New sub board for shed swa advice.

[Ian1981]

I wouldn't have a clue who it was aimed at, but I can assure you I am not bigbob1, because I'm not following all that he has posted, and I believe whilst it may need discussion that this thread is not the place to be discussing exporting PME, because that really is off topic.

So, sorry for mixing that up, but #e5 has been in my signature on here for many, many months now.

I have nothing against #e5
My quote was in response to bigbob spouting nonsense about exporting the installation earth and hashtaging e5 and which I don’t think is in the spirit of their codes.
I’ve never noticed anyone on here use it before to be honest, if you check I’ve not had any quaral with you on this thread nor replied to any of your comments till now.

 

[Toneyz]

It wasn't just hitting the live, it was through the live and cpc.
However, the install was not correctly tested, and the cpc was vaporised when the installation was energized, i.e. the dead testing which should have been done, and wasn't would have found the fault.
Ergo the negligence of the QS signing off the EIC, and the QS allowing inadequately skilled persons to undertake the work under their supervision, thus inadequate supervision of their subordinates also, but I'm not sure of the details of the charge.

I can't recall reading in the trade press or the NICEIC letter regarding it was through the CPC as well and no dead testing only recall it read about screw through live. If what you say is correct highlights reality that bosses think won't happen.

 

[netblindpaul]

I have nothing against #e5
My quote was in response to bigbob spouting nonsense about exporting the installation earth and hashtaging e5 and which I don’t think is in the spirit of their codes.
I’ve never noticed anyone on here use it before to be honest, if you check I’ve not had any quaral with you on this thread nor replied to any of your comments till now.

No worries, sorry Ian, I think that there is merit in discussing exporting earths, just not in this thread.
I think he has some valid points, but may not have made them well.
#e5 has been in my signature on here for several months now, perhaps even a year, or more.

 

[netblindpaul]

I can't recall reading in the trade press or the NICEIC letter regarding it was through the CPC as well and no dead testing only recall it read about screw through live. If what you say is correct highlights reality that bosses think won't happen.

If you read the Coroners report and the expert witness investigations, the cpc was vaporised by the fault, I'm not saying that there was no dead testing, but it would seem that the cpc had been vaporised before the insulation resistance testing had been done, i.e. the installation was energised before the correct sequence of dead testing had been completed.
Something should have tripped when that happened, so it should have been investigated.
That seems to have been missed.
Of course, once the cpc was gone there was no path to earth to detect the fault, where as if the testing had been done correctly, this would have been located.

 

[a-z electrics]

I assume it's a 3 core SWA with one core the installation earth? And it's easy to terminate the armour using a banjo washer and stranded wire, or get a pirhana nut as suggested.

 

[sparksburnout]

how the hell does the CPC "vaporise" when the circuit was energised?? If there was a dead short between L-E then the OCPD would have tripped. Sounds a bit iffy to me.

 

[Deleted member 9648]

Clearly this thread proves the earthing of an SWA feeding a shed is an immensely complicated issue far beyond the capabilities of an electrician.... and a legal minefield. I think the regulations should only permit Electrical Engineers with a minimum of 50yrs experience to install a sub to a shed. Either that or electricity in sheds should be banned outright and thousands of lives will be saved.
I'm not going anywhere near my shed until it has been disconnected by the SAS in full protective regalia, and I'll wont sleep easy ever again, haunted by the realisation that I've been doing it wrong all these years.

 

[bigbob1]

‘Respect for life, law, the environment and public good’

If you CRA something and come to the conclusion it’s okay to do. Then you have no respect for life or law.

You take the worst case scenario and you put processes in place to try and counteract it. You don’t save £5 and hope it’s not you that kills someone, because you knew it can happen, but did nothing to counteract it.

 

[bigbob1]

Clearly this thread proves the earthing of an SWA feeding a shed is an immensely complicated issue far beyond the capabilities of an electrician.... and a legal minefield. I think the regulations should only permit Electrical Engineers with a minimum of 50yrs experience to install a sub to a shed. Either that or electricity in sheds should be banned outright and thousands of lives will be saved.
I'm not going anywhere near my shed until it has been disconnected by the SAS in full protective regalia, and I'll wont sleep easy ever again, haunted by the realisation that I've been doing it wrong all these years.

