AFDD in 18th 2nd Amendment

[mainline]

I would say yes as long as it's deemed to be non-combustible, but that’s listed as a garage consumer unit.

According to Luceco Technical Team,
This board is fully compliant with all of the manufacturing requirements in the 18th edition of the wiring regulations.

 

[pc1966]

Realistically all of the metals used for electrical work are going to be acceptable, steel is cheapest and easy to work with. Aluminium is easier to mould in to odd shapes and has some theoretical advantages (e.g. higher strength to weight ratio, non-magnetic, higher conductivity) but cost is likely to go against it. Same for copper and brass, but knobs on the price tag.

There are some metals that would not be acceptable, most obvious is magnesium alloys as they will burn spectacularly in air if heated to even normal temperatures. Less obvious are alloys with large amounts of beryllium in them as they result in toxic dust if worked, as well as being expensive.

 

[davesparks]

Cast Aluminium, available from screwstation.

Are these compliant?

View attachment 100729

I checked the specs on them and it actually says its cast steel.

 

[pirate]

Trying to get my head round this. Chlorine trifluoride? Crikey, i don't want to meet that any time soon! However, that and an oxygen lance are unlikely bedfellows for a domestic CU. I'm presuming that what the regs are intending, though not saying, is that the material used should be non-combustible "in the normally envisaged environment in which it is installed"...I'm simply thinking that, eg in a normal house, you are unlikely to encounter a situation where conditions can exist which would cause a normally non-combustible material to go on fire, and the purpose of the enclosure is to contain any fire that may occur within the enclosure, or prevent any fire externally from gaining access to the interior of the enclosure. I can see that steel is probably the easiest and cheapest solution for many reasons. Would carbon fibre be an option as i believe it has a very high temperature melting point and doesn't actually combust? It would look really "cool" too!

 

[mainline]

I checked the specs on them and it actually says its cast steel.

You checked the wrong one.

Put 1926g in.

https://www.NoLinkingToThis/p/briti...d=337165#product_additional_details_container

 

[Simon47]

I'm presuming that what the regs are intending, though not saying, is that the material used should be non-combustible "in the normally envisaged environment in which it is installed"

Yes, I think we all assume that. But in terms of signing a certificate to say "this installation complies with BS7671 ed foo amd bar" then I don't think "we all assume" is sufficient. I'd agree that an oxygen lance or ClF3 is highly unlikely to be involved, but I'm sure some interesting cases have come up in the past - hence the adage that nothing is foolproof as fools are so inventive.
All they (the committee behind BS7671) had to do was reference an existing standard, or simply state "when heated to X˚C in a normal atmosphere" if they didn't want to use an existing standard. Had they done that then there'd be an objective test allowing the use of any material that met the specific requirements. I.e. it would be really easy - "does the material meet the laid down objective test ?", if yes then it can be used.

 

[UNG]

Yes, I think we all assume that. But in terms of signing a certificate to say "this installation complies with BS7671 ed foo amd bar" then I don't think "we all assume" is sufficient. I'd agree that an oxygen lance or ClF3 is highly unlikely to be involved, but I'm sure some interesting cases have come up in the past - hence the adage that nothing is foolproof as fools are so inventive.
All they (the committee behind BS7671) had to do was reference an existing standard, or simply state "when heated to X˚C in a normal atmosphere" if they didn't want to use an existing standard. Had they done that then there'd be an objective test allowing the use of any material that met the specific requirements. I.e. it would be really easy - "does the material meet the laid down objective test ?", if yes then it can be used.

Wouldn't that be BS EN 61439-3.

 

[Simon47]

Wouldn't that be BS EN 61439-3.

Which doesn't specify flammability requirements AFAICS.

 

[pc1966]

You checked the wrong one.

Put 1926g in.

https://www.NoLinkingToThis/p/briti...d=337165#product_additional_details_container

The BG data sheet says steel:

https://www.bgelectrical.uk/public/downloads/data-sheets/consumer-units/metal-enclosures-datasheet.pdf

 

[mainline]

The BG data sheet says steel:

https://www.bgelectrical.uk/public/downloads/data-sheets/consumer-units/metal-enclosures-datasheet.pdf

Screwfix info says for the 1926g

Specification
Brand	British General
Cable Entry Points	Top, Bottom, Side & Rear
Construction Material (Electrical)	Aluminium
Consumer Unit Type	Garage
CSU Populated/Unpopulated	Populated
Current Rating	40 A
Fixings Supplied	Fixings Not Supplied
Integrity	Non High Integrity
IP Rating	IP65

