Bonding gas/water yellow and blue

[Houndogg10]

Hi I am recently qualified and still have a lot of learning/reading to do but Blue plastic waterpipe incoming, seems to always be a grey area with electricians I work with, me personally wouldn’t bond it..... Although we have to prove that in the plumbers install their is no copper going to earth?? Can someone enlighten me on this please

Many thanks..... and go easy on me lol

 

[Houndogg10]

So is this topic a grey area in general lol I can never find or hear a straight answer for it as I have also heard that bonding something that doesn’t need a bond will possibly start a not needed potential??

 

[Leesparkykent]

It's not a grey area. If it's an extraneous conductive part it needs bonding. If it's not an extraneous conductive part it doesn't need bonding. I always run a green and yellow in for gas and water on a new builds as I've had muppet meter fitters refusing to connect as no bonding, even though it didn't require bonding. If they moan I connect it then chop it off when the muppet has finished.

 

[Midwest]

Must admit, I'm still confusing myself over this. I understand the testing to conclude if a metal pipework after a plastic service is extraneous or not.

I take spinlondons point that bonding the above, under fault conditions may momentarily 'increase the number of conductive parts that will become live', but wouldn't these be earthed anyway by a circuit cpc?

The OSG recommends bonding of above, unless its been confirmed said pipework is not introducing Earth potential. It mentions pipework 'liable to introduce earth potential'. It doesn't mention testing to prove whether such pipes are extraneous, only gives examples, as in reg 411.3.1.2. Indeed the formulae for when doubt exists over effectiveness of extraneous or not, reg 415.2.2 is for supplementary bonding, something completely different. Reg 544.1.2 states where the consumers hard metal pipework should be bonded after insulating section or insert.

So I'm suggesting BS7671 recommends that unless you can physically confirm all such pipework is not liable to or not able to, then it should be bonded?

 

[LeeH]

That’s a sound conclusion.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

I don’t bother with the OSGs, as they contain so many errors.

Are you stating that the OSGs recommend bonding non-extraneous conductive-parts?

 

[Midwest]

I don’t bother with the OSGs, as they contain so many errors.

Are you stating that the OSGs recommend bonding non-extraneous conductive-parts?

But it does contain some pretty pictures for us plebs.

Have a shufty yourself, it talks about it on pages 44 & 46 in the yellow version.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

But it does contain some pretty pictures for us plebs.

Have a shufty yourself, it talks about it on pages 44 & 46 in the yellow version.

Unfortunately, that is not possible.
I only have a brown 16th and a red 17th someone gave me.
My point is however, BS7671 requires protective bonding for extraneous conductive-parts, not for non-extraneous conductive-parts.

 

[Midwest]

Unfortunately, that is not possible.
I only have a brown 16th and a red 17th someone gave me.
My point is however, BS7671 requires protective bonding for extraneous conductive-parts, not for non-extraneous conductive-parts.

Oohh ok, give me 5 mins, I'll type up what the OSG says. Might be 10, just sipping a G&T

 

[Midwest]

Yellow OSG Sec 4.5 'Main protective bonding of plastic services'. There's no shock here (excuse the pun), it says there's no requirement to bond plastic services.

Continuing on page 46; 'Where there is a plastic service and a metal installation within the premises, main bonding is recommended unless it has been confirmed that any metallic pipework within the building is not introducing Earth potential (see 4.3, (referencing to reg 411.3.1.2).

I have had a quick shufty through GN8, and can't seem to find specific mention of the above scenario.

What do you make of the definition of extraneous-conductive-part in BS7671?

 

[Midwest]

It goes onto say about internal metallic pipework which may be buried in the ground for convenience............but I'm not typing all that out for you

 

[Leesparkykent]

Yellow OSG Sec 4.5 'Main protective bonding of plastic services'. There's no shock here (excuse the pun), it says there's no requirement to bond plastic services.

Continuing on page 46; 'Where there is a plastic service and a metal installation within the premises, main bonding is recommended unless it has been confirmed that any metallic pipework within the building is not introducing Earth potential (see 4.3, (referencing to reg 411.3.1.2).

I have had a quick shufty through GN8, and can't seem to find specific mention of the above scenario.

What do you make of the definition of extraneous-conductive-part in BS7671?

That was 16mins

 

[Midwest]

That was 16mins

It was a double

 

[fraserd]

NHBC “snagged” me on this on some new builds, yellow plastic incoming on the gas with about a meter of copper on show ran inside a garage clearly not extraneous and tested to prove so. Even after exerts sent from regs/osg apparently it wasn’t acceptable and they wouldn’t issue their cert or warranty. I was very annoyed as I had to go back and bond all of them which cost me money and made me look like I was in the wrong. He said “everyone else runs an earth to it so you are clearly in the wrong” could of smacked the smug ---.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

It goes onto say about internal metallic pipework which may be buried in the ground for convenience............but I'm not typing all that out for you

Even if the incoming services are not plastic and are bonded at entry, you would bond again if services are buried in the ground within the premises.

 

[LeeH]

It was a double

I’m partial to a Martin Millers myself.