Legal minefield when you kill someone or burn a shed down. Yes!

 

[bigbob1]

I have nothing against #e5
My quote was in response to bigbob spouting nonsense about exporting the installation earth and hashtaging e5 and which I don’t think is in the spirit of their codes.
I’ve never noticed anyone on here use it before to be honest, if you check I’ve not had any quaral with you on this thread nor replied to any of your comments till now.

You shouldn’t export a DNO earth without their consent. What you do is provide your own! That’s called TT and doing the RIGHT thing. Get over yourself.

 

[Ian1981]

You shouldn’t export a DNO earth without their consent. What you do is provide your own! That’s called TT and doing the RIGHT thing. Get over yourself.

your ----ing in the wind bob.
All them school jobs I’ve done where different buildings exist from the same installation, all the new build student block accommodations I’ve been involved with and army base new builds ,all with the installation earth extended to each building and non TT.
All the jobs I’ve been on and tested etc, don’t recall many being TT where numerous buildings exist but all must be breaking your law then?

 

[Pete999]

For God's sake don't give him more excuses

 

[Ian1981]

For God's sake don't give him more excuses

I won’t pete I’m turning the notifications for this thread well and truly off

 

[Pete999]

I won’t pete I’m turning the notifications for this thread well and truly off

Good man I'm ignoring, just as good

 

[netblindpaul]

how the hell does the CPC "vaporise" when the circuit was energised?? If there was a dead short between L-E then the OCPD would have tripped. Sounds a bit iffy to me.

I dunno, but that was the expert witness evidence provided by the forensic investigation.
If the circuit was repeatedly energised then it may well have blown the cpc away, we don't have adequate detail to know.
What was the fault current, I think it may have been a block of flats?
As she was definitely in a flat, so the sub may have been close.
There was no RCD on the circuit, so the fault would have been at full PFC at that point.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

With regards to the Emma Shaw case:
The installation was constructed to the 16th edition.
She was electrocuted in 2007.
The ECA were called as expert witness.
A screw fixing plasterboard to metal stud work penetrated a cable, making contact with both the Line and CPC.
Subsequent energisation did cause part of the damaged CPC to be vaporised, which left the unearthed metal stud work live.
The CPS decided there was insufficient evidence to prosecute anyone for manslaughter.
The Coroner did not write to every NICEIC QS, he wrote to the NICEIC and the Chair of the Competent Persons Forum.
Two people, an unqualified Inspector and his QS were prosecuted under HASAWA section 7.
The QS was found guilty and fined £1000.

 

[Leesparkykent]

how the hell does the CPC "vaporise" when the circuit was energised?? If there was a dead short between L-E then the OCPD would have tripped. Sounds a bit iffy to me.

I read something ages ago, but can’t seem to find it anymore....That the circuit breaker had been reset many times effectively blowing the line to earth fault clear.

 

[netblindpaul]

With regards to the Emma Shaw case:
The installation was constructed to the 16th edition.
She was electrocuted in 2007.
A screw fixing plasterboard to metal stud work penetrated a cable, making contact with both the Line and CPC.
Subsequent energisation did cause part of the damaged CPC to be vaporised, which left the unearthed metal stud work live.
The CPS decided there was insufficient evidence to prosecute anyone for manslaughter.
The Coroner did not write to every NICEIC QS, he wrote to the NICEIC and the Chair of the Competent Persons Forum.
Two people, an unqualified Inspector and his QS were prosecuted under HASAWA section 7.
The QS was found guilty and fined £1000.

That is pretty much correct spin.
Under rule 43, the coroner wrote to theNICEIC, and they wrote to all their QS's & PDH's at that point in time.
Or at least they told the Coroner they did, because if they hadn't the Coroners powers could have taken that further.

 

[Leesparkykent]

You shouldn’t export a DNO earth without their consent. What you do is provide your own! That’s called TT and doing the RIGHT thing. Get over yourself.

What about extending the equipotential zone?

 

[Deleted member 26818]

BigBob1.
Have you ever considered actually backing up anything you say with a Regulation or a quote from somewhere?
Citing publications and Regulations that do not agree, or in fact actually disagree with your statements is not sufficient.

