Regulations, Guidances, Training and 'blind followers'

Joined
28 Jan 2011
Messages
57,457
Reaction score
4,304
Location
Buckinghamshire
Country
United Kingdom
In this thread .....
What regulation is it that specifies the clipping distances you wish to comply with? 522.8.4 and 522.8.5 essentially leave it to the discretion of the person doing the work ("...supported by suitable means at appropriate intervals..." etc.).
Are we perhaps talking about OSG guidance again?
And the appropriate intervals have been calculated and presented within a table in the OSG, use discretion if you wish but without some guidance, it could well become transgression.
.... creating a situation in which robots or monkeys with the appropriate 'checklists' and guidance documents could do our job, without having any understanding of what they were doing, or why ....
Which is related to the scenario I often warn about, where I tell people that what they need to do is to learn and to come to understand what they are doing, and not come here looking for somebody to just give them put-this-wire-in-that-hole instructions for them to blindly follow.
Yes, I understand that, but I was obviously talking about something rather different from that - a widespread phenomenon which extends across most fields and which applies primarily to those who are 'trained' in the professions or trades concerned.

My comments were in response to what had been said by an electrician, and apply primarily to electricians (although similar situations exist in many/most fields), not to layman. As far as I can see, we are unfortunately moving in the direction of them (electricians) becoming 'blind followers' of sets of instructions, regulations and guidelines, without necessarily having adequate understanding, and hence not necessarily having the ability to 'think' about what they are doing, or to make judgements/decisions based on understanding and experience.

For better or for worse, we are seeing increasing regulation in nearly all walks of life. Whilst there is scope for a lot of discussion about the necessity, value and wisdom of that, the reality is that we are stuck with it. However, in terms of electrical work, the regulations are certainly non-exhaustive and in many cases have a lack of clarity which leads to the need for 'interpretation', which is where a properly-trained electrician's knowledge and ability to 'think' comes (or should come) into play.

There are plenty of sources of guidance, both 'official' (OSG, GNs, Approved Docs) and unofficial (books etc., discussions with colleagues, even internet forums!) which are of value is helping a 'properly-trained electrician' to do their thinking, make their judgements/assessments and exercise experience-based discretion. However, the moment any of these 'guidances' come to be thought of as something which has to be 'complied with', they are effectively being treated as part of 'regulations' - hence moving one closer to the blind 'electrical work by numbers' approach which excludes thinking, and to a large extent removes the need for understanding and/or knowledge (other than of the word of the regs and 'guidelines'). That was really my main point.

Although very trivial, the cable clipping issue illustrates this fairly well. The regs merely require that cables be "supported by suitable means at appropriate intervals", leaving a knowledgeable and thinking person considerable scope for making an informed and experienced judgement. 'Guidance' in the OSG suggests a maximum clip spacing of 250mm for horizontal PVC-sheathed cables (≤0.9mm in diameter), and some feel or suggest that this should be regarded as something which should always be 'complied with' if one wishes to be sure of achieving compliance with the regs. However, as has been pointed out, a thinking person ought to understand that the guidance is far from exhaustive, and that 'horizontal' covers a multitude of situations, which will have different support requirements - e.g. clipped to a vertical surface (e.g. wall), on the top of a beam/joint/surface or on the bottom of a beam/joist/surface. One suspects that the OSG guidance probably relates to the first of those scenarios, but a thinking person would probably conclude that clip spacing could usually be greater than 250mm in the second case, and might well need to be less than 250mm in the third case. The blind follower of the OSG will presumably simply apply 250mm for anything horizontal.

Kind Regards, John
 
Sponsored Links
Blind follower, or someone who doesn't understand English very well?

A cable lying on top of a beam is supported by that beam, not by any clips which may be used to prevent lateral movement.
 
As far as I can see, we are unfortunately moving in the direction of them (electricians) becoming 'blind followers' of sets of instructions, regulations and guidelines, without necessarily having adequate understanding, and hence not necessarily having the ability to 'think' about what they are doing, or to make judgements/decisions based on understanding and experience.
A destination which I thoroughly deprecate for DIYers, let alone professionals.
 
Blind follower, or someone who doesn't understand English very well? A cable lying on top of a beam is supported by that beam, not by any clips which may be used to prevent lateral movement.
As far as BS7671 is concerned, you're right - that merely requires adequate 'support'. However, for a person who feels that they have to comply with the OSG, I think it is a case of 'blind follower' - I can't find anything in the OSG which excludes the needs for clips when a cable is supported by lying on something (although it does exclude the need for clips within conduits, ducts or trunking!). Very blind following, one might say!

