Bonding Gas Supply in an Outbuilding

[Piratepete]

Hi Guys
Doing an EICR of a property.
The client has an outbuilding with gas and water supplies. It has it's own CU fed from the main CU in the house.
The water is bonded but the gas is not.
The water supply is underground from the house in plastic and then changes to copper which is bonded.

The gas supply comes from the house in an underground copper pipe linked to the gas pipes in the house. So, electrically, it would be subject to the bonding in the house.
But does this negate the need to bond it in the outbuilding?

Looking forward to wise words!

Cheers
Pete

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Im not talking about the plastic pipe. I am talking about the copper installation in the outbuilding. You do not know that it is not extraneous without testing it first.

Again, the definition of extraneous needs to be googled.

 

[TJ Anderson]

Well when I went to school plastic did not make a good material for conducting electricity.

Read post #26!! I know the plastic pipe is not conductive ffs. I am talking with regard to the copper installation in the outbuilding. We know nothing about it from the OP's opening post so you cannot possibly know if it is extraneous or not as you don't have enough information to make that judgement.

 

[davesparks]

You need to google the definition of extraneous.

No I don't, the definition of the word extraneous won't help at all.

Bs7671 defines the term 'extraneous conductive part' in the context of electrical installations.

 

[TJ Anderson]

Again, the definition of extraneous needs to be googled.

I know what an extraneous conductive part is and what defines it (Extraneous-conductive-part: A conductive part liable to introduce a potential, generally earth potential, and not forming part of the electrical installation). How do you know it is not from the limited information the OP has provided regarding the copper installation pipework?

 

[davesparks]

NO the incoming pipe is plastic.

Yes the incoming pipe is plastic, but the installation it feeds is copper. There is no information as to how extensive the copper installation is or whether it is all surface pipework on plastic clips or mostly buried in the concrete floor structure or it could even go back underground as copper to feed another building.

Without further information there is no way to know whether or not the installation pipework will be an extraneous conductive part.

 

[HandySparks]

Yes the incoming pipe is plastic, but the installation it feeds is copper. There is no information as to how extensive the copper installation is or whether it is all surface pipework on plastic clips or mostly buried in the concrete floor structure or it could even go back underground as copper to feed another building.

Without further information there is no way to know whether or not the installation pipework will be an extraneous conductive part.

544.1.2 says "The main protective bonding connection to any gas, water or other service shall be made as near as practicable to the point of entry of that service into the premises."

Since it refers to the point of entry of the service, rather than the point of entry of the pipework, it appears to be saying that, even if the reason that the copper pipework is extraneous is that it feeds out underground in copper, the main bond should still be made at the incoming point.

 

[Simlec]

Yes the incoming pipe is plastic, but the installation it feeds is copper. There is no information as to how extensive the copper installation is or whether it is all surface pipework on plastic clips or mostly buried in the concrete floor structure or it could even go back underground as copper to feed another building.

Without further information there is no way to know whether or not the installation pipework will be an extraneous conductive part.

So the incoming pipe is plastic with a bond on it that's not needed. Ok we got there.
Yes it could go underground again (like the gas has and we said move the bond over to that pipe), and if it was copper then it would be bonded at that point would it not.
Am I right in thinking if a house had plastic gas & water incoming pipes and copper installation pipes that did not go underground again, you would bond the pipe work?
TJ, I think your comment of the word "Stupid" over steps the mark!!

 

[davesparks]

544.1.2 says "The main protective bonding connection to any gas, water or other service shall be made as near as practicable to the point of entry of that service into the premises."

Since it refers to the point of entry of the service, rather than the point of entry of the pipework, it appears to be saying that, even if the reason that the copper pipework is extraneous is that it feeds out underground in copper, the main bond should still be made at the incoming point.

Which supports my point exactly.

Although you would have to check exactly what they mean when they say 'service' and how you apply it. I would say in the situation that it is not the incoming service which is being bonded but the installation pipework and as such would be best to be bonded at the point that the extraneous part enters the installation.

 

[Knobhead]

?

Yes. your interpretation is correct.
My immediate thought was that it should be bonded, but I couldn't understand why it hadn't been done as the gas supply is an easy connection within 2 metres of the CU and all services were put in at the same time, 10 years ago. The water stopcock and bonding point are miles away.
Pete

Did it comply then?

 

[HandySparks]

Which supports my point exactly.

Although you would have to check exactly what they mean when they say 'service' and how you apply it. I would say in the situation that it is not the incoming service which is being bonded but the installation pipework and as such would be best to be bonded at the point that the extraneous part enters the installation.

I agree. It would be better to bond at the point where the metallic pipework enters the building, which isn't what the regs appear to be saying.

 

[shanky887614]

544.1.2 says "The main protective bonding connection to any gas, water or other service shall be made as near as practicable to the point of entry of that service into the premises."

Since it refers to the point of entry of the service, rather than the point of entry of the pipework, it appears to be saying that, even if the reason that the copper pipework is extraneous is that it feeds out underground in copper, the main bond should still be made at the incoming point.

wrong.

then a block of flats only has bonding on the intake into the building and nothing in the flats?

each seperate building requires bonding in this case the house and outbuilding both need bonding

 

[HandySparks]

wrong.

then a block of flats only has bonding on the intake into the building and nothing in the flats?

each seperate building requires bonding in this case the house and outbuilding both need bonding

You misunderstand my point.

The regs seem to be saying that extraneous pipework have to be bonded where the supply (water/gas) enters, rather than at the point that makes the pipework extraneous, which could be where another building or an outside tap is supplied.

