I have built a stable block consisting of two stables and a store. I have applied to have mains electricity installed, and as part p won't apply Iwill be wiring them myself. My question is do led strip lights have as much shadow as led floods. I have been using 12 volt floods, which are great but do cast shadows. I was thinking of fitting weather proof led strip lights, hoping they would be similar to the florescent strip lights. Any ideas?
Currently reading:
Best type of lighting in stables
Discuss Best type of lighting in stables in the UK Electrical Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net
- Reaction score
- 1,535
Bet its all wired in t/e aswell..... and will burn down by all the rats attracted by your LIVESTOCK food!....
Yes, let's get straight. I'll ignore the insults, bit childish. The building is a stable. It is on it's own in a field. It will have it's own supply. It houses animals. Because of this it does not come under building control regs. Therefore Part p, and yes I do know the difference between them is not necessary as they are not a legal requirement, they are a Standard. Having said that the installation will be to the same standard as required by the regs, and the installation will be properly tested. But I don't need it to be signed off, and I am sure there will be no problem getting it metered. Horses are NOT livestock. And a live horse is a lot more expensive than a dead one.
- Reaction score
- 17,249
Which regulations are you referring to as the latest regs?
The latest version of the IEE wiring regulations is BS7671:2008 'IET wiring regulations, Seventeenth Edition'
So how can you say that you will be installing and testing to the latest regs, when the latest regs are the very standard which you are arguing doesn't apply?
- Reaction score
- 17,249
Which regulations are you referring to as the latest regs?
The latest version of the IEE wiring regulations is BS7671:2008 'IET wiring regulations, Seventeenth Edition'
So how can you say that you will be installing and testing to the latest regs, when the latest regs are the very standard which you are arguing doesn't apply?
- Reaction score
- 5,984
BS7671 is to be used to ensure you remain compliant with EAWR 1989. If you chose not to install to BS7671 and cannot justify why you haven't done so then you are in breach of EAWR 1989.
A lot of members on here have given you very sound advice and guidance, it's your choice if you chose to accept or ignore this.
You may have been within the trade for 50 years with a DNO but you show a lot of ignorance with regards to the legal requirements of the end user and those that install and maintain their installations.
BCO is correct that this falls outside the scope of Part P however the BCO is incorrect that it falls outside the scope of BS7671.
A lot of members on here have given you very sound advice and guidance, it's your choice if you chose to accept or ignore this.
You may have been within the trade for 50 years with a DNO but you show a lot of ignorance with regards to the legal requirements of the end user and those that install and maintain their installations.
BCO is correct that this falls outside the scope of Part P however the BCO is incorrect that it falls outside the scope of BS7671.
- Reaction score
- 12,556
Ah I get it now. Times are tight and carrots don't get any cheaper. Make sure you remember to sort out the geegee insurance before you switch on
Why does everyone assume the installation is not safe? I keep saying it will be to the standards required by the 17th edition, but as it is a standard and not a law it doesn't have to be carried out by a registered electrician. Why does Electricity at Work come into it?
The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (defra) tell you in there "Code of Practice for the Welfare of Horses, Ponies, Donkeys and their Hybrids" that your electrical installation should be installed/maintained and tested to current BS7671.
Part P has nothing to do with what you are doing full stop.
Now stop posting and get on with it and please post us some pictures of your finished installation please (but no pictures of your dead horses as its clear you dont have a clue what is required for the welfare of the animals).
Part P has nothing to do with what you are doing full stop.
Now stop posting and get on with it and please post us some pictures of your finished installation please (but no pictures of your dead horses as its clear you dont have a clue what is required for the welfare of the animals).
- Reaction score
- 1,535
out of interest what have you wired it in?
- Reaction score
- 5,984
Bare conductors and porcelain insulators. Do you know nothing?
- Reaction score
- 1,766
Wellies and a waxed jacket?
- Reaction score
- 565
The highway code is not a legal document. It is a code. An expected standard that any deviation from could land you in court. BS7671 is the same.
- Reaction score
- 1,535
whats it been wired in then you hav'nt said yet?
- Reaction score
- 6,646
...Right then...In the true sense of the rules,he is correct,but in the same manner,Hitler was a serious socialist and never got a mention in Brighton,this week
I will not be quoting regs,or crabbing the OP's methodology,as we have not seen the installation,which could well be exemplary.
This is a similar situation,to the MOT exemptions for certain HGV's,which applied regarding street lighting,road marking,etc.
They did not need one,but gradually,the insurers requirement for record of maintenance,made it tricky not to use the MOT process,as proof of such.
I do a great deal of work,and have a great many friends,with equestrian yards,and here is a story...
One such fellow,lost three horses,in a night,due to series of common issues,occurring in a stable block,comprising of decent,well installed equipment.
Just 10mA is all they need...even the biggest Shire.
The investigation,and insurance claim,started a chain of events,which would have been not nearly as onerous,had the standard set of installation procedures,been voluntarily adhered to.
In fact,he was informed by the loss adjuster,the investigation,not just by themselves,but most of the other bodies,would have been "hugely restricted,if there was any paperwork regarding the block,to wave in front of people..." and that is a direct quote.
It's horses for courses...
I will not be quoting regs,or crabbing the OP's methodology,as we have not seen the installation,which could well be exemplary.
This is a similar situation,to the MOT exemptions for certain HGV's,which applied regarding street lighting,road marking,etc.
They did not need one,but gradually,the insurers requirement for record of maintenance,made it tricky not to use the MOT process,as proof of such.
I do a great deal of work,and have a great many friends,with equestrian yards,and here is a story...
