New sub board for shed swa advice.

[Dave OCD]

Ok this is all very well and could go on for weeks but please quote the exact wording of the exact regulation that clearly states armour must be earthed at the supply end.

Edit - reply to post #57.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Does this statement suggest that it can be connected to whatever earthing arrangement exists at the origin OR alternatively, connected to a separate earthing arrangement at the load end?

It should be connected to the same earthing system as the protective device which protects the SWA cable is connected to.
It should not be connected to a separate earthing system.

 

[netblindpaul]

I did not say the EAWR does not apply to domestic work.
I said the EAWR does not apply to a domestic installation.

It does though, if you, read, the law, the installation is under the control of the installer, thus the installation is under the control of the installer, ergo, EAWR applies.

 

[netblindpaul]

Ok this is all very well and could go on for weeks but please quote the exact wording of the exact regulation that clearly states armour must be earthed at the supply end.

Edit - reply to post #57.

EAWR89:
Earthing or other suitable precautions
8.Precautions shall be taken, either by earthing or by other suitable means, to prevent danger arising when any conductor (other than a circuit conductor) which may reasonably foreseeably become charged as a result of either the use of a system, or a fault in a system, becomes so charged;and, for the purposes of ensuring compliance with this regulation, a conductor shall be regarded as earthed when it is connected to the general mass of earth by conductors of sufficient strength and current-carrying capability to discharge electrical energy to earth.

 

[Colin33]

If the SWA was feeding a separated TT installation then clearly the conductive part of the SWA would be earthed from the supply (TN) end,and electrically separated from the earthing arrangement at the load end..

So are you suggesting that the swa would need to be terminated in a separate enclosure before entering a metal consumer unit ( TT earthed) in an outbuilding for example?

 

[Dave OCD]

Which says NOTHING about where the earthing must be carried out, therefore you are wrong. Reply to post #64

 

[Dave OCD]

So are you suggesting that the swa would need to be terminated in a separate enclosure before entering a metal consumer unit ( TT earthed) in an outbuilding for example?

Or you could possibly connect straight in with an alternative gland.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

It does though, if you, read, the law, the installation is under the control of the installer, thus the installation is under the control of the installer, ergo, EAWR applies.

No, the installation is under the control of the householder.
The installer bugged off ages ago and is probably installing other installations, or on here wondering where people get such weird ideas from.

 

[netblindpaul]

No, the installation is under the control of the householder.
The installer bugged off ages ago and is probably installing other installations, or on here wondering where people get such weird ideas from.

You are missing the point the doing of the installation is under the control of the "electrician" no matter where they have been since or after, that job was under their control, they were at work, thus, EAWR & HASAWA applied at that time.
Employed or Self-Employed both apply.

 

[Colin33]

It should be connected to the same earthing system as the protective device which protects the SWA cable is connected to.
It should not be connected to a separate earthing system.

So you may end up with a metal consumer unit connected to a TT arrangement with a Zs of up to 1667 ohms for example, fitted adjacent to a metal adaptable box to which the swa is terminated with a Zs of perhaps .35 ohms. Is that right?

 

[Octopus]

You are missing the point the doing of the installation is under the control of the "electrician" no matter where they have been since or after, that job was under their control, they were at work, thus, EAWR & HASAWA applied at that time.
Employed or Self-Employed both apply.

And you are missing the point.

Where is the reg about connecting the SWA at the supply end ?

 

[Deleted member 26818]

You are missing the point the doing of the installation is under the control of the "electrician" no matter where they have been since or after, that job was under their control, they were at work, thus, EAWR & HASAWA applied at that time.
Employed or Self-Employed both apply.

Sorry you are getting confused about what it is the Regulations apply to.
To put it in simple terms, the ground does not have to comply with HASAWA.
If a worker then digs a hole in the ground, that task must comply with HASAWA.
Electricity does not have to comply with the EAWR.
How you use electricity when conducting a task for work must comply with the EAWR.
An installation in a building which is not used for work purposes does not have to comply with the EAWR.
How you use the electricity provided by that installation when conducting a task for work must comply with the EAWR.
An installation in a building that is a place of work, must comply with the EAWR.
How you use the electricity (irrespective of whether it is for a task of work) provided by the installation, must also comply with the EAWR.
Compliance with the EAWR can in many respects be achieved by compliance with BS7671.

