IET logo
 
IET
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: GN3 + OSG AMD3 delayed.
Topic Summary:
Created On: 11 January 2015 10:46 AM
Status: Read Only
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch
Search Topic Search Topic
Topic Tools Topic Tools
View similar topics View similar topics
View topic in raw text format. Print this topic.
 11 January 2015 10:46 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



alanblaby

Posts: 757
Joined: 09 March 2012

I got an email this morning saying that the GN3 and OSG books I've ordered have been delayed, and are 'estimated' to be available in February.

Is this a printing delay, or are the relevant Writers / Committees still debating what should be in them?
i.e. what code should be put down for a plastic CU in domestic premises?

And why the distinction between Domestic and other properties?
Some of the offices I attend have a far worse fire risk in their CU cupboards than many houses I attend - the office cupboard is usually used as a store for anything, and not neatly, just thrown in, or used as a paper store.
 11 January 2015 01:55 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



spinlondon

Posts: 5494
Joined: 10 December 2004

The only CU that I have witnessed on fire was in an industrial unit.
Are you saying that it is only in domestic installations where plastic is no longer allowed?
 11 January 2015 02:43 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



leckie

Posts: 4439
Joined: 21 November 2008

That right Spin.
 11 January 2015 02:47 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



alanblaby

Posts: 757
Joined: 09 March 2012

That's right.
Well, it doesnt say 'not allowed', but the wording is
"Within domestic premises...shall comply with BS61439-3, and shall ....be manufactured from a non-combustible material.
Note 1:Ferrous metal..is deemed to be an example of a non-combustible material"

So they are deemed not good enough if they are passed for the BS, but must exceed the requirements of the BS by also being non-combustible.

Here's me thinking meeting the British Standards (or European) must be a god product, but we must (soon) exceed those standards. - Who is to monitor that a CU/switchgear is non combustible?
Surely there should now be a test to ensure what we buy does meet that requirement.

Or, we'll just have to trust the Manufacturers, who have been supplying non-compliant CUs for a number of years now.
 11 January 2015 03:03 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



daveparry1

Posts: 7749
Joined: 04 July 2007

who have been supplying non-compliant CUs for a number of years now.

But isn't the point Alan, that they'll only become non-compliant after Jan. '16?
 11 January 2015 03:06 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



RB1981

Posts: 485
Joined: 16 September 2007

Although in the interests of accuracy it states that alternatively it can be housed in a non-combustible enclosure.

Not sure why domestic is requiring a higher standard than other work though!

-------------------------
Walsh Electrical Services
http://www.walshelectrical.ie/
RECI REC & NICEIC Approved Contractor
 11 January 2015 03:10 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



sparkingchip

Posts: 10180
Joined: 18 January 2003

@#$€ up in a brewery?

That may sound harsh, but how long has this amendment been planned?
 11 January 2015 03:16 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



phantom9

Posts: 1757
Joined: 16 December 2002

I installed a new CU yesterday. I am installing the same one again on Tuesday and again on Thursday. The one I installed yesterday hasn't caught fire. When 1 January 2016 arrives my CU will be one that complies with AMD3. Until then I couldn't care less.
 11 January 2015 03:21 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Jaymack

Posts: 5377
Joined: 07 April 2004

Originally posted by: phantom9
I installed a new CU yesterday. I am installing the same one again on Tuesday and again on Thursday.

What was wrong the first time?

Regards

Get it right first time!
 11 January 2015 03:23 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



phantom9

Posts: 1757
Joined: 16 December 2002

In three different locations.
 11 January 2015 03:35 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



alanblaby

Posts: 757
Joined: 09 March 2012

Dave P - According to another poster here, many current CUs do not meet the relevant BS requirements now, so really shouldnt b, or have been, sold.