One such fellow,lost three horses,in a night,due to series of common issues,occurring in a stable block,comprising of decent,well installed equipment.
Just 10mA is all they need...even the biggest Shire.
The investigation,and insurance claim,started a chain of events,which would have been not nearly as onerous,had the standard set of installation procedures,been voluntarily adhered to.
In fact,he was informed by the loss adjuster,the investigation,not just by themselves,but most of the other bodies,would have been "hugely restricted,if there was any paperwork regarding the block,to wave in front of people..." and that is a direct quote.
It's horses for courses...
- Reaction score
- 2,602
Some one has asked about the installation. Mains is in a brick built cubicle at the back of the stable block, which is 2 stables each 12 foot square and 10 foot high. The store is the same size. This is totally inaccessible to the horses. There is a two way consumer unit (ip65) with a 30ma rcd main switch, fed with 16mm tails. Earth is to a 6 foot earth rod. Wiring is in plastic conduit, two circuits. One 1.5 mm for lighting and 1 2.5mm for a socket. A seperate 2.5mm earth is run for each circuit. All switches and the socket are in the store. Again this cannot be accessed by the horses. All switches and the socket are to ip66. The light fittings are weatherproof led battens to ip65, and are mounted at the wall/roof join. Non of it would be accessible by the horses. The socket also has a built in rcd. I cannot see much wrong with that installation. Non of the wiring is outside. Anyway, we will see on Monday whether the supplier will meter and connect it.
I still maintain that I have not broken any laws or installed a dangerous system. The EWR do not apply, I am a competent person, as required by the regs, it does not say you have to be registered. I know part P does not apply, and is a different thing, but at the end of the day, how many people have been taken to court for not complying with the 17th edition unless it is a complete bodge. I bet very few.
Before anyone says I should have used steel conduit, I feel plastic is more suitable, it will not rust and provides sufficient mechanical protection. Yes I know about rodents, but that is a lesser problem.
I suppose Devonchris gave some good advice. The highway code is not a legal requirement, but you can end up in court if you don't comply. So what he is saying I suppose is that as most people use a phone, drink coffee, eat a sandwich or exceed the speed limit ie ignore the rules then that is ok, so I can likewise adjust the 17th edition as suits. I hasten to add that is not what I have done. I really can't see why you have all got so upset. Anyway, I'll let you all know what happens Monday. Have a good day.
I still maintain that I have not broken any laws or installed a dangerous system. The EWR do not apply, I am a competent person, as required by the regs, it does not say you have to be registered. I know part P does not apply, and is a different thing, but at the end of the day, how many people have been taken to court for not complying with the 17th edition unless it is a complete bodge. I bet very few.
Before anyone says I should have used steel conduit, I feel plastic is more suitable, it will not rust and provides sufficient mechanical protection. Yes I know about rodents, but that is a lesser problem.
I suppose Devonchris gave some good advice. The highway code is not a legal requirement, but you can end up in court if you don't comply. So what he is saying I suppose is that as most people use a phone, drink coffee, eat a sandwich or exceed the speed limit ie ignore the rules then that is ok, so I can likewise adjust the 17th edition as suits. I hasten to add that is not what I have done. I really can't see why you have all got so upset. Anyway, I'll let you all know what happens Monday. Have a good day.
- Reaction score
- 1,535
Personally i do them in swa, but sounds okay to me, people got grumpy because of the way your attitude came accross in your early posts, i understand its difficult to convey emotion by text but you sounded an arse haha, anyway hope it all goes well.
- Reaction score
- 67,275
appreciate that you have most likely done a good job, but can't understand why you don't want to complete an Installation Certificate.You would then have a written record and proof that the installation was safe. if, God forbid, there was a fire or injury at any time, it's the first thing your insurer would want to see.
- Reaction score
- 67,275
that's what we would all do. you can't very well have a horse in the client's details.
- Reaction score
- 16,784
Right, now this your most sensible post in the thread. This is exactly what you should do. Wire it to the regs (I've no doubt you have wired it very well), test it, fill in the appropriate installation cert. You are then covered in the event of any future occurences and saved from any awkward questions from insurance companies
- Reaction score
- 565
That's not what I said.
What ever Regs apply or do not, you owe a "duty of care" to anybody who may be visiting you property, ie Vets, Farrier or delivery drivers etc.
This link may be of interest to you?
Unlawful death by electrocution,caused by negligent electrical testing. - https://electrical-testing-safety.co.uk/why-we-test/unlawful-death
No one is in any doubt about your level of competence or understanding of the Regulations. You have demonstrated that in your earlier replies.
(Read in to that what you will, your good at that)
- Reaction score
- 436
BS7671 isn’t statutory however E@WR are statutory and states quite clearly that all requirements of BS7671 are adhered to. So in actual reality this then makes BS7671 law, albeit indirectly
If not for that then your attempt to manipulate the rules to suit yourself would probably have worked.
For the sake of printing off a few pages and taking the time to enter the results you will get from the testing you say you will do. It might add 30 minutes to your time to fill in the forms with the results. Hardly worthwhile trying to interpret the regs differently to save 30 mins or less.
If not for that then your attempt to manipulate the rules to suit yourself would probably have worked.
For the sake of printing off a few pages and taking the time to enter the results you will get from the testing you say you will do. It might add 30 minutes to your time to fill in the forms with the results. Hardly worthwhile trying to interpret the regs differently to save 30 mins or less.
Reply to Best type of lighting in stables in the UK Electrical Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net
Similar Threads
- Question
OFFICIAL SPONSORS
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.