't put it right) They were there within the hour ! I'll see what, if anything, they have done to correct the system this thread was started about.


UPDATE : They have refused to correct any of it ! where to from here ....