IET logo
 
IET
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: 16th Edition or 17th Edition?
Topic Summary: Five year project
Created On: 09 May 2012 11:11 AM
Status: Post and Reply
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.
 09 May 2012 11:11 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Patchy

Posts: 26
Joined: 29 September 2008

Hi All,

I am involved with a project which has spanned a 5 year period. The original contractor began the installation to the regulations that were current at the time - 16th edition. However, after 75% of the installation has been complete, the contractor went bust and another contractor is required to come on-board to complete the job.

We are not only asking the contractor to complete the final 25% of the installation, we are also asking them to certify the existing works that have been completed. However, the existing works were completed to the 16th edition!!

Will the whole installation be required to be brought up to 17th edition requirements, or just the remaining 25%?

Thanks in advance!
Matt
 09 May 2012 11:19 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



AJJewsbury

Posts: 10964
Joined: 13 August 2003

My understanding is that it's the design (rather than construction or testing) that marks the watershed between versions of the standard - so if the design was completed while the 16th was in force then installation and testing should also be to the 16th (as they have to follow the design of course) - no matter how long it takes.

So the remaining 25% could (arguably should) be done to the 16th rather than the 17th if the design for that was done under the first phase. You could elect to re-do the design under the 17th, but that'd be your (or the client's choice), rather than a matter of regulations.

- Andy.
 09 May 2012 11:39 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



daveparry1

Posts: 5886
Joined: 04 July 2007

I think it would make sense to recommend bringing it all up to 17th, it's probably only going to be mainly rcd protection & 17th compliant board etc?

Dave.
 09 May 2012 11:43 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



AJJewsbury

Posts: 10964
Joined: 13 August 2003

we are also asking them to certify the existing works that have been completed

To certify they'd probably need the original contractor to sign for design & construction - if that isn't possible, then a periodic inspection & issuing a Electrical Installation Condition Report is probably a better approach.
- Andy.
 09 May 2012 11:49 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Patchy

Posts: 26
Joined: 29 September 2008

Thanks.

There are between 75-100 DB's, therefore replacing them all could get expensive. Also, we will be asking the new contractor to take design responsibility for the exisiting installation also, so I expect they will need to check the whole installation and supporting calcs thoroughly.

I am not suggesting that the upgrading the whole installation to 17th edition isn't best practice, I am just keen to understand if the client has the choice to still install to the 16th, and the implications?
 09 May 2012 11:54 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



daveparry1

Posts: 5886
Joined: 04 July 2007

In that case Matt, 16th!
 09 May 2012 12:09 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



MrP

Posts: 815
Joined: 24 March 2006

As Andy says it was designed to the 16th not the 17th end of

MrP
 09 May 2012 01:09 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Patchy

Posts: 26
Joined: 29 September 2008

Understood.

Thanks, Matt
 10 May 2012 01:37 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for BigRed.
BigRed

Posts: 552
Joined: 10 November 2006

with andy eicr to 16th. if most was constructed to the 16th, then thats the standard to test to. All current works to be installed should be to 17th.
 10 May 2012 04:04 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Jaymack

Posts: 4480
Joined: 07 April 2004

I seem to remember leeway was given for six months completion, after the date of the introduction of the 17th, if an installation was designed to the 16th. I think some discussion is required with the owner, local planning authority and the relevant scheme provider.

Regards
 10 May 2012 10:14 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



paulskyrme

Posts: 736
Joined: 12 February 2003

16th, it was designed to 16th and the job started under 16th so 16th it is.
IIRC this is written into the regs, somewhere!
 10 May 2012 10:50 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



John Peckham

Posts: 7253
Joined: 23 April 2005

You cannot issue an EIC for the 75% of the work that has been done by others. You can carry out a PIT which should compare the installation to the current edition of the regulations (BS7671:2008 (2011)) and issue an EICR which may have some C3s on it.

For the 25% of the work that has not been done is there a valid design for this work? Why not consult the client and ask them if the work was designed to the 16th if they want it upgraded to the 17th. I cannot see how you can commence the instillation of new work to an old standard some 4 years after it became obsolete?

-------------------------
John Peckham

http://www.astutetechnicalservices.co.uk/
 11 May 2012 12:07 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



mawry

Posts: 193
Joined: 26 April 2004

I'd go along with JP's assessment
Statistics

See Also:



FuseTalk Standard Edition v3.2 - © 1999-2014 FuseTalk Inc. All rights reserved.