 

[netblindpaul]

Sorry you are getting confused about what it is the Regulations apply to.
To put it in simple terms, the ground does not have to comply with HASAWA.
If a worker then digs a hole in the ground, that task must comply with HASAWA.
Electricity does not have to comply with the EAWR.
How you use electricity when conducting a task for work must comply with the EAWR.
An installation in a building which is not used for work purposes does not have to comply with the EAWR.
How you use the electricity provided by that installation when conducting a task for work must comply with the EAWR.
An installation in a building that is a place of work, must comply with the EAWR.
How you use the electricity (irrespective of whether it is for a task of work) provided by the installation, must also comply with the EAWR.
Compliance with the EAWR can in many respects be achieved by compliance with BS7671.

No, you are wrong, not me.
Look at HASAWA, and this is NOT just my view point.
3
General duties of employers and self-employed to persons other than their employees.
So how does this NOT apply to householders when the install is crap and endangers them.
The install is done by employers or their employees, thus by the employer, or the self-employed.
The house holder is a person that is someone other than an employee, and the installation does not comply with EAWR, ergo an offence under HASAWA S3.

 

[johnduffell]

there are two threads of conversation - the smaller one is about which earthing system you can connect to. I have pinched the typed up version of the reg but the answer is it has to be the same earthing system as the installation containing the protective device
"542.1.3.3 [...]if the protective conductor forms part of a cable, the protective conductor shall be earthed only in the installation containing the associated protective device."

 

[netblindpaul]

Sorry you are getting confused about what it is the Regulations apply to.
To put it in simple terms, the ground does not have to comply with HASAWA.
If a worker then digs a hole in the ground, that task must comply with HASAWA.
Electricity does not have to comply with the EAWR.
How you use electricity when conducting a task for work must comply with the EAWR.
An installation in a building which is not used for work purposes does not have to comply with the EAWR.
How you use the electricity provided by that installation when conducting a task for work must comply with the EAWR.
An installation in a building that is a place of work, must comply with the EAWR.
How you use the electricity (irrespective of whether it is for a task of work) provided by the installation, must also comply with the EAWR.
Compliance with the EAWR can in many respects be achieved by compliance with BS7671.

So if this is true and the installation does not comply with EAWR, how does the installer comply with HASAWA Reg 3?

 

[Octopus]

there are two threads of conversation - the smaller one is about which earthing system you can connect to. I have pinched the typed up version of the reg but the answer is it has to be the same earthing system as the installation containing the protective device
"542.1.3.3 [...]if the protective conductor forms part of a cable, the protective conductor shall be earthed only in the installation containing the associated protective device."

But it still doesn't say which ends it should be connected ....

 

[Octopus]

there are two threads of conversation - the smaller one is about which earthing system you can connect to. I have pinched the typed up version of the reg but the answer is it has to be the same earthing system as the installation containing the protective device
"542.1.3.3 [...]if the protective conductor forms part of a cable, the protective conductor shall be earthed only in the installation containing the associated protective device."

But it still doesn't say which ends it should be connected ....

 

[telectrix]

there are two threads of conversation - the smaller one is about which earthing system you can connect to. I have pinched the typed up version of the reg but the answer is it has to be the same earthing system as the installation containing the protective device
"542.1.3.3 [...]if the protective conductor forms part of a cable, the protective conductor shall be earthed only in the installation containing the associated protective device."

but the argument is not about earthing the protective conductor, is it? it's about earthing the armour when said armour is not used as cpc.

 

[netblindpaul]

So, EAWR requires that any conductor that may become "inadvertently charged" must be suitably earthed, my wording, the original is earlier in the thread.
If, EAWR does not apply to installations under BS 7671 why is this contained there in?
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) welcomes the publication of BS 7671:2018, Requirements for Electrical Installations, IET Wiring Regulations 18th Edition. BS 7671 and the IET/IEE Wiring Regulations have been extensively referred to in HSE guidance over the years. Installations which conform to the standards laid down in BS 7671:2018 are regarded by HSE as likely to achieve conformity with the relevant parts of the Electricity at Work Regulations 1989. Existing installations may have been designed and installed to conform to the standards set by earlier editions of BS 7671 or the IEE Wiring Regulations. This does not mean that they will fail to achieve conformity with the relevant parts of the Electricity at Work Regulations 1989.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

So if this is true and the installation does not comply with EAWR, how does the installer comply with HASAWA Reg 3?

What installer?