AMD 3 - Hopefully busting the myth of metal DBs

[baldsparkies]

As a follow up to post 3,
Thought it worth a mention that the board I referred to is rated as;

Self-extinguishing ABS
IP2XC
BSEN 61439-3

And this is the spec most plastic CU's follow.
Now if they are compliant with the new AMD 3 then the metal clad board scenario is nothing more than a red herring.

If not !!
Then there are a lot of boards out there that, not only are no longer compliant.
But also constitutes a fire hazard ??
Surely this will open up a completely new can of worms when conducting EICR's

This isn't simply a case of non compliance, as per installed to an older version of BS7671 which may or may not receive a code 3

But a case of all plastic consumer units constituting a fire hazard, and therefore legitimately receiving an automatic code 2 (unsatisfactory result)

I just cant see that being allowed to happen ????

 

[telectrix]

the whole issue is a storm in a teacup. will it affect the price of beer.... NO.... therefore it can be ignored.

 

[telectrix]

manufacturers will soon have plastic CUs that conform to 421.1.201, and cef will have a nice little sideline in yet another shiny sticker to add to the ones alreasdy adorning the CU.

 

[D Skelton]

As a follow up to post 3,
Thought it worth a mention that the board I referred to is rated as;

Self-extinguishing ABS
IP2XC
BSEN 61439-3

And this is the spec most plastic CU's follow.
Now if they are compliant with the new AMD 3 then the metal clad board scenario is nothing more than a red herring.

If not !!
Then there are a lot of boards out there that, not only are no longer compliant.
But also constitutes a fire hazard ??
Surely this will open up a completely new can of worms when conducting EICR's

This isn't simply a case of non compliance, as per installed to an older version of BS7671 which may or may not receive a code 3

But a case of all plastic consumer units constituting a fire hazard, and therefore legitimately receiving an automatic code 2 (unsatisfactory result)

I just cant see that being allowed to happen ????

The point is, if a plastic board is combustible, then it doesn't conform to the product standard and therefore shouldn't have been installed in the first place. Believe you me, there are an awful lot of boards out there that fall way short of the product standard! Some even made by BEAMA member companies. This needs addressing.

The product standard is fine, the installation standard was fine before it tried to meddle. Sort out the products that don't meet the product standard and sort out the installers that don't meet the installation standard and whoopty doo, what do we get as a result? Zero fusebox fires!

 

[NDG Elecs]

Good work Damian, this amendment really is a load of BS....!

At a slightly different angle, what if a plastic CU that is deemed combustible is installed after 2016 upon the proviso it will be being housed in a fire rated/non combustible enclosure. Do we need to have the enclosure installed first... Bit of the old chicken and egg going on. Are we expected to be buying steel shells to house them.

I read on Contactums website last night, in the FAQs I think, that existing plastic CUs are not unsafe and do not need to be replaced with metal. Well that's stating the jeffing obvious....so no amendment needed then after all.

All that is needed is a moral and diligent work ethic and less limp-wristedness. Market forces are partly to blame in the rise of the cowboy installation. I say the schemes should enforce extra supervision and training for any body found responsible for a fire. Not so easy though me thinks.

I do prefer plastic CUs over metal any day of the week.... Or is that 47 weeks and counting!

I wonder if the manufacturers prefer to sell metal CUs as it may be more profitable. They don't seem to be fighting the wording/semantics/interpretation of the reg at all.

 

[D Skelton]

Good work Damian, this amendment really is a load of BS....!

At a slightly different angle, what if a plastic CU that is deemed combustible is installed after 2016 upon the proviso it will be being housed in a fire rated/non combustible enclosure. Do we need to have the enclosure installed first... Bit of the old chicken and egg going on. Are we expected to be buying steel shells to house them.

Thank you.

To answer your question, if a plastic board is classed as combustible then it won't have passed the 960°C glow - wire test in accordance with BS EN 60695-2-10&11 as is required by BS EN 61439-3, therefore it won't meet the requirements of the product standard and should not be sold on the European market.

