Metal enclosure with 3rd amendment.

[JohnW2]

Duplicate deleted

 

[stillp]

You're a member of the public. When do you expect it?

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Just slightly before I can no longer put off buying the AMD3 edition would be ideal...

 

[JohnW2]

You're a member of the public. When do you expect it?

I was deferring to you as someone who is probably wiser than I am!

The average interval between Amendments (or new editions) seems to have been 2-3 years for a long time. On that basis, I suppose one might expect the next DPC to show itself sometime during 2016, possibly early 2017.

Kind Regards, John

 

[stillp]

It would be hard to push through a new amendment/edition in less time than that.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

What, even if it's full of b*****ks?

 

[ban-all-sheds]

If it does not require compliance with a European standard which does, then it has no meaning.

But it does. It requires compliance with BS EN 61439-3. The IEC Working Group who wrote the standard from which the BS EN is derived (without technical change) felt that the hot wire test was adequate verification of non-combustibility.
The wording that follows the reference to the product standard is redundant.

A further point for clarification is that plastic enclosures manufactured from 960 degree glow-wire rated material would not be classified as ‘non-combustible’ in the context of this regulation.

 

[stillp]

A strange remark from BEAMA, not supported by their Technical Bulletin. Clearly they don't know either. In the absence of a proper definition in BS7671 then the product standard has to take precedence.

 

[securespark]

How on earth is this regulation going to be workable, let alone enforceable/policeable?

Hence the manufacturers playing safe and making their entire ranges out of steel.

No doubt a few years down the line, an acceptable alternative will be developed/ agreed upon.

 

[EFLImpudence]

This really is not good enough.

I have long said "Do not assume those in charge know what they are doing".

I wish they would stop proving it.

 

[securespark]

Like I said elsewhere, we are being used as guinea pigs for regs that are later found to be unnecessary or dangerous and dropped or amended.

Like the "bond everything" 15th Ed....

 

[JohnW2]

How on earth is this regulation going to be workable, let alone enforceable/policeable?

Hence the manufacturers playing safe and making their entire ranges out of steel.

Indeed, they appear to be 'knee-jerking'. I don't really know (but certainly am not convinced) what effect the change will have on fires but, as I've said before, I'll be fairly surprised if a widespread change to metal CUs does not result in an increase in electric shocks, some of which may well be fatal ones.

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Perhaps BEAMA might be more usefully employed by getting their members to improve the internals of their products so that so many poor connections didn't occur, rather than making the outsides out of stuff which won't burn.

 

[stillp]

As a Trade Association, they do what their members ask them to do, rather than the other way round.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

OK.

What we do

BEAMA provides leadership, expertise and independent influence in the areas of product safety, performance, energy efficiency and sustainability.

Perhaps BEAMA might be more usefully employed by providing leadership and expertise in the area of product safety to their members to influence them to improve the internals of their products so that so many poor connections didn't occur, rather than making the outsides out of stuff which won't burn.