Kind Regards, John
 
Sponsored Links
As far as I can see, we are unfortunately moving in the direction of them (electricians) becoming 'blind followers' of sets of instructions, regulations and guidelines, without necessarily having adequate understanding, and hence not necessarily having the ability to 'think' about what they are doing, or to make judgements/decisions based on understanding and experience.
A destination which I thoroughly deprecate for DIYers, let alone professionals.
Me, too - but one might feel that it's hardly reasonable to expect higher standards (of understanding, knowledge and ability to think) from DIYers than from electricians who are 'advising' them! As I've said, this problem is ubiquitous in the present world.

Kind Regards, John
 
Is it not also the case that where electricias are members of different "schemes" the scheme rules force then in blind obedience of the regulations, as strict compliance is what they will be audited on?

I often see the DNO's are a rule to themselves comment. (OK often toungue in cheek) but we operate totally differently, we are governed by laws and regulations cited under those laws, but as an industry and individual DNOs we are free to comply with them in our own seperate ways.
This cascades down to engineers who are give a lot of empowerment to decide exactly how to do work to provide compiance with the laws and our individual COPs.

I think a lot of the vaugeness commented on in regulations governing installations are to allow this "freedom" in fact part of the pre-amble of BS7671 does allow this individual solution to problems, which I think, in part, was aimed at increasing the proffesionalism and training of electricians. I think in a lot of cases it has failed.
 
However, for a person who feels that they have to comply with the OSG, I think it is a case of 'blind follower' - I can't find anything in the OSG which excludes the needs for clips when a cable is supported by lying on something
Does it too not use the word "support"?

although it does exclude the need for clips within conduits, ducts or trunking
Even in vertical runs?
 
Me, too - but one might feel that it's hardly reasonable to expect higher standards (of understanding, knowledge and ability to think) from DIYers than from electricians who are 'advising' them!
I don't.

That others expect low standards even of professionals is not a factor when I am giving advice.
 
Is it not also the case that where electricias are members of different "schemes" the scheme rules force then in blind obedience of the regulations, as strict compliance is what they will be audited on?
Not exclusively, there is scope to record departures from BS7671.

However, this leads to explanations and hoping that the assessor is knowledgeable enough to agree with your actions.
So things are done 'for a quiet life'.
There are quite often reports of work being carried out solely because "I know this particular Building Inspector will not accept it unless it is done that way".

It comes down to the fact that those in charge are not competent to be in the position - but they are.

Quite often Gas safe engineers will not commission a boiler without (unrequired and unnecessary) so called cross-bonding of all the pipes connected to it.
You can argue your case but it they won't sign they won't sign.


I think a lot of the vaugeness commented on in regulations governing installations are to allow this "freedom" in fact part of the pre-amble of BS7671 does allow this individual solution to problems, which I think, in part, was aimed at increasing the proffesionalism and training of electricians. I think in a lot of cases it has failed.
That is true in some instances but some of the regulations are so 'black and white' that there is no scope for movement.

E.g. "Electrical equipment shall be installed in accordance with the instructions provided by the manufacturer ..."
There is no provision made should the manufacturer's instructions be unnecessary or just wrong.
 
Is it not also the case that where electricias are members of different "schemes" the scheme rules force then in blind obedience of the regulations, as strict compliance is what they will be audited on?
Yes, I believe that is the case. BS7671 is, of course, not actually (legally) mandatory (although virtually everyone relies upon compliance with BS7671 to demonstrate compliance with Part P of the Building Regs), but I understand that some (maybe all) 'scheme operators' do demand BS7671 compliance of their members. However, I'm not sure that even they require 'compliance' with guidance documents such as the OSG.
I often see the DNO's are a rule to themselves comment. (OK often toungue in cheek) but we operate totally differently, we are governed by laws and regulations cited under those laws, but as an industry and individual DNOs we are free to comply with them in our own seperate ways.
Indeed. You'll never see me tallking of 'a law unto themselves'. They operate to their own set of rules, as interpreted by each DNO.
I think a lot of the vaugeness commented on in regulations governing installations are to allow this "freedom" in fact part of the pre-amble of BS7671 does allow this individual solution to problems, which I think, in part, was aimed at increasing the proffesionalism and training of electricians. I think in a lot of cases it has failed.
Exactly my point ... and, as I've said, when people start extending their 'blind obedience' even to guidance documents (not even BS7671 itself), that undermining of professionalism obviously gets worse. IMO sad, but it's happened/happening in the great majority of professions.

