If it is fitted to parts to which it should not be fitted it will introduce a hazard which was not there before.
Fitting a new 9.8 Kwh shower in Bathroom
- Thread starter gardener1214388
- Start date
Sponsored Links
I suspect one of the things which confuses some people is main bonding, which in some senses may appear to them to be an exception to this rule. Main bonding does not connect two touchable objects together but, rather, connects something (usually a pipe) to the main EARTHING terminal.
There might perhaps be less scope for confusion if we talked in terms of 'cross-bonding' (which more-or-less does what it says on the tin), rather than 'supplementary bonding'.
Kind Regards, John.
A Gas Safe Registered plumber told me that a non electric powered Shower should have its own 6mm earth cable fitted to both its own hot and cold water supply copper pipes then routed direct only into the consumer board; is this correct.
Then all other cross bonded copper pipes; i.e. basin, cistern radiators should have their own 6mm cross bonded cables connected to the nearest junction box earth terminal and not be routed direct to the consumer board.
I also understand that in the latest edition 17 electrics that cross bonding that was done some years ago has been relaxed in certain situations.
Well, yes but it does not apply to bathrooms and only 'goes to' or 'from' the MET because it is the pipe and MET which are being bonded.
I should have said bonding only 'goes to' or 'from' another part.
There might but there are many names which could be more self-explanatory.
Sponsored Links
You presumably are talking about the unnecessary bonding of things (like the infamous plastic-plumbed metal bath!) which would not require bonding even if the conditions for omission of supplementary bonding were not satisfied. In that situation, I agree that the unnecessary bonding can create a potential hazard which otherwise would not exist.
However, in terms of things which would require supplementary bonding if the conditions for omission were not satisfied, if the conditions are satisfied (such that supplementary bonding is not actually required), they will presumably all be electrically connected (and electrically connected to the installation's earthing system), anyway, in which case 'unnecessary' bonding would make no difference to anything (i.e. would not introduce any hazards)?
Kind Regards, John
No.
I don't know why a junction box is included and 4mm² is adequate.
I keep saying - just because it is a pipe does not mean it must be bonded.
It likely will but you cannot tell by looking at it.
Yes, the reference to RCDs plus the other conditions.
Yes, hence the 'If it is fitted to parts to which it should not be fitted'.
Yes, as I said, I presumed that my interpretation of those words was what you intended.
However, I think that others (including the OP) may easily have misinterpreted you words to simply mean that all 'unnecessary' supplementary bonding (including that which was only unnecessary because conditions for its omission were satisfied) could be hazardous. As I said, if the only reason for supplementary bonding of a particular item being 'unnecessary' is that the conditions for omission are satisfied, then unnecessarily bonding that item would not introduce any hazard.
Unnecessarily bonding something that does not need bonding (ever) obviously can introduce a hazard even when supplementary bonding is required (i.e. if conditions for omission are not satisfied).
Kind Regards, John
Question here is; the shower 100 cable twin & Earth; this earth cable is routed inside the shower to the earth terminal and also continues marked as an "Inlet Earth Wire" onto the C.W supply metal fitting; so in effect would provide earth bonding;
No, that will provide EARTHING.
I have never seen a shower with such, if I understand you correctly.
Mira Azura 9.8 Kw electric shower
I think that there must be some difference in interpretation here, since what I wrote seemed to be totally appropriate in terms of the context, given my interpretation of what questions were being asked. Since the OP asked his question above in response to my confirming that, given satisfaction of certain conditions (including RCD protection). supplementary bonding can now (under 17th ed regs) be omitted, I him to be asking whether there would be any 'detrimental or negative effect' if supplementary bonding that would have been required under early regs was installed now, even though conditions for its omission were satisfied.
In terms of that interpretation (which, as always, may have been wrong), I felt that the answer you gave could easily mislead the OP, since it could easily be taken to be saying that the answer to the question that I believe was being asked (as above) was that the 'unnecessary bonding' (per above) could introduce a hazard which would not otherwise be there. As I said, I think that such a hazard would only be introduced by bonding if one bonded something which did not require bonding under either (probably any) set of regulations - i.e. if one bonded things which were not extraneous-conductive parts (and which which not earthed).
Kind Regards, John
That may be so - but from the original question I understood it to mean that there was no bonding at present and he was going to apply it without understanding.
Therefore, to ask if bonding would be detrimental if applied although not needed because of RCDs etc., whilst not ascertaining whether parts are extraneous or not does, I think, validate my reply.
Therefore, to ask if bonding would be detrimental if applied although not needed because of RCDs etc., whilst not ascertaining whether parts are extraneous or not does, I think, validate my reply.
Fair enough - we clearly interpreted the question slightly differently.
Whatever, what matters is that I think (know) that we both totally agree about when supplementary bonding is (and isn't) necessary/required, and when including 'unnecessary' bonding does (and does not) potentially introduce a hazard which would otherwise not be there. Hopefully some of the others who have read this discussion will also now understand.
Kind Regards, John
DIYnot Local
Staff member
If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.
Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.
Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local
Sponsored Links
