New sub board for shed swa advice.

[netblindpaul]

Any installer anywhere.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Any installer anywhere.

Right now, I’m sat in my bungalow.
I cannot (unless I look in a mirror) see any installers.
Why would my electrical installation have to comply with EAWR or HASAWA?

 

[netblindpaul]

Right now, I’m sat in my bungalow.
I cannot (unless I look in a mirror) see any installers.
Why would my electrical installation have to comply with EAWR or HASAWA?

Someone installed the work, and if they did this as part of a business, which we are discussing, not DIY, then the installation works and the requirement for compliance with EAWR of the installation was there when it was installed, thus the installer was required to comply with the law of the land as per EAWR & HASAWA.
What happened after that with regard to DIY is not relevant and has not been discussed.
So if you did your own install in your own home that is not relevant, but, if you are employed or self-employed then EAWR and HASAWA applied at the time of the install, and thus the installation must comply with the law.

 

[davesparks]

Ok, how about a supply to an outside socket or shed where you're coming from an existing socket on a RFC, plasterboard walls so you put in a single dry lining box for a DP switch or SFCU and drill through to outside behind the box, how do you earth the armour at that termination ? Yes I know you could terminate into a box outside but why create another unnecessary connection when you can earth the armour at the other end ? Or you could have an insulated CU to take your SWA from with no space around it for an additional connection box and no way of drilling a 20mm hole into it.

But you will still be terminating the SWA with the correct gland so I see no reason not to swap the locknut for an earthing nut.
Or are you suggesting that it’s ok to terminate SWA without a gland?

 

[davesparks]

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?

No you wouldn’t, you can’t have exposed metal connected to two different earthing systems like that. You insulate the armour at the load end of the submain so that it does not introduce another potential.

Also leaving a TT system with such a high Ra is unacceptable.

 

[davesparks]

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

No it doesn’t say specifically which end of an SWA cable must be earthed if it is done at only one end, it says what must be achieved by the earthing. These regulations assume that we have enough sense to apply them correctly and don’t need a step by step guide to every little detail.

So the regulation basically says that the armour must be earthed to prevent it becoming charged (either through induction, capacitance or touching something which is live) in normal service or under fault conditions.

In normal service it wouldn’t matter which end is earthed, however under fault conditions such as physical damage it is possible that several armour strands could be broken. This could lead to the armour on the live side of the damage being unearthed if the connection was only made at the load end.

 

[Pete999]

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.

Precisamundo

 

[Deleted member 9648]

No it doesn’t say specifically which end of an SWA cable must be earthed if it is done at only one end, it says what must be achieved by the earthing. These regulations assume that we have enough sense to apply them correctly and don’t need a step by step guide to every little detail.

So the regulation basically says that the armour must be earthed to prevent it becoming charged (either through induction, capacitance or touching something which is live) in normal service or under fault conditions.

In normal service it wouldn’t matter which end is earthed, however under fault conditions such as physical damage it is possible that several armour strands could be broken. This could lead to the armour on the live side of the damage being unearthed if the connection was only made at the load end.

If you are going to use that as an argument for earthing at both ends then you would have to apply the same argument to all radial circuit cpc's as damage may result in partial or complete loss of earth to part of the circuit.
Not all scenario's are sufficiently likely to be worth allowing for.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

If you are going to use that as an argument for earthing at both ends then you would have to apply the same argument to all radial circuit cpc's as damage may result in partial or complete loss of earth to part of the circuit.
Not all scenario's are sufficiently likely to be worth allowing for.

Exactly why high integrity earthin requires a second CPC.

 

[Deleted member 9648]

Exactly why high integrity earthin requires a second CPC.

Don't think earthing a cables conductive part is classed as requiring high integrity earthing.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Don't think earthing a cables conductive part is classed as requiring high integrity earthing.

My reply was in response to your statement about applying the argument to radials and damaged CPCs.

 

[Dave OCD]

92 posts including this one, but any armour anywhere will have rusted away before NBP admits he's wrong.