Kind Regards, John
 
However, for a person who feels that they have to comply with the OSG, I think it is a case of 'blind follower' - I can't find anything in the OSG which excludes the needs for clips when a cable is supported by lying on something
Does it too not use the word "support"?
The word obviously appears in their text. However, in terms of specifics, it says "For sheathed and/or armoured cables installed in accessible positions, suport by clips at spacings not exceeding the appropriate value sated in Table 4A" (without any qualifications/exclusions regarding otherwise-supported cables).
although it does exclude the need for clips within conduits, ducts or trunking
Even in vertical runs?
I was actually talking about horizontal - but, for vertical, they allow cable in conduits/ducts/trunking to be "without further fixing" for vertical runs up to 5m in length.
[all of the above from my 'old' red OSG]

Kind Regards, John
 
That is true in some instances but some of the regulations are so 'black and white' that there is no scope for movement.
E.g. "Electrical equipment shall be installed in accordance with the instructions provided by the manufacturer ..."
There is no provision made should the manufacturer's instructions be unnecessary or just wrong.
Yes, that is a particularly bad (dare I say 'ridiculous') regulation, since it is effectively attempting to force compliance with something of which they are not aware, have no control over and, as you imply, may result in non-compliance with explicit parts of BS7671 and/or be plain wrong/dangerous.

One might hope that most electricians will be sensible enough not to do dangerous things 'just because the MI says so', but I presume that many feel obliged (e.g. by scheme membership) to comply with bits of MIs (e.g. fan isolators) which they (and the rest of BS7671) do not regard as electrically necessary.

Kind Regards, John
 
What is the point of the On Site Guide?

It must only be to accommodate those who can't or don't know how or even why to work out things for themselves.

Why would a guide for that purpose be written?

Even if it is accepted that such is required it is written so badly that it leads to confusion with the actual regulations.
Therefore it must have been written by those who themselves are not actually knowledgeable enough.


The daftest example must surely be the section which is actually headed "4.3 Main protective bonding of plastic services".
The text of which goes on to include wording which is different enough than the actual regulation to actually alter the meaning.

This can only lead to readers not installing properly but if they don't know how will they know?

The poster of the thread which lead to this offshoot obviously does/did not know that the maximum Zs of an mcb is Uo/Ia so has only ever 'looked it up'.
 
What is the point of the On Site Guide? ... It must only be to accommodate those who can't or don't know how or even why to work out things for themselves. ... Why would a guide for that purpose be written?
As you will understand, that's essentially my point - although I would not go quite as far as you. As I've said, there's nothing wrong with 'guidance' documents, as an aid to 'working things out for themselves' (i.e. as 'something to think about'), provided that they are only regarded as 'guidance'. Such things exist in most fields I have worked in, and they often are useful as 'food for thought', particularly for those who have yet to gain a lot of experience.
Even if it is accepted that such is required it is written so badly that it leads to confusion with the actual regulations. Therefore it must have been written by those who themselves are not actually knowledgeable enough.
Seemingly so. Hence my concern when I see such 'guidance' being used as if it were regulation, particularly when advice is being given on that basis.
The daftest example must surely be the section which is actually headed "4.3 Main protective bonding of plastic services".
I would hesiutate to judge which is the 'daftest', but that one is certainly pretty daft! (and, as you say, potentially very confusing to thsoe who need to 'look up')
The poster of the thread which lead to this offshoot obviously does/did not know that the maximum Zs of an mcb is Uo/Ia so has only ever 'looked it up'.
[different thread, actually, but....] Exactly my main point. We are developing a 'look it up', rather than 'work it out' culture - and that can be a problem unless (which is impossible) the 'looking up books' are totally exhaustive and totally correct.

Kind Regards, John
 
The word obviously appears in their text. However, in terms of specifics, it says "For sheathed and/or armoured cables installed in accessible positions, suport by clips at spacings not exceeding the appropriate value sated in Table 4A" (without any qualifications/exclusions regarding otherwise-supported cables).
There you are then - it does not apply to cables on tops of beams because the clips are not providing support.


I was actually talking about horizontal
Cables lying in horizontal ducting or trunking are supported by the ducting or trunking and do not need clips to provide that.


for vertical, they allow cable in conduits/ducts/trunking to be "without further fixing" for vertical runs up to 5m in length.
[all of the above from my 'old' red OSG]
My even older GN3 says the same, but also talks about vertical cables which are inaccessible and unlikely to be disturbed. 5m.

The table for clip spacing is headed

Spacings of supports for cables in accessible positions the entire support derived from clips.

which

1) Shows the over-simplification in the OSG - as I have been saying, a cable on top of a beam is not being supported by the clips.

2) Leads me, as someone with the ability to think, and a certain amount of knowledge, that the word "support" might be better replaced by "restraint", and that the purpose of clips on vertical runs is to stop the cables being snagged and pulled.
 

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