New edition of Best Practice Guide #4

[pc1966]

I see the BPG#4 has been updated and just taking a look over it now. However, I am not a fan of the new layout (EICR report style of list) as it lacks some of the example photos of the previous edition that made it more generally readable to non-electricians. The colour coding is a nice touch, but I think the photos before were useful and should not have been removed.

Over to you folks for comments?

 

[timhoward]

I'm inclined agree with you. It's now a lot less consumer friendly with most of it turning into a long list.

I noticed that mixed switchgear is now expressed the other way around. It used to be "C3 unless.......". Now it's a "C2 where ......"

They've also stopped referring to BPG1 for the famous missing CPC on circuit supplying Class 1 equipment or metal face plates.

EV charge points now mentioned too.

 

[Lister1987]

Deja Vu?

Link to new best practice guide 4

Don’t know if it’s been posted yet, but here’s a link to the new guidance for I&T from Electrical Safety First; Best practice guide 4. https://www.electricalsafetyfirst.org.uk/media/3snlkv1x/best-practice-guide-4-issue-6.pdf 😎👍

www.electriciansforums.net

best practice guide 4 (new edition)

in the old bpg4 it stated Absence of supplementary bonding for installed Class II equipment where required (such as in a location containing a bath or shower), in case the equipment is replaced with Class I equipment in the future. as: Non-compliances with the current edition of BS 7671 that do...

www.electriciansforums.net

 

[pc1966]

I'm inclined agree with you. It's now a lot less consumer friendly with most of it turning into a long list.

I noticed that mixed switchgear is now expressed the other way around. It used to be "C3 unless.......". Now it's a "C2 where ......"

Seems a subtle push to replacing CUs along with a lack of AFDD being something to "observe".

It appears later, worded very slightly differently, for the C3 case! Would it have been too hard to have "otherwise C3" in the text?

They've also stopped referring to BPG1 for the famous missing CPC on circuit supplying Class 1 equipment or metal face plates.

That is also an odd shift, as now the slightly non-obvious aspect is C3 for "Absence of circuit protective conductors in circuits having only Class II (or all insulated) equipment where they are unlikely to be exchanged for Class I equipment" and that seems overly broad compared to the occasional pre-1966 lighting circuit.

EV charge points now mentioned too.

Yes, I had to look up what a "RDC-DD" is on that point! The way it is written is somewhat convoluted, as basically it is saying a lack of DC leak protection, either by a Type B RCD, or some device specific to that (that are probably in most EV point these days).

On a related front there is now the "official" code of C3 for type AC RCDs being used practically anywhere, but again the note/explanation is very poor and not much use to the public. Same for no AFDD in high-risk areas, though its text spills over in to the lack of SPD coding as C3.

Another thing mentioned as NC only is this one that often gets debated / questioned on these forums: "Meter tails exceed 3m in length, and no overcurrent protection has been provided on the consumer side of the installation (and max Zs is satisfactory)" which to me seems also to be not terribly good, not so much the lack of OCPD as we all know the DNO fuse is likely to do, but no mention of any ability to isolate long tails that, but the simple fact they were needed, are probably more likely to subject to a risk of damage.