IET logo
 
IET
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: 16th edition rules on showers in bedrooms
Topic Summary:
Created On: 17 July 2013 08:27 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.
 17 July 2013 08:27 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



BrucieBonus

Posts: 692
Joined: 20 February 2007

Hi everyone

I'm just wondering if the same rules applied then ie if a room that is not principally a bathroom has a shower in it, then it is treated as if it was a bathroom/shower room?

My copy of the 16th ed regs are buried underneath the rubbish/christmas tree/cassette tapes in my loft - but hopefully someone can remember and help me out!

thanks

BB

I should say that this is in relation to an EICR for a house which has a shower in a bedroom and sockets within 2 m, switches within 0.6m and no RCD protection - equipotential bonds in place though at boiler

Edited: 17 July 2013 at 08:33 AM by BrucieBonus
 17 July 2013 08:45 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for davezawadi.
davezawadi

Posts: 2657
Joined: 26 June 2002

Brucie, we are on the 17th!
Any room containing a bath or shower etc.
Its not compliant, but you can fix it fairly easily, note the zones, and fit blanking plates as required. The local equipotential bonding can be avoided if you fit an RCD.

You must EICR to the latest regs, but you know that. I'll bet they don't have the EIC for that job! Surely you have the 17th amdt.1?

David

-------------------------
David
CEng etc, don't ask, its a result not a question!
 17 July 2013 09:32 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for Parsley.
Parsley

Posts: 1020
Joined: 04 November 2004

Brucie are you asking if this would have meet the requirements of the 16th?

Rooms with a shower cubicle installed that are not bathrooms or shower rooms could only have socket outlets installed if they were positioned at least 3m away from the edge of zone 1 (i.e. outside zone 3) the socket outlet had to be protected by a 30ma rcd in accordance with 412-06. refer to 601-08-02 16th 2004

Only pull cords were allowed in zones 1 and 2
So I don't think your example would have meet the requirements of the 16th when it was originally installed.

Regards
 17 July 2013 10:09 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



AJJewsbury

Posts: 11493
Joined: 13 August 2003

I've a feeling that things changed mid-16th - when the zones came in. Before that I think that shower cubicles in other rooms allowed sockets provided they were over 2.5m away and had 30mA RCD protection (but it's a long time ago and my memory might not be what it was).
- Andy.
 17 July 2013 10:19 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for Parsley.
Parsley

Posts: 1020
Joined: 04 November 2004

My post was based on the 2004 brown cover.

Regards
 17 July 2013 11:39 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



John Peckham

Posts: 7474
Joined: 23 April 2005

Brucie

Spookily I have just come back from doing an EICR on a house and found something similar. Shower in bedroom, socket less than 3m away, no 30mA protection (anywhere in the house), and no supplementary bonding. So that will go down on the EICR as a C2.

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

http://www.astutetechnicalservices.co.uk/
 17 July 2013 12:43 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



BrucieBonus

Posts: 692
Joined: 20 February 2007

Yay - thanks people - I guess I was asking about did it meet the regs when installed - thinking it didn't but just wanted to be sure before I gave customer the bad news - they are letting the house as 'two bathroom' and I've rather put a spanner in the works......

Thanks again all

BB
 25 July 2013 01:23 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



deejackson

Posts: 267
Joined: 13 May 2005

I wonder at what point a fully enclosed shower cubicle becomes re-classified as a separate wet-room accessed from the bedroom? We used to have a small flat where the shower (cubicle) was accessed from the bedroom - not sure how it could comply with a 3metre separation - the bedroom wasn't that big!

Dee
 25 July 2013 02:15 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



AJJewsbury

Posts: 11493
Joined: 13 August 2003

I wonder at what point a fully enclosed shower cubicle becomes re-classified as a separate wet-room accessed from the bedroom? We used to have a small flat where the shower (cubicle) was accessed from the bedroom - not sure how it could comply with a 3metre separation - the bedroom wasn't that big!

Interesting thinking!

701 says the location is bounded by floors, walls, ceilings, doors, etc, so I guess the typical cubical that's open at the top is missing one boundary. So by the letter of the regs if the cubical had a ceiling (or extended right up to the room's ceiling) I guess you could say that the cubicle itself limits the location.

From an engineering point of view, if people are still likely to be wet, naked and barefooted in the bedroom outside of the cubicle (e.g. to dry off after a shower), it doesn't seems sensible to ignore the 701 requirements completely. So in practical terms I'd like to see the shower "cubicle" include a changing/drying area too before treating the rest of the room as outside the location.

- Andy.
 25 July 2013 03:10 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for ebee.
ebee

Posts: 5707
Joined: 02 December 2004

I think you are testing to the 17th obviously.
But trying to establish which parts did/did not comply on the date of the install therefore merely informing the owners of that fact.

Ie - it would be coded and subsequently awarded unstaisfactory according to current standards but then the owner wants to know if was "shortchanged at the time of install too".

I seem to remember something about the 16th - Whitfield stated something as if it was in the regs but it subsequently was not, which I suspect it was talked about in committee but didn`t go thru until a subsequent amendment.
I can`t remember exactly what it was but it was sockets in a room containing a bath/shower and the distance and/or RCDing of sockets.

I`ve not got it to hand at the moment but I suspect the 16th Yellow cover had just come in , effectively putting Whitfield a bit ahead of the regs at that time.

-------------------------
Regards,
Ebee (M I S P N)

Knotted cables cause Lumpy Lektrik
Statistics

See Also:



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