New CU but no water bonding...

[jaydub]

Someone has asked for an upgrade to their consumer unit but they have no water bonding. I explained this and said it needs to be done but it's quite a job and they don't want it done, just the CU upgraded?

What's the crack with that?

Can you crack on and put it down as a departure from bs7671?

 

[polo1]

Is the incoming water supply definitely an extraneous conductive part?
I won't do a cu changeover where bonding is required & the customer won't agree to it being done.
PS you can't note it as a departure.

 

[Des 56]

Before any addition or alteration is carried out blah blah

 

[Pete999]

Someone has asked for an upgrade to their consumer unit but they have no water bonding. I explained this and said it needs to be done but it's quite a job and they don't want it done, just the CU upgraded?

What's the crack with that?

Can you crack on and put it down as a departure from bs7671?

Or walk away, safety should have no cost if they wont pay walk away.

 

[Octopus]

So the IET come out with regs, make no attempt to publicise the regs and leaves the poor sparks to educate the public.

This is not acceptable.

So, our responsibility is to make sites safer and, as such, updating a cu to one with. MCB's and RCD's is making the site safer.

Tin hat on

Just saying..

Ps. None of the CPS make any attempt, that I am aware of to educate Joe public either.

My advice to the op is to provide a written quote with the cu and bonding update ... Then see what happens.....

 

[Midwest]

Even if the service is plastic, internal water metal pipes might have to be bonded.

 

[jaydub]

Thanks everyone, just a situation I have not yet come across.

Can anyone give me an example of when you might use the departures section? Just out of interest really. Again, never used it or seen it used!

 

[Ian1981]

Even if the service is plastic, internal water metal pipes might have to be bonded.

If internal water pipes with plastic incoming service can't introduce a potential (earth potential that is) and can be considered non extraneous parts then I don't see why they need bonding

 

[Midwest]

If internal water pipes can't introduce a potential (earth potential that is) and can be considered non extraneous parts then I don't see why they need bonding

Reg 528.3.4.

 

[Deleted member 9648]

The departures section would only be used where a departure from Bs7671 could be justified,
so in the real world virtually never unless the signatory is prepared to take to consequences if the known departure goes ---- up.

 

[telectrix]

sometimes you canfind a cold water pipe in an easier location to bond. in that case, it could be noted as a departure, as long as a R2 test confirmed that said bond had an acceptable resistance to the pipe where you'd have liked to bond ( i.e. close to the point of entry ).i done that with the gas here. as the main gas pipe passess next to the CU. the entry point is 10yards away in the attached garage.

 

[Ian1981]

Reg 528.3.4.

Confused what's that got to do with protective bonding ?

 

[telectrix]

Confused what's that got to do with protective bonding ?

bugger all. afaik, can't be arsed to look it up, but ain't it the proximity of services reg.?

 

[Ian1981]

bugger all. afaik, can't be arsed to look it up, but ain't it the proximity of services reg.?

Correct

 

[Wilko]

I think departure example would be design engineer had specified some bit of kit that was not BS XYZ but had certified that it was equivalent or better than the required BS.

 

[westward10]

I estimate 45 posts on this.

 

[Midwest]

Reg 528.3.4

ii) Fault protection shall be afforded in accordance with the requirements of section 411.

If I'm completely off target, please feel free to tell me, I'm here to learn. As far as I'm aware, if you can't guarantee you electrical services, are not in close proximity with other services, section 411 applies?

 

[Ian1981]

Reg 528.3.4

ii) Fault protection shall be afforded in accordance with the requirements of section 411.

If I'm completely off target, please feel free to tell me, I'm here to learn. As far as I'm aware, if you can't guarantee you electrical services, are not in close proximity with other services, section 411 applies?

Yes but that's nothing to do with main protective bonding of extraneous parts :mtongue: although it is part of ADS
Chapter 54 deals with protective bonding

 

[telectrix]

regs. book stays in desk drawer after beer o'clock.

 

[westward10]

I don't have a set of Regs.

 

[telectrix]

sell you one. 15th edition. £500.make cheque out to "Campaign for Action on Shire Horses". bit long, that, so just use the initials ...C.A.S.H.

 

[Midwest]

Yes but that's nothing to do with main protective bonding of extraneous parts :mtongue: although it is part of ADS

Except main protective bonding of extraneous parts is in sec 411. This could go on all night, but suffice to say those with more intelligence than me, have bonded metal internal with plastic service. I'll just follow their lead.

 

[westward10]

Just seen an ECA survey which states only 6% of businesses surveyed are in full support of the 18th Ed changes, I could have saved them a lot of time and money with that.

 

[telectrix]

Except main protective bonding of extraneous parts is in sec 411. This could go on all night, but suffice to say those with more intelligence than me, have bonded metal internal with plastic service. I'll just follow their lead.

thought them wet-pants stopped using lead.

 

[Ian1981]

Yes but that's nothing to do with main protective bonding of extraneous parts :mtongue: although it is part of ADS

Except main protective bonding of extraneous parts is in sec 411. This could go on all night, but suffice to say those with more intelligence than me, have bonded metal internal with plastic service. I'll just follow their lead.

i would say bonding a piece of metal not extraneous could introduce a shock hazard (during fault conditions in the installation) which might never have been there because it wasn't needed such as isolated from earth metal work

 

[telectrix]

i would say bonding a piece of metal not extraneous could introduce a shock hazard which might never have been there because it wasn't needed such as isolated from earth metal work

that's why any metalwork should be tested to determine if it's extraneous. 22kΩ

 

[Ian1981]

If you ever read they magazine professional electrician the NICEIC did an article about it but can't remember what month it was.
That's if anyone trusts the NICEIC view

 

[Ian1981]

that's why any metalwork should be tested to determine if it's extraneous. 22kΩ

Think this is supposed to be made more clear in the 18th edition
On the DPC it has a sentence along the lines of if there's an insulated insert before entering the property then no bonding is required

 

[westward10]

Might have to up my estimate to 145 posts at this rate.

 

[snowhead]

Might have to up my estimate to 145 posts at this rate.

That'll be a Departure then?