But it appears nothing is being done about it.
 11 January 2015 03:39 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



paulskyrme

Posts: 1291
Joined: 12 February 2003

Now there is the issue.
Currently CU's must meet 60439-3, as of March-15 they must meet 61439-3.
Differing requirements.
61439, much harsher.
I have questioned the tests done on CU's to make the decision that 61439 compliant units would not be, and all I got was shrugged shoulders from 2 very vocal and prominent figures in the "industry" or so they would have you believe.
 11 January 2015 08:12 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



mapj1

Posts: 9698
Joined: 22 July 2004

Currently CU's must meet 60439-3, as of March-15 they must meet 61439-3. Differing requirements. 61439, much harsher.


Indeed, rather 'more than a one in place of a zero'
ABB have produced a short guide to the changes.

Old and new standards - compared

Just in case you have not seen it.

-------------------------
regards Mike
 11 January 2015 09:52 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



paulskyrme

Posts: 1291
Joined: 12 February 2003

Ohh, I've seen it MIke, and a lot mor on top.
I have spent a lot of time looking into why an installation standard is dictating product requirements when there is a product standard already in place.
I am unhappy with the information I have found and managed to get for the reasons for the changes.
Whilst I encourage safety imporovements, I fail to see why an installation standard should be dictating product requirements.
 12 January 2015 12:30 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



davezawadi

Posts: 3955
Joined: 26 June 2002

Interesting, but the relevance to domestic CUs is pretty vague and the reason for change not at all clear. But we all have found that anyway. I saw now reference to fire containment there (ABB document) so the UK requirement is still far away from this standard, and fire testing would be very expensive for all the other countries who don't require it.!

GN3 etc being late is almost certainly in response to complaints about inspection classifications. Don't expect them any time soon (see my other posts).

-------------------------
David
BSc CEng MIET
david@ZawadiSoundAndLighting.co.uk
 13 January 2015 02:53 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Zoro

Posts: 300
Joined: 31 July 2011

Originally posted by: paulskyrme

Now there is the issue.

Currently CU's must meet 60439-3, as of March-15 they must meet 61439-3.

Differing requirements. 61439, much harsher.

I have questioned the tests done on CU's to make the decision that 61439 compliant units would not be, and all I got was shrugged shoulders from 2 very vocal and prominent figures in the "industry" or so they would have you believe.


Four out of five current plastic consumer units do not meet the current regulations, for flammability, they fail to meet the BS/EN 60439-3 standard, they would not meet the new 61439-3 standard either. Steel consumer units will not stop fires, the temperatures are to high.

The cynical use of JPEL64, by Industry figures that would be laughed at in the rest of Europe, for trying to manipulate BS7671 installation regulations to dictate product specifications is typical of those that you can observe.. Most are representing the commercial interests of their employers, not the interests of the public, or most people on this forum.

The Scams have said keep fitting the non compliant boards and that there is no need to code them, interesting advice, but they have no responsibility at all, we do. It would be an interesting challenge in the courts.

So no surprise in the delay on Guidance notes from the IET then.

http://www.eponthenet.net/arti...er-consumer-units.aspx
.
 13 January 2015 03:00 PM
User is online View Users Profile Print this message



AJJewsbury

Posts: 16105
Joined: 13 August 2003

Perhaps they're waiting for BS 7671 AMD 3 Corrigendum 1 so that they can write some guidance that makes sense and matches the regs?
- Andy.
 13 January 2015 08:29 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



napitprofessional

Posts: 452
Joined: 08 March 2008

Originally posted by: AJJewsbury

Perhaps they're waiting for BS 7671 AMD 3 Corrigendum 1 so that they can write some guidance that makes sense and matches the regs?

- Andy.


I think it far more likely that the usual vested interests, having made a total **** of the issue, are now deciding if it is more profitable to either break ranks or close ranks, stick their fingers in their ears and hope they can get away with it until after the election ....

-------------------------
B. Eng (Hons) MIET
Statistics

New here?


See Also:



FuseTalk Standard Edition v3.2 - © 1999-2017 FuseTalk Inc. All rights reserved.

..