 

[Geordie Spark]

Never found the need to use that particular picture book Dave... lol!!

Here's me thinking you wrote the book!

 

[shanky887614]

You misunderstand my point.

The regs seem to be saying that extraneous pipework have to be bonded where the supply (water/gas) enters, rather than at the point that makes the pipework extraneous, which could be where another building or an outside tap is supplied.

if it is a seperate building its a seperate premises

 

[Simlec]

You misunderstand my point.

The regs seem to be saying that extraneous pipework have to be bonded where the supply (water/gas) enters, rather than at the point that makes the pipework extraneous, which could be where another building or an outside tap is supplied.

You need to drop the supply part, it could be uni-strut with tray that enters the building from outside in contact with ground. Supply service is just an example.

 

[davesparks]

if it is a seperate building its a seperate premises

Not necessarily, but there could be more than one premises within a building.

 

[specs]

Just bond it
, I would

 

[HandySparks]

You need to drop the supply part, it could be uni-strut with tray that enters the building from outside in contact with ground. Supply service is just an example.

I agree that main bonding may be required to extraneous parts other than services. However, where it is a service, 544.1.2 defines where the bonding connection should be made, namely where the service enters the premises.

 

[davesparks]

I agree that main bonding may be required to extraneous parts other than services. However, where it is a service, 544.1.2 defines where the bonding connection should be made, namely where the service enters the premises.

Neither the gas nor the water in the outbuilding in the OP is entering the premises though, yet one certainly needs bonding and the other might.

 

[HandySparks]

Neither the gas nor the water in the outbuilding in the OP is entering the premises though, yet one certainly needs bonding and the other might.

Yes, I've drifted away from the OP and was speaking more generally.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

I take it no one bothered to google the definition then?
BS7671 requires us to bond any conductive part which enters the building from outside, which may introduce a difference in potential.
There is no requirement to bond conductive parts that do not enter the building from outside.
The plastic water pipe is not conductive, so does not require bonding.
The internal copper water pipes are conductive, but as they do not enter the building from outside, they cannot introduce a difference in potential, and therefore also do not require bonding.

 

[TJ Anderson]

I take it no one bothered to google the definition then?
BS7671 requires us to bond any conductive part which enters the building from outside, which may introduce a difference in potential.
There is no requirement to bond conductive parts that do not enter the building from outside.
The plastic water pipe is not conductive, so does not require bonding.
The internal copper water pipes are conductive, but as they do not enter the building from outside, they cannot introduce a difference in potential, and therefore also do not require bonding.

I quoted the definition in previous post. What difference does it make if it becomes extraneous within the building or outside. If conductive pipework was buried in the floor of the house it could become extraneous.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

I quoted the definition in previous post. What difference does it make if it becomes extraneous within the building or outside. If conductive pipework was buried in the floor of the house it could become extraneous.

You quoted the definition of an extraneous-conductive part, not the definition of extraneous.
It doesn't make any difference, as it's physically impossible for something that is entirely inside a building to also be extraneous.
If the copper pipework were buried in the ground, then the part that is in the ground (no longer inside the building) would be extraneous, and where the copper pipework re-entered the building would require bonding.
However as far as I'm aware, the copper pipework does not exit then re-enter the building.

 

[Geordie Spark]

Twenty three HOURS and fifty four posts later and you're all still arguing about this bloody copper pipe!!

How long would it have taken to find out by testing the damned thing with a meter & long bit of wire???

and it's you lot who think plumbers are a bit mentally challenged!! :laugh:

 

[Engineer54]

Staying with the OP's outbuilding installation, if the metal water pipework that's fed/connected to a incoming plastic pipe, enters the slab internally, say to supply something on the other side of the room it would be prudent to test for being extraneous. Which is going to be pretty certain that it will be, especially if it's been tied to the slabs rebar grid, and therefore will require main bonding. If however it's just been visibly clipped internally to the walls, it's unlikely that it will be extraneous and main bonding will not be required.

The incoming gas pipe goes without saying, will be an extraneous conductive part that will require main bonding...

And that just about clears everything up as far as these two services are concerned with this OP's outbuilding query!!!

 

[Knobhead]

Twenty three HOURS and fifty four posts later and you're all still arguing about this bloody copper pipe!!

How long would it have taken to find out by testing the damned thing with a meter & long bit of wire???

and it's you lot who think plumbers are a bit mentally challenged!! :laugh:

This is the tilers forum! What do you expect?

 

[Knobhead]

The IET mandarins must be howling with laughter at the farce they’ve created!

Bring back the 15th.
Non of this is it, isn’t it, slap a bit of wire on it then it isn’t.

From the OED

Irrelevant or unrelated to the subject being dealt with: one is obliged to wade through many pages of extraneous material.

 

[richy3333]

Whoever did this was either confused or trying to make sure 'belt and braces' style. The incomer for the water before the stopcock is plastic. The floor it passes through is chipboard and the pipe drops down into a solem/void (timber building raised up on blocks). After the stopcock and meter it's all copper either clipped to joists or in stud walls.

 

[shanky887614]

View attachment 28056
Whoever did this was either confused or trying to make sure 'belt and braces' style. The incomer for the water before the stopcock is plastic. The floor it passes through is chipboard and the pipe drops down into a solem/void (timber building raised up on blocks). After the stopcock and meter it's all copper either clipped to joists or in stud walls.

nothing wrong with belt and braces, i wear them when its cold (attached to my sellopets)

 

[Geordie Spark]

This is the tilers forum! What do you expect?

I know it is!!

I'm still trying to work that one out!