No earth cable on light fitting

Sponsored Links
The bath is not an electrical device though, so although it might be an interesting example of a conductive object, it is neither Class I nor Class II.
That's obviously true but, as I have repeatedly said, the discussion appears to have been simply about the general undesirability of having 'unnecessarily earthed metal' around the place, regardless of whether it is the outer casing of a Class II electrical appliance or something totally non-electrical.
Class II equipment is often not designed to withstand a continuous earth potential on its exposed metalwork ...
What on earth does that mean? You are surely not suggesting that the 'double or reinforced insulation' is not even able to withstand continuously the p.d. between supply voltage and earth, are you?
... and is not designed so that its exposed metalwork can safely carry fault current until a protective device can operate.
I don't really understand that, either. Where do I find the corresponding requirements in relation to the ability to "safely carry fault current" for the exposed-conductive parts of a Class I item?

Kind Regards, John
 
You are surely not suggesting that the 'double or reinforced insulation' is not even able to withstand continuously the p.d. between supply voltage and earth, are you?
Why should I not suggest that?
I don't really understand that, either. Where do I find the corresponding requirements in relation to the ability to "safely carry fault current" for the exposed-conductive parts of a Class I item?
In the appropriate product standard or basic standard, where else?
 
It can similarly be said that a Class II appliance is only as safe as its "double or reinforced insulation" (which I presume is not infallible)
Indeed, when it comes to some of the class II things I've seen, I've had to wonder at just how good the double insulation really is. For example, I remember some years ago having a metal desk lamp, a cheap, modern replica of an older style adjustable lamp. It was supposedly class II, but after looking at the construction and how the wiring was routed I was concerned that the double-insulation might not actually last that long with movement. I rewired it with a 3-conductor cord and bolted an earth securely onto the metal base with a solder tag, and felt far more comfortable handling it afterward.

A live bath will not come to any harm but it will not do you any good touching it.
That's true in some situations, but consider something like a metal bathtub which has metal taps fitted on the wall above it, i.e. not bolted to the tub so as to provide metallic contact.

In the event of some external fault raising the potential on the pipework and the taps significantly, if you were sitting in the water and reaching out for one of those taps, would you rather the bathtub was at the same potential or that it was supposedly isolated from earth, but in reality almost certain to have some sort of earth potential on it, even if through a relatively high resistance of the building structure?
 
Sponsored Links
You are surely not suggesting that the 'double or reinforced insulation' is not even able to withstand continuously the p.d. between supply voltage and earth, are you?
Why should I not suggest that?
... because it seems to imply that the Class II item could be diabolically dangerous?
I don't really understand that, either. Where do I find the corresponding requirements in relation to the ability to "safely carry fault current" for the exposed-conductive parts of a Class I item?
In the appropriate product standard or basic standard, where else?
In the absence of a relevant specific product Standard, I presume that the 'basic Standard' would be BS7671, and I haven't seen any such requirements in it. ... and, anyway, what are these exposed-c-ps that could not safely carry fault current until a protective device operated - aluminium foil, perhaps??

Kind Regards, John
 
Screening, reducing problems caused by cumulative capacitance resulting in excessive leakage currents.....
If there is no connection to earth, where exactly are these leakage currents flowing?
Through any other path to earth which is provided by connection or contact with the units concerned.

Take a group of typical class II things like a TV, VCR, DVD player, audio amplifier, satellite receiver etc. all interconnected. Then grab a Belling-Lee coax plug or satellite F-connector which has earth potential on the shell and go to connect it to the appropriate unit. The current which results as one contacts the devices while holding an earthed connector can be quite enough to give a definite "bite" in some cases.

(And once that connector is in place, the whole lot is then earthed through that external connection anyway, so why not put a secure earth on it from the supply at the outset?)
 
Class II equipment is often not designed to withstand a continuous earth potential on its exposed metalwork,.
Well it darned well should be! If you are seriously suggesting that some metal-cased class II device might suffer some sort of insulation breakdown if the case ends up earthed, then I would have severe misgivings as to its double-insulation properties and therefore its safety.
 
You are surely not suggesting that the 'double or reinforced insulation' is not even able to withstand continuously the p.d. between supply voltage and earth, are you?
Why should I not suggest that?
... because it seems to imply that the Class II item could be diabolically dangerous?
No, it implies that the item, like all electrical equipment and appliances, is designed to be used as specified by the manufacturer, not to be connected to some other potential.
In the absence of a relevant specific product Standard, I presume that the 'basic Standard' would be BS7671, and I haven't seen any such requirements in it. ... and, anyway, what are these exposed-c-ps that could not safely carry fault current until a protective device operated - aluminium foil, perhaps??
No, BS7671 is not a basic standard! It has nothing to do with product requirements, it is a standard for electrical installations. Relevant basic standards might be 61140, 60335 series, etc.
Yes, aluminium foil might be an example. Would you expect the manufacturer of an item of Class II equipment to test the exposed metal parts for fault current withstand?
 
No, it implies that the item, like all electrical equipment and appliances, is designed to be used as specified by the manufacturer, not to be connected to some other potential.
What if somebody takes that piece of metal-cased class II equipment and stands it on something which is earthed, or pushes it back against something which is earthed?

What if it's a piece of equipment intended to be used handheld? Are the manufacturer's instructions going to include statements that the user must wear insulating rubber boots and not touch anything earthed while using it? (I'm sure that would inspire user confidence in its safety!)
 
No, it implies that the item, like all electrical equipment and appliances, is designed to be used as specified by the manufacturer, not to be connected to some other potential.
What if somebody takes that piece of metal-cased class II equipment and stands it on something which is earthed, or pushes it back against something which is earthed?
If the nature of the equipment is such that that is foreseeable then the manufacturer must take it into account in his design.
What if it's a piece of equipment intended to be used handheld?
Most equipment intended for hand-held use is Class II, and is only used for short periods.
 
A live bath will not come to any harm but it will not do you any good touching it.
In the event of some external fault raising the potential on the pipework and the taps significantly, if you were sitting in the water and reaching out for one of those taps, would you rather the bathtub was at the same potential or that it was supposedly isolated from earth,
Won't you have to qualify supposedly?

Either bonded or isolated, it doesn't matter, does it? It depends what you do next.

but in reality almost certain to have some sort of earth potential on it, even if through a relatively high resistance of the building structure?
An extraneous-c-p do you mean?
 
... because it seems to imply that the Class II item could be diabolically dangerous?
No, it implies that the item, like all electrical equipment and appliances, is designed to be used as specified by the manufacturer, not to be connected to some other potential.
I really can't buy that argument. If a Class II item could not be relied upon to withstand supply p.d. between its internal parts and the outside of it's casing, then is simply would not be safe.
Would you expect the manufacturer of an item of Class II equipment to test the exposed metal parts for fault current withstand?
No, but if the concept of Class II is to believed, there would be no need for them to - since there should be no way that fault current could flow through through those exposed parts.

Kind Regards, John
 
That the item is to be connected as specified by the manufacturer, not otherwise. Any item connected to the wrong potential can become dangerous.
This seems to be getting plain silly. We're not talking about connecting equipment designed for 12V to 230V, or equipment designed for 230V to 1000V - we're talking about the outer casing of something allegedly safe (and safe to touch) coming into contact with earth potential, a potential which is ubiquitous within almost all premises. If an item becomes "dangerous" under those circumstances, it is simply a dangerous item.

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
Back
Top