 

[sparksburnout]

Ok, how about a supply to an outside socket or shed where you're coming from an existing socket on a RFC, plasterboard walls so you put in a single dry lining box for a DP switch or SFCU and drill through to outside behind the box, how do you earth the armour at that termination ? Yes I know you could terminate into a box outside but why create another unnecessary connection when you can earth the armour at the other end ? Or you could have an insulated CU to take your SWA from with no space around it for an additional connection box and no way of drilling a 20mm hole into it.

I don't understand your argument here to be honest. You have got to gland the SWA to something have you not?? So just earth it at that point. I often use a Wiska box on the outside wall, not forgetting the danger 230V label

 

[sparksburnout]

Ok, how about a supply to an outside socket or shed where you're coming from an existing socket on a RFC, plasterboard walls so you put in a single dry lining box for a DP switch or SFCU and drill through to outside behind the box, how do you earth the armour at that termination ? Yes I know you could terminate into a box outside but why create another unnecessary connection when you can earth the armour at the other end ? Or you could have an insulated CU to take your SWA from with no space around it for an additional connection box and no way of drilling a 20mm hole into it.

I don't understand your argument here to be honest. You have got to gland the SWA to something have you not?? So just earth it at that point. I often use a Wiska box on the outside wall, not forgetting the danger 230V label

 

[netblindpaul]

Going back to basics is needed here so that the requirements can be understood.
I can assure you that I am NOT wrong, (this is NOT just my opinion), if you listen to, read and understand the posts I have made then this can be understood.
Firstly it must be understood that HASAWA applies to all persons when at work, employed or self-employed if people can't understand that then they are beyond help.
Is this understood by all, or are many of you going to disagree and state that you are beyond the law of the land when you are at work, and thus the law does not apply to you because you are some sort of special being?

 

[Deleted member 26818]

I think your problem is that you are confusing a ‘task of work’ with a ‘domestic installation’.
If no task of work is being conducted, neither the HASAWA or the EAWR applies.
If a task of work is being conducted the HASAWA and EAWR would apply to that task, not to the domestic installation.
It may be that the task of work is to make safe a dangerous condition in the domestic installation.
How would such a task be able to be conducted if the domestic installation must first comply with HASWA and the EAWR?

 

[Colin33]

No you wouldn’t, you can’t have exposed metal connected to two different earthing systems like that. You insulate the armour at the load end of the submain so that it does not introduce another potential.

Also leaving a TT system with such a high Ra is unacceptable.

That's what I thought, so instead of the scenario I suggested you'd use a plastic enclosure for the swa instead of metal, and boot over the swa gland so no exposed metal is left? (lets leave the 1667 ohm TT topic for another day, sometimes it's impossible to achieve below 200 when your installation is on a cliff edge, or on a sandy beach for example ;-))

 

[netblindpaul]

I think your problem is that you are confusing a ‘task of work’ with a ‘domestic installation’.
If no task of work is being conducted, neither the HASAWA or the EAWR applies.
If a task of work is being conducted the HASAWA and EAWR would apply to that task, not to the domestic installation.
It may be that the task of work is to make safe a dangerous condition in the domestic installation.
How would such a task be able to be conducted if the domestic installation must first comply with HASWA and the EAWR?

I am fully understanding the situation, and this is not just my opinion it is that of many others, and other organisations.
The task of work is being done when the domestic electrical installation is being designed, constructed, inspected and tested, or do you not charge for the domestic installations you do Spin?
Do the rest of you do all your domestic installations works as DIY, therefore no money changes hands and nobody gets paid for any domestic installations works?
I know that the domestic installation industry is a race to the bottom, but I don't believe that no one gets paid for domestic installations works.
How do all these domestic electricians and those working for builders doing new builds pay for their food and mortgages of they are not at work and being paid when they are doing the electrical works?

Thus the law does apply to people doing electrical installations works, whether employed or self employed when they are at work doing the work.
Therefore the Health and Safety At Work etc. Act 1974 applies to these people when they are at work, if it doesn't why to all these house building companies make such a bloody massive thing about Health and Safety on their construction sites.

So is every house building company in the country wrong then Spin? Because that is what you are saying. You are saying that HASAWA & EAWR do not apply to domestic works.

 

[Octopus]

How on earth did we go from whether there was a “correct end” to earth SWA to this garbage ......

 

[Dave OCD]

Precisely Murdoch ! That issue seems to have been quietly put to one side.....