IET logo
 
IET
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: 18th Edition DPC Part 8
Topic Summary:
Created On: 17 July 2017 02:35 PM
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.
 17 July 2017 02:35 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



PG

Posts: 193
Joined: 17 October 2011

Trying to wade through the DPC and came upon the new section on Energy Efficiency.
I'm struggling with this section, possibly because it seems to read like a design guide rather than a set of regulations.
As far as I can see, it is an integral part of the regulations. While I think that some form of regulation may, in the future, be appropriate I feel that this text is not yet suitable for prescriptive regulations.
Part 8 is only recognised in the, appended, Model Test Forms inasmuch that there is a field in the EIC that requires "Details of Energy Efficiency Measures". Is it fair to assume that the authors were struggling to find anything definitive to list?
The cynic in me wonders if this section is a method of spurring us into the Internet of Things.

Does anyone share my bewilderment - before I spend a lot more time trying to understand this part of the regs.
 17 July 2017 03:45 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



davezawadi

Posts: 3819
Joined: 26 June 2002

Yes they are curious and in the wrong place, they should be in the building regs if anywhere at all. Please write a comment which says this! They are not regulations as you say, and not very self consistent even as advice. In my view they are largely meaningless. Only the designer can say what efficiency measures he has taken, and this would be considered as part of the design process anyway. None of us run all the cables red hot all the time to save money!

-------------------------
David
BSc CEng MIET
david@ZawadiSoundAndLighting.co.uk
 19 July 2017 05:17 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



PG

Posts: 193
Joined: 17 October 2011

Many Thanks.
I see that there is a later thread expressing some reservation on the "barycentre" computation.
I'll comment on the DPC as suggested (hard going on the BS web - it was much easier for the earlier DPCs).
 19 July 2017 05:40 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



AJJewsbury

Posts: 15716
Joined: 13 August 2003

Yes they are curious and in the wrong place, they should be in the building regs if anywhere at all.

Definitely "curious", I'm not sure about being in the wrong place though. Safety of people in buildings is a building regs matter, but they still delegate all the details of electrical safety out to BS 7671 (or equivalent) - I'm not sure what's wrong with taking a similar attitude when it comes to the conservation of fuel and power. (Although I've not noticed any obvious co-ordination between the proposed part 8 and part L of the building regs...)
- Andy.
 19 July 2017 06:55 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



PG

Posts: 193
Joined: 17 October 2011

Perhaps Part 8 should undergo some clarification before it becomes part of the Regs.
I would like to see all the Model Forms updated to reflect the essential requirements (whatever they are agreed to be).
Regards
 20 July 2017 04:18 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



spinlondon

Posts: 5490
Joined: 10 December 2004

Not convinced that the consultation process is anything more than a smoke screen.
The last time, nothing from the DPC became part of the Regs.
Things that did become part of the Regs. were never offered up for consultation.

Edited: 20 July 2017 at 04:31 AM by spinlondon
 20 July 2017 11:05 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



AJJewsbury

Posts: 15716
Joined: 13 August 2003

The last time, nothing from the DPC became part of the Regs.

I disagree - a few of my (very minor) DPC comments last time did seem to make their way into the final version (either that or someone else had the same though at the same time - always possible).
- Andy.
 20 July 2017 02:52 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



spinlondon

Posts: 5490
Joined: 10 December 2004

Could you specify which proposals were adopted?
I cannot recall any.
 20 July 2017 06:00 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



AJJewsbury

Posts: 15716
Joined: 13 August 2003

Could you specify which proposals were adopted?

Not sure if you mean committee generated proposals included in the original DPC or public generated proposals in response to the DPC - but either way...

changes to the rules for 30mA RCD protection for sockets (deleting the 'for use for ordinary persons and intended for general use' bit and introducing the risk assessment option), Cmin, and fireproof support of cables in escape routes were all in the DPC and then appeared just about word for word in the published AMD3.

and in terms of things fed back by the public - I can only say for mine (and while most of my comments seemed to be ignored a few at least did seem to get through) - adding a reference to BS EN 61558-2-8 to 414.3 (so I can claim my door bell is SELV) and a change to 559.5.5 to include not just specifically, 3-phase but any multi-phase lighting circuit (which I raised after a discussion here) would be a couple of examples.

- Andy.
 20 July 2017 06:27 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



spinlondon

Posts: 5490
Joined: 10 December 2004

Last DPC I read had nothing about changing the requirements for RCD protection to socket-outlets so perhaps I missed that one.
Statistics

New here?


See Also:



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

..