new installtion (bonding)

[Engineer54]

I'll have an effin' go.....

Each flat is a self contained unit with it's own dedicated supply. Therefore metallic services entering a flat are extraneous conductive parts relative to that flat....they may therefore introduce a potential from another source to the flat they are entering. As a result they should be main bonded at the point of entry to each flat to the same flats MET.

Exactly wirepuller!! Coupled to the fact, that the main riser tee's to each flats service pipes can be expected to also be bonded within each of the other 29 flats. The fact that the incoming main service pipes to the building has been changed to plastic is irrelevant... Which was the very point i made in the first place... Oh well, at least we get there in the end, unless of course Mr IQ wants to totally disagree again??

 

[Deleted member 9648]

Exactly wirepuller!! Coupled to the fact, that the main riser tee's to each flats service pipes can be expected to also be bonded within each of the other 29 flats. The fact that the incoming main service pipes to the building has been changed to plastic is irrelevant... Which was the very point i made in the first place... Oh well, at least we get there in the end, unless of course Mr IQ wants to totally disagree again??

I'm not sure this is relevant to IQ's point which you are arguing.
The scenario you quote above is for 30 separate installs which happen to be housed in one building.....if it is one install in one building then I agree with IQ.....all services which are ECP's will be bonded at the point of entry,including steels to a single MET....whats in contact with them after that matters not.
In your flats scenario there are effectively 30 separate installations.

 

[Engineer54]

I'm not sure this is relevant to IQ's point which you are arguing.
The scenario you quote above is for 30 separate installs which happen to be housed in one building.....if it is one install in one building then I agree with IQ.....all services which are ECP's will be bonded at the point of entry,including steels to a single MET....whats in contact with them after that matters not.
In your flats scenario there are effectively 30 separate installations.

Correct, and fair do's if the re-bar has been brought out and bonded to the MET, but in most circumstances a typical multi-story concrete framed building sitting on ground level foundations without a basement will not typically be brought out... Thing is, most of my working life has been dealing with these types of building structures, and i know full well that, no matter how hard you try not too, you will always get a good reading off of any metal pipework that passes through the buildings structure, including the metal stairwell hand rails, that are almost always welded to the concrete steelwork!!!

The chances are, that a multi story building typically offices and the like, will be of a similar arrangement, fewer separate installations maybe, but separate installations just the same... Very unlikely that a single installation will be distributed throughout such a building. Not impossible by any stretch of the imagination, just highly unlikely...

As i say, i was only trying to make a simple statement originally, in that having a plastic incoming service, doesn't always mean there is no requirement to bond existing internal metallic pipework. Hell i even stated that it's always best to conduct a survey and/or test said pipework, can't get any fairer than that.... But it seems, it's still not to everyones liking. ...lol!!

 

[malcolmsanford]

If the incoming pipe to these flats over a course of time as been replaced by plastic, where is the old metallic installation now getting it's potential from ??

We can assume that it maybe picking up a potential if there is gas connections it is joining to such as a boiler but these flats are electric only.

We could say that the metallic pipes maybe picking up an earth through metal work inside the building, but lets say that because it is a large building(30 flats) and it is old there is no metalwork in it, it's all mortar, brick and wood

So plastic incomer, metal pipe throughout the building.................... will it need bonding??

 

[Engineer54]

If the incoming pipe to these flats over a course of time as been replaced by plastic, where is the old metallic installation now getting it's potential from ??

Another reason to bond any incoming metal service pipe at each flat, as sure as eggs are eggs any original pipe will be picking up a potential from the buildings concrete steelwork!!

We can assume that it maybe picking up a potential if there is gas connections it is joining to such as a boiler but these flats are electric only.

Matters not...

We could say that the metallic pipes maybe picking up an earth through metal work inside the building, but lets say that because it is a large building(30 flats) and it is old there is no metalwork in it, it's all mortar, brick and wood

We have established early on in this fiasco that this is a multi-story concrete framed and floor building.

So plastic incomer, metal pipe throughout the building.................... will it need bonding??

Yes!!

It's all hypothetical Malc, i was just making a point that an incoming plastic service pipe doesn't always mean that you don't need to bond the existing internal metallic pipework. It's now been blown out of all proportion by a guy that won't admit that His original statement was wrong and that there are situations/circumstances where it is irrelevant whether the incoming service is plastic or otherwise!!!

 

[malcolmsanford]

Well mate I always like a good argument. Like you Col and the amount of time we have been at this, there is very little chance of every finding a once size fits all solution.

That is why I'm not a great lover of the guides, they have their place but today they are deemed to be fact rather than a guide by some of the newer lads in the industry.

That is why I posted what I did in the hope it would just make some think. There is always the possibility because of the plastic main service that the internal service though metallic will not introduce a potential. I personally in any flat install would test the internal pipework inside the dwelling to make sure it was extraneous, especially in today's industry and the common use/replacement of old services to composites, therefore it would not be getting bonding as a rote.

 

[Engineer54]

Well mate I always like a good argument. Like you Col and the amount of time we have been at this, there is very little chance of every finding a once size fits all solution.

That is why I'm not a great lover of the guides, they have their place but today they are deemed to be fact rather than a guide by some of the newer lads in the industry.

I like a good argument too, lol!!! But when you get the childish sarcasm to prop-up his argument it's gets to be something quite different.

I don't disregard the Reg's, just don't always need them to tell me how to do things. As you say, like yourself i don't live and die by them. Seems that a lot of quotations of this Reg or that, is looking for easy ways out of doing things, instead of doing the job correctly in the first place these days....

 

[IQ Electrical]

I like a good argument too, lol!!! But when you get the childish sarcasm to prop-up his argument it's gets to be something quite different.

I don't disregard the Reg's, just don't always need them to tell me how to do things. As you say, like yourself i don't live and die by them. Seems that a lot of quotations of this Reg or that, is looking for easy ways out of doing things, instead of doing the job correctly in the first place these days....

Oh do grow up man, childish sarcasm to prop up my argument? Using the scenario of an installation on the moon? Might it have been humour? Lighten up and stop taking yourself so seriously!
With relevance to this thread and the original question, as has been mentioned above (not by me) what I wrote was 100% correct!

Now jog on and let's agree to differ-the strength of this forum is the broad experience of many members from the domestic-only electrician to the likes of you and the larger projects and everyone in between. As Malcolm said, there isn't a one size fits all solution.....

 

[Spudnik]

Put the handbags away please.

Heated debate is fine, but lets not get personal.

 

[IQ Electrical]

Put the handbags away please.

Heated debate is fine, but lets not get personal