 

[bigbob1]

your ****ing in the wind bob.
All them school jobs I’ve done where different buildings exist from the same installation, all the new build student block accommodations I’ve been involved with and army base new builds ,all with the installation earth extended to each building and non TT.
All the jobs I’ve been on and tested etc, don’t recall many being TT where numerous buildings exist but all must be breaking your law then?

With designers getting permission to run submains you can p*** in the wind all day long.......because they have a defence. It’s a phone call and an email we do it all the time, it takes 15mins.
And yes they do say no a fair bit.

 

[bigbob1]

BigBob1.
Have you ever considered actually backing up anything you say with a Regulation or a quote from somewhere?
Citing publications and Regulations that do not agree, or in fact actually disagree with your statements is not sufficient.

Read up ^^^ Mr IET forum member.

 

[Wilko]

Officially out.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Read up ^^^ Mr IET forum member.

I take it that’s a no.
I am no longer a member of the forum, and have not been so for some time.
What I find odd, is that I can find Regulations in both ESQCR and the old Electricity Supply Regulations which state the DNOs cannot refuse a connection for an installation which complies with the Wiring Regulations.
I can find publications from The IET and Stroma describing how to export the installation earth to outbuildings.
There is even a video by John Ward detailing how to export the earth.
That’s without really trying.

You on the other hand are unable to find anything at all to back your claims.

Why is this?

 

[Pete999]

Read up ^^^ Mr IET forum member.

Read up what exactly????????????????? The fictitious regulation you won't tell us about????????????????????

 

[bigbob1]

What about extending the equipotential zone?

Yep totally acceptable. Let me guess hdpe pipe? Metal shed extend it.
Use the armour as the cpc....oh no you have to use armour glands ahh a 4 core SWA? Baring in mind that’ll cost more than an earth rod honest to god comedy gold.
#E5

 

[Pete999]

how the hell does the CPC "vaporise" when the circuit was energised?? If there was a dead short between L-E then the OCPD would have tripped. Sounds a bit iffy to me.

He just has to be a windup merchant

 

[bigbob1]

I take it that’s a no.
I am no longer a member of the forum, and have not been so for some time.
What I find odd, is that I can find Regulations in both ESQCR and the old Electricity Supply Regulations which state the DNOs cannot refuse a connection for an installation which complies with the Wiring Regulations.
I can find publications from The IET and Stroma describing how to export the installation earth to outbuildings.
There is even a video by John Ward detailing how to export the earth.
That’s without really trying.

You on the other hand are unable to find anything at all to back your claims.

Why is this?

They can refuse to provide an earth connection.

I take it that’s a no.
I am no longer a member of the forum, and have not been so for some time.
What I find odd, is that I can find Regulations in both ESQCR and the old Electricity Supply Regulations which state the DNOs cannot refuse a connection for an installation which complies with the Wiring Regulations.
I can find publications from The IET and Stroma describing how to export the installation earth to outbuildings.
There is even a video by John Ward detailing how to export the earth.
That’s without really trying.

You on the other hand are unable to find anything at all to back your claims.

Why is this?

ESQCR section 8 first paragraph.
But it’s okay for you to use their earth?! It’s not a bad thing because when their neutral goes and someone dies they just go ‘he didn’t have permission from us’!!! I can show you a whole estate that was section 24’d because of supplies to garages done by a part P wonder. You are either a really sh*t troll or you genuinely think what you proclaim, which is worrying.

 

[Dave OCD]

Is this still going ?? Sorry I've been away from here since last night, doing a shed supply,TNCS earthing.

 

[bigbob1]

Thank you for a deeper insight in to how wrecked the system really is in this country. The ‘minimalistic’ approach taken.

 

[bigbob1]

Is this still going ?? Sorry I've been away from here since last night, doing a shed supply,TNCS earthing.

Fingers crossed for you Dave.

 

[Ian1981]

Open circuit pen conductors only really an issue on TNCS arrangements tho isn’t it?
An accident can occur with that whether you have extended an equipotential zone to an outbuilding or if it’s just located in the one building containing the installation earth, the point being that the touch voltage should be lower than if you hadn’t provided protective bonding at all.
Show us evidence of this section 24’d site if you please?

