Discuss Advice needed with manufacturing electrical equipment in the Electrical Wiring, Theories and Regulations area at ElectriciansForums.net

Welcome to ElectriciansForums.net - The American Electrical Advice Forum
Head straight to the main forums to chat by click here:   American Electrical Advice Forum

Reaction score
4
Hello all,

I'm sure someone on here will be able to help me.

The company I work for manufacturers electronic signs, ticket machines and information kiosks. You'll see these dotted around the UK in stations and bus shelters etc.

I joined the company 3 years ago and although the products are good, I am the only one with any form of electrical qualifications. Now I'm fine with the regulations on connecting these pieces of street furniture but I struggle when it comes to finding any guidance on how they units themselves are constructed.

Is there a document or any guidance on the sizing of the earthing conductors within the units? At the moment the guys in the factory are using 1mm singles to earth exposed conductive parts and that seems too small to me, even though it does usually result in less 0.1 ohms.

I can't seem to find any specific advice, i.e. the unit is protected by a 13a fuse then all earthing conductors should be xxmm for example.

Thanks in advance,

Rich
 
if the conductor is not mechanically protected, then a min. of 4mm is required.
 
Yes it's called BS7671. All the criteria you need to answer your above query, is contained in that publication....

BS 7671 is the requirement for electrical installations, not the equipment attached to final circuits.

Thanks for you replies. Will get the calculator out and try adiabatic equation on the current set up. I've been looking for a definitive answer for 3 years now, I don't think there is one!
 
BS 7671 is the requirement for electrical installations, not the equipment attached to final circuits.

Thanks for you replies. Will get the calculator out and try adiabatic equation on the current set up. I've been looking for a definitive answer for 3 years now, I don't think there is one!

With many of these things it comes down to a combination of the 'right' or sometimes just a suitable analysis method to calculate an acceptable solution according to a set of criteria. It is this sort of situation where experience and engineering judgement comes in to select the right analytical tool for the job. I agree strongly with Eng54's general direction and davesparks specific identification of the adiabatic equation being the first 'port of call'. Though this is more of a 'gut' response than one driven by a knowledge of the specific derivation and therefore the wider applicability of the adiabatic equation. I would need to remind myself by some personal refresher study.
 
What other tests do you carry out. Some of our products have 0.75mm but as long s we achieve 0.1 ohms on the earth continuity test we are happy. We also carry out a hipot flash test at 1.5kv and then a live load test. Is there outside bodies who check your product, bsi, vde, beab etc.
 
Hi mate,

If I'm honest I don't anything other than a PAT test is carried out, and I'm not even sure they are doing that. I don't really have much to do with the manufacturing side of the business but I'm just poking my nose in because I'm slightly concerned.

We essentially just wire components together, 230 > 5,12,24 volt transformers for example. Do we still need to flash test our kiosks and signs?

We don't have anything checked by any outside body either. : /
 
Hi mate,

If I'm honest I don't anything other than a PAT test is carried out, and I'm not even sure they are doing that. I don't really have much to do with the manufacturing side of the business but I'm just poking my nose in because I'm slightly concerned.

We essentially just wire components together, 230 > 5,12,24 volt transformers for example. Do we still need to flash test our kiosks and signs?

We don't have anything checked by any outside body either. : /

Beab are concerned with domestic electrical products i doubt your kiosks come under that category. As regards to flash testing i would be in favour of it. Although you have to bear in mind it may be destructive to some electronic componnts. I don't know your product. We flash test our electronic/electrical products with 5ma at 1.5kv for 2 seconds. Some other manufacturers also carry out an ir test, we don't. The order of tests we carry out are
1, Earth Continuity lower than 0.1 ohm is a pass.
2, Flash 5mA @ 1.5kv for 2 seconds.
3, Live Load Functional test.
 
Is it just me, but I kinda shocked by this thread. Presumably these products have been installed in public places, and I would expect them to be manufactured and installed by a company to some BS.

If this company hasn't got any designers/engineers without any suitable qualifications, requiring the OP to come on this forum (no offence chaps) for advice, then I think trading standards might be interested.

Or have I just got hold of the wrong end of the stick here?
 
Is it just me, but I kinda shocked by this thread. Presumably these products have been installed in public places, and I would expect them to be manufactured and installed by a company to some BS.

If this company hasn't got any designers/engineers without any suitable qualifications, requiring the OP to come on this forum (no offence chaps) for advice, then I think trading standards might be interested.

Or have I just got hold of the wrong end of the stick here?

Hi Midwest,

I know what you're saying and it worries me, hence asking for advice on here. The problem I run into is that there doesn't appear to be a BS for the products we make. There is a document on the government website that is very informative but just states that the equipment has to be safe, without any specifics. I sometimes struggle with the vagueness of the information provided, including BS 7671. Its statements like a "where reasonably practical" etc. Just tell me to use a 2.5mm cable!

Raparee thanks for for that article and your help. Not sure if we'd be able to flash test our units without destroying them as some of the components are a little bit temperamental at the best of times but I want to make sure we carry out the other tests on every peice of equipment that leaves the building. It's helped comparing notes.

Rich
 
kenai36 not having a pop at your, admire anyone seeking advice. Just think your company would be on a hiding to nothing, if someone got hurt from their products, especially as it appears they have no suitable designers/engineers. Getting advice/instruction from a forum, would hold for nothing in litigation IMO.
 
kenai36 not having a pop at your, admire anyone seeking advice. Just think your company would be on a hiding to nothing, if someone got hurt from their products, especially as it appears they have no suitable designers/engineers. Getting advice/instruction from a forum, would hold for nothing in litigation IMO.

An interesting conundrum here ... you are quite correct regarding someone being injured or worse. However, how about a thought experiment ... what if the equipment is either intrinsically 'safe' or never experiences a set of circumstances that cause it to either fault or a fault occurs but the circumstances are such that no one is hurt? Is the company negligent at this point despite having no 'competent' designers or engineers. Does it need these people or is it already acting within its own boundary of competence?


Nothing is perfectly safe or will remain that way indefinitely ... moth or rust eventually corrupt! In our litigious society, which let us assume for the moment came to the UK from 'across the pond', we have forgotten this very fact and believe that we can insulate ourselves from all risk. What kind of topsy-turvy world do we live in when a packet of peanuts has to carry the disclaimer that 'This packet may contain nuts!'? More so, in our daily lives it is someone else's fault if we are inadvertently put at risk by their deliberate or unknowing actions!


Unfortunately, in my opinion, society is going backwards in pursuing the current path of litigation, it is yet another money making scam which profits the few, often not those in need, whilst taxing the many. We would not have any of the technology that we have today if the current risk averse approach were taken in its development. Bridges have collapsed and trains and aircraft have crashed costing lives because of 2 things. Firstly lack of knowledge at the time of load carrying capacity, material decay characteristics and cyclical loading leading to fatigue as well as other often previously unknown phenomena. Secondly, and in my view this is unacceptable, the selfish pursuit of putting profit before delivery. Deliberate profiteering or gross negligence by using substandard or inadequate materials, processes or approach to solving a problem.


If this company or any other body, let us say a someone with a Electrical Trainee qualification, is operating within the bounds of their competence or skill, delivering a product or service that is as safe as reasonably practicable in their chosen technology then so be it. However, if the same entity is deliberately profiteering or demonstrating a reckless disregard for public or employee safety then they should be dealt with under the full force of the law. More importantly in my view is the fact that the customer retains responsibility for being sufficiently informed regarding the safe use or operation of the product or interaction with the service. They should not be able to vexatiously claim liability against the manufacturer or installer.
 
An interesting conundrum here ... you are quite correct regarding someone being injured or worse. However, how about a thought experiment ... what if the equipment is either intrinsically 'safe' or never experiences a set of circumstances that cause it to either fault or a fault occurs but the circumstances are such that no one is hurt? Is the company negligent at this point despite having no 'competent' designers or engineers. Does it need these people or is it already acting within its own boundary of competence?


Nothing is perfectly safe or will remain that way indefinitely ... moth or rust eventually corrupt! In our litigious society, which let us assume for the moment came to the UK from 'across the pond', we have forgotten this very fact and believe that we can insulate ourselves from all risk. What kind of topsy-turvy world do we live in when a packet of peanuts has to carry the disclaimer that 'This packet may contain nuts!'? More so, in our daily lives it is someone else's fault if we are inadvertently put at risk by their deliberate or unknowing actions!


Unfortunately, in my opinion, society is going backwards in pursuing the current path of litigation, it is yet another money making scam which profits the few, often not those in need, whilst taxing the many. We would not have any of the technology that we have today if the current risk averse approach were taken in its development. Bridges have collapsed and trains and aircraft have crashed costing lives because of 2 things. Firstly lack of knowledge at the time of load carrying capacity, material decay characteristics and cyclical loading leading to fatigue as well as other often previously unknown phenomena. Secondly, and in my view this is unacceptable, the selfish pursuit of putting profit before delivery. Deliberate profiteering or gross negligence by using substandard or inadequate materials, processes or approach to solving a problem.


If this company or any other body, let us say a someone with a Electrical Trainee qualification, is operating within the bounds of their competence or skill, delivering a product or service that is as safe as reasonably practicable in their chosen technology then so be it. However, if the same entity is deliberately profiteering or demonstrating a reckless disregard for public or employee safety then they should be dealt with under the full force of the law. More importantly in my view is the fact that the customer retains responsibility for being sufficiently informed regarding the safe use or operation of the product or interaction with the service. They should not be able to vexatiously claim liability against the manufacturer or installer.

Blimey....don't know what to say about that. Anyways, just popped in from the garage. Doing a spot of DIY manufacturing. I've heard there's a future market for non-combustible CU's. I've made the enclosure out of 12mm plasterboard I had spare. Gonna use a bit of 2x1 batten to fix the mcb's to (it'll be alright!) Just the cable entries now. :smilewinkgrin:
 
Blimey....don't know what to say about that. Anyways, just popped in from the garage. Doing a spot of DIY manufacturing. I've heard there's a future market for non-combustible CU's. I've made the enclosure out of 12mm plasterboard I had spare. Gonna use a bit of 2x1 batten to fix the mcb's to (it'll be alright!) Just the cable entries now. :smilewinkgrin:

LOL ... are you competent in handling plasterboard and timber ... I don't think it will fly! 2 x 1 batten isn't very conductive ... unless subject to carbon arc tracking! I like it.
 
BS EN 12414:1999

Vehicle parking control equipment. Pay and display ticket machine. Technical and functional requirements

This particular document might be of some use, try and get a pdf copy.
 

Reply to Advice needed with manufacturing electrical equipment in the Electrical Wiring, Theories and Regulations area at ElectriciansForums.net

OFFICIAL SPONSORS

Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Electrician Courses Green Electrical Goods PCB Way Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Pushfit Wire Connectors Electric Underfloor Heating Electrician Courses
These Official Forum Sponsors May Provide Discounts to Regular Forum Members - If you would like to sponsor us then CLICK HERE and post a thread with who you are, and we'll send you some stats etc
This website was designed, optimised and is hosted by Untold Media. Operating under the name Untold Media since 2001.
Back
Top
AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website. For the best site experience please disable your AdBlocker.

I've Disabled AdBlock