By definition, any plastic board that truly meets the current requirements of BS EN 61439-3 will be non-combustible.

 

[baldsparkies]

Remember those stories of the 1st world war.
When the powers to be sat around a table smoking fat cigars and deciding on their strategy for the next attack.
Then they send thousands of lads, over the trenches to be mowed down by german machine guns.

Keep yer heads down lads, cus they sure don't give a ---- about the implications to us.

 

[NDG Elecs]

Sorry Damian, I skim read parts of this thread. But get exactly your point re 61439 DBs. This will rumble and rumble I feel!

 

[D Skelton]

Remember those stories of the 1st world war.
When the powers to be sat around a table smoking fat cigars and deciding on their strategy for the next attack.
Then they send thousands of lads, over the trenches to be mowed down by german machine guns.

Keep yer heads down lads, cus they sure don't give a ---- about the implications to us.

Very true, however in this scenario there is no implication to us. We can carry on fitting plastic boards as long as we want. BS 7671, in particular Regulation 421.1.201 only goes to bolster this point by referring us back to the product standard that defines non-combustible in the first place lol!

We've all been caught, hook, line and sinker by nothing but a red herring.

To those of you reading this who don't have a clue what we're all on about;

THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT AFTER 1ST JANUARY 2016 TO ONLY FIT METAL BOARDS IN DWELLINGS

 

[baldsparkies]

Thank you.

To answer your question, if a plastic board is classed as combustible then it won't have passed the 960°C glow - wire test in accordance with BS EN 60695-2-10&11 as is required by BS EN 61439-3, therefore it won't meet the requirements of the product standard and should not be sold on the European market.

By definition, any plastic board that truly meets the current requirements of BS EN 61439-3 will be non-combustible.

But they do play with words Skelt, as said the board I referred to is deemed Self-extinguishing.
Where does that stand with reference to Self-extinguishing vs Non-combustible.
Is there any official clarification on any difference or does it mean the same thing.
Or are they just going to sit back and leave the man on the tools to take the responsibility, and decision. ????

 

[NDG Elecs]

Maybe a product recall is in order. That could be a profitable little number.. In my dreams that is!

 

[D Skelton]

But they do play with words Skelt, as said the board I referred to is deemed Self-extinguishing.
Where does that stand with reference to Self-extinguishing vs Non-combustible.
Is there any official clarification on any difference or does it mean the same thing.
Or are they just going to sit back and leave the man on the tools to take the responsibility, and decision. ????

If something self extinguishes, by definition it cannot ignite. Ignition is the state of undergoing combustion. If it cannot ignite, then it is not combustible.

The company that produces the board can call it what they like. They can say that it is "rated at fifteen bananas on the Keanu Reeves scale", and so long as it passes the 960° glow-wire test, then it cannot be combustible.

 

[Jonspark]

If something self extinguishes, by definition it cannot ignite. Ignition is the state of undergoing combustion. If it cannot ignite, then it is not combustible.

The company that produces the board can call it what they like. They can say that it is "rated at fifteen bananas on the Keanu Reeves scale", and so long as it passes the 960° glow-wire test, then it cannot be combustible.

Don't you just love semantics

 

[baldsparkies]

So,
Quote 1,
Consumer units and similar switchgear assemblies will have to comply with the BS EN 61439-3 standard.
And most of them already do !!
Quote 2,
An example of non-combustible material is steel.
But they DON'T mention plastic in that statement,even though its capable of being non combustible, and therefore starting the mythology !!

:icon12:

 

[Jay Sparks]

Excellent post Mr Skelton. I am glad someone (you) has been ar3ed enough to actually look at the regs regarding this farse!!!

This is one of the best post in a LONG time on this forum. I have copied your post and gave a copy to a few of my colleagues.

The BS7671 makes reference to conforming to the "manufacturers instructions" for any accesssory/equipment, therefore if the manufacturers state that their board conforms to BS 61439-3, then it is perfectly acceptable.


Jay