18th edition - any point?

[Octopus]

I can't understand why RCD's are mandatory for circuits with "luminaries" talk about a stupid decision!

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Because socket outlets involve a physical interaction with electrical equipment in the action of plugging in and contact by the end user with equipment of unknown safety. It is far simpler to require all 13a outlets to be protected rather than make available 'loopholes' which may result in a hazard if taken advantage of in a way the regulations do not intend.

If that were the case, then there would never have been any exceptions, and we wouldn’t have the ones we do have now.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

I can't understand why RCD's are mandatory for circuits with "luminaries" talk about a stupid decision!

Yes, rather than mandating safer lamp holders, lets require RCD protection.

 

[Deleted member 9648]

If that were the case, then there would never have been any exceptions, and we wouldn’t have the ones we do have now.

Not at all, the regulations historically have tended to sneak in a gradual 'upgrade'. Look at the gradual increase in the size of bonding conductors, and Zs readings which were fine last year are now potentially dangerous apparently. In the next amendment AFDD's will be required on certain circuits....and in the 19th on all.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Bonding conductor CSA increased due to PME and diverted Neutral currents.
Zs has been lowered due to CENLEC introducing Cmin.
These changes are logical, there’s an explanation.
The situation I’ve highlighted is not logical, there’s no explanation.
Why should a socket that is only ever used once in a blue moon, and never for mobile equipment now need RCD protection?

 

[Intoelectrics]

Bonding conductor CSA increased due to PME and diverted Neutral currents.
Zs has been lowered due to CENLEC introducing Cmin.
These changes are logical, there’s an explanation.
The situation I’ve highlighted is not logical, there’s no explanation.
Why should a socket that is only ever used once in a blue moon, and never for mobile equipment now need RCD protection?

Yes it does seem crazy. Can we trust that this has been thoroughly investigated and the right decision has been made? I can't honestly answer that. It may well be a case of well... if people are prepared to abuse this, intentionally or not, then if all socket outlets are deemed to require RCD's then there is no ambiguity. This type of attitude can be seen everyday with all sorts of things.
An example was when I asked a fella from the road traffic agency about why the stopping distances in the highway code had never been adjusted, as modern cars have ABS and other advanced features so can now stop far quicker in a much shorter distance than when the highway code was written. He went on to explain that there had been extensive study into this and data showed that although cars are much safer, modern drivers tend to be more complacent and subconsciously rely on the technology to save them. As a result the average reaction time has increased slightly and this negates the advancement in braking technology. In fact he went on to say that data taken over the last 20 years shows that on average stopping distances during an accident had actually increased.
So this shows that in general people get complacent and sometimes what might seem like a crazy regulation actually might save someones's life.

 

[Percyprod]

ABS doesn't shorten braking distances - it helps keep control of the car. If you've ever had to do an emergency stop with ABS you'll agree. Seems like you'll never stop!

 

[Intoelectrics]

ABS doesn't shorten braking distances - it helps keep control of the car. If you've ever had to do an emergency stop with ABS you'll agree. Seems like you'll never stop!

Depends on the situation, but that is for another argument.
My point being that sometimes regulations seem silly to us until we are presented with a reasoning that makes sense. Whether you agree with the reasoning behind them is your own choice.
It might well be that sometimes the easiest thing to do is to dismiss ambiguity by just putting in a reg that covers all situations. I suspect that this might be the case in the RCD for all socket outlets situation. I could be wrong though.

 

[Octopus]

Depends on the situation, but that is for another argument.
My point being that sometimes regulations seem silly to us until we are presented with a reasoning that makes sense. Whether you agree with the reasoning behind them is your own choice.
It might well be that sometimes the easiest thing to do is to dismiss ambiguity by just putting in a reg that covers all situations. I suspect that this might be the case in the RCD for all socket outlets situation. I could be wrong though.

Hum ........... I've yet to see any of that to back up the changes to the 18th ................

In fact its always the complete lack of explanations that pxsses me off.

 

[Wilko]

For my small part, I agree. It seems we are just to accept these updates from Our Betters. Some descriptive material is sometimes released to explain decisions e.g. info around fires from combustible cu. But the material is usually incomplete and often just raises more questions .

 

[Intoelectrics]

Hum ........... I've yet to see any of that to back up the changes to the 18th ................

In fact its always the complete lack of explanations that pxsses me off.

I don't disagree, in fact I've given you an agree. If you noticed I posted "until" we are given an explanation, this may not ever happen. It might be that some half wit sat at a desk with no practical electrical experience is coming up with these changes (actually most likely is) But it may well be that as more data is collected and analysed the changes made are justifiable improvements.

 

[andyb]

Why all of a sudden does the plug behind my washing machine that only ever gets used every 4-6 years when my washing machine needs replacing now need RCD protection?

I'd say that it's in constant use Spin.

 

[CACJL]

With the 18th edition coming out, will this just mean more rules broken? Judging by the number of questions on this forum most electricians struggle with the 17th edition! I assume any installations wired under the 17th edition are now dangerous? Mmm better think about rewiring my stables. Only joking, you know me and the regs!

Welcome to living in a nanny state, bureaucracy gone mad.

 

[andyb]

Welcome to living in a nanny state, bureaucracy gone mad.

So you'd have no electrical reg's then?

 

[Percyprod]

I'm for that! (Only joking)!