"Maybe" to all of that! What with glanding of cables etc, if the front cover seals fairly well (which it presumably has to if it is to act as an effective fire barrier), I'm not sure that I would want my life to depend upon significant amounts of smoke getting out particularly quickly, and finding its way to the nearest smoke detector. A requirement for a mini smoke detector within a ("combustible") CU might actually be a better option!I suspect that smoke will leak out, even if fire is contained. And assuming there is a suitable smoke detector located nearby, then that will trigger on quite small amounts of this sort of smoke - I'd have thought.
Quite so!But yes, you do make a valid point. There's not much benefit to having (say) a 1/2 hour fire resistance if it delays the alarm sounding by 1/2 hour
Exactly.EDIT: Really, while I agree with you that the regs are "wrong", debating that is just being pedantic for the sake of it. It doesn't matter how much we debate what is wrong with the regs, they are there as written and I can't see that changing. So I suggest we just accept that and move on. ... Yes, complain to whoever is responsible for the cockup, but just stop arguing that it's currently not possible to fit a CU in compliance with the regs. I think we all agree - but most of us agree that there is a pragmatic approach that allows the world to carry on while we wait (for a long time) for the buffoons to sort out the mess.
Kind Regards, John
Last edited: