Extraneous conductive parts in outbuildings

[D Skelton]

Tut tut, who you been upsetting now?? If it's not our mates in the sun lounge it's others on another forum...lol!!

Ah just some fella who's so used to others licking his bum hole that he went all weird when some young sprog challenged him on his ridiculous opinion that Part P is all fine and dandy. He seems like a decent bloke, the thing is, he's like many over at the IET forums whereby when someone questions his opinion on a wider issue, he'd rather go into minute detail about irrelevant things really rather than sticking to the topic in hand.

I made a point that some years back I used a 2.5mm conductor on a 10A lighting circuit and my scam assessor reacted as if he'd never seen such a thing before, his response was along the lines of "the OSG is all you need for domestic applications and that 2.5mm on a lighting circuit regardless of any other factors is and always will be ridiculous".

The point I was trying to make is that a Electrical Trainee won't think outside the box because they're so used to following the 'wire by numbers' OSG.

Apparently I can't calculate a cable size properly???

I told him where to go.

 

[Engineer54]

his response was along the lines of "the OSG is all you need for domestic applications and that 2.5mm on a lighting circuit regardless of any other factors is and always will be ridiculous".

Oh dear, our projects specifications minimum size conductor for lighting final circuits is 2.5mm and 4mm for final circuit small power/socket outlets!! lol!! Been the same on most of the major projects i've worked on too....

 

[D Skelton]

Oh dear, our projects specifications minimum size conductor for lighting final circuits is 2.5mm and 4mm for final circuit small power/socket outlets!! lol!! Been the same on most of the major projects i've worked on too....

Exactly the same on many commercial projects I work on, just rare in a domestic. Still, that doesn't mean that 2.5mm will never need to be specced on a domestic!

The fact is, rather than sticking to the topic, he set out on a quest to try and somehow discredit me, and I was having none of it! The only reason I waded in on the topic (being someone who never posts on the IET forums for obvious reasons) was because his opening reply in the thread was accusing us five who attended parliament of misleading the MPs! The worst thing was that his flock of sheep huddled round him to bolster his argument even further rather than thinking for themselves!

I might have had time for the bloke if he hadn't initially called my integrity into question on a public forum!

Nothing annoys me more than someone who knows a lot thinking they know it all. I like to think in 20 years time when I know a lot that I will welcome a challenge of my knowledge and will be able to engage in a reasoned and polite debate without trying to sully someones name.

I'm always happy to eat humble pie if needs be, but I am sure as hell not wrong on this one!

 

[Engineer54]

I've just read the thread on IET, ...I can't believe the attitude of these so-called professionals towards electricians training. No wonder the electrical industries is on it's knees and in the state it's in. I've said it before and i'll say it again, the vast majority of these IET Engineers are outside of the building services industry and have little, if any interest in it or the those that work within the sector.

In my honest opinion, it's time to pass the Building Regulations (BS7671) over to CIBSE, who are a far more professional organisation all round, and far better suited to look after a standard that regulates building electrical installations. It's hard for me to say that, but i also know that if i had my time again, i would be with CIBSE, and Not the IET....

 

[D Skelton]

It's bad aint it!

I can't believe the attitude of these so called professionals towards a guy who's just trying to do his bit to defend their trade either! It's just one big old boys club full of know it all no marks and I've no time for it.

It's enough to make me wanna just give up hammering the scams Why bother when my own kind are accusing me of being untruthful and a $hit electrician!?

 

[Badged01]

......Why bother when my own kind are accusing me of being untruthful and a $hit electrician!?

Welcome to the world of politics, back stabbing and double dealing .......

 

[dab1]

I did my 17th edition course a couple of weeks ago, and I asked the question about extraneous metalwork. I asked about the 45K ohms rule although I thought it was 33k ohms. My understanding was, if its above 45/33kohms it is considered electrically separate and no need to bond. However I was told by the lecturer "forget the readings if it's metalwork entering the building which is also in contact with the ground it must be bonded"

 

[D Skelton]

I did my 17th edition course a couple of weeks ago, and I asked the question about extraneous metalwork. I asked about the 45K ohms rule although I thought it was 33k ohms. My understanding was, if its above 45/33kohms it is considered electrically separate and no need to bond. However I was told by the lecturer "forget the readings if it's metalwork entering the building which is also in contact with the ground it must be bonded"

Your lecturer was wrong.

 

[trev]

I did my 17th edition course a couple of weeks ago, and I asked the question about extraneous metalwork. I asked about the 45K ohms rule although I thought it was 33k ohms. My understanding was, if its above 45/33kohms it is considered electrically separate and no need to bond. However I was told by the lecturer "forget the readings if it's metalwork entering the building which is also in contact with the ground it must be bonded"

I'll go one further than Damian. Your lecturer is an idiot.

 

[Engineer54]

I did my 17th edition course a couple of weeks ago, and I asked the question about extraneous metalwork. I asked about the 45K ohms rule although I thought it was 33k ohms. My understanding was, if its above 45/33kohms it is considered electrically separate and no need to bond. However I was told by the lecturer "forget the readings if it's metalwork entering the building which is also in contact with the ground it must be bonded"

The fact of the matter is, that it will be highly unlikely that any metallic pipework or other metalwork coming out of the ground, and entering a properties electrical installations equipotential zone will have such a high value, and so will require main bonding as a matter of course...

So, giving the lecturer the benifit of doubt, this is probably what he meant, or at least what i hope he meant!! ..lol!!