 

[Leesparkykent]

Yep totally acceptable. Let me guess hdpe pipe? Metal shed extend it.
Use the armour as the cpc....oh no you have to use armour glands ahh a 4 core SWA? Baring in mind that’ll cost more than an earth rod honest to god comedy gold.
#E5

Sorry @bigbob1...I don't want to come across as rude but could you please put that in English that can be understood? Thanks.

 

[Ian1981]

Sorry @bigbob1...I don't want to come across as rude but could you please put that in English that can be understood? Thanks.

Basically he is right and we have being doing it all wrong for all these years!

 

[Toneyz]

Why is this?

As I posted before his just on here to wind up and insult everyone.Why does the IET who publish the regs show in their guidance notes you can export the earth? These E5 members seem to have clubbed together had a badge made (had to redesign it as not to be sued by TFL) to look down on high at us electricians to tell us we are all doing it wrong. For some reason, this Bob thinks he is all above us but no substance. The only one in this group that has got my respect is this Ninger bloke who does some very well presented and explained youtube videos.
Pete, I think that I have an earth rod if you want one.

 

[netblindpaul]

It should only be an issue with open circuit PEN/CNE conductors, but even on presented TN-S supplies these days they are often TN-C-S further upstream.
They annoying thing is the extents that the paying customer (& thus the spark) has to potentially go to so that the DNO's can get away with a lack of maintenance and investment in their networks, so that they can make more profit. Whilst sparks get a bad reputation for being accused of trying to rip off the punter because of the upgrading to earthing and bonding needed.
Eventually the public pays and the DNO's get away with it and make more profit that they can siphon offshore.

 

[ipf]

I don't really get all this, using the example from 2007, or whenever, to back up an argument for not extending a supply from a tncs system. It's not even an example of a neutral failure in such an installation (which is basically the argument for not extending). That is generally a problem caused by DNO ineptitude and, as such, should be down to them.

 

[Ian1981]

As I posted before his just on here to wind up and insult everyone.Why does the IET who publish the regs show in their guidance notes you can export the earth? These E5 members seem to have clubbed together had a badge made (had to redesign it as not to be sued by TFL) to look down on high at us electricians to tell us we are all doing it wrong. For some reason, this Bob thinks he is all above us but no substance. The only one in this group that has got my respect is this Ninger bloke who does some very well presented and explained youtube videos.
Pete, I think that I have an earth rod if you want one.

Sparkyninja he is a member on here widdler is his forum name.
Well informed YouTube videos , educational and a fellow north easterner!

 

[netblindpaul]

As I posted before his just on here to wind up and insult everyone.Why does the IET who publish the regs show in their guidance notes you can export the earth? These E5 members seem to have clubbed together had a badge made (had to redesign it as not to be sued by TFL) to look down on high at us electricians to tell us we are all doing it wrong. For some reason, this Bob thinks he is all above us but no substance. The only one in this group that has got my respect is this Ninger bloke who does some very well presented and explained youtube videos.
Pete, I think that I have an earth rod if you want one.

There is not necessarily a problem with exporting an earth if it's done correctly.
I think that there is some misunderstanding with regard to this, and yes there is a lot of guidance on doing this.
I think that the discussions with regard to the exporting earths has been quite vociferous and also, I think that the issue of exporting a PME earth is distracting from the rest of the thread, because it was not originally anything to do with exporting earths, merely about earthing of SWA & where.
Now that applies even within an equipotential zone.

Can we get an understanding that HASAWA and EAWR apply to domestic works when they are being done, and the installation that is left behind afterwards, now that it seems the legal case has brought enlightenment?

I would like to bring this to a close, but, until the application of the law is understood and agreed, then I don't see how this can be done.

 

[Colin33]

If so, what's it got to do with an external supply?
Just bad workmanship, surely, giving someone the opportunity to screw through a cable in such circumstances.

Ah, but some trades like to use 100mm screws when a 20 is all that's required ;-) I once had a fault while testing a new installation, turned out to be the fault of the plasterers who picked up the Paslode and fired 50mm brads into my cables while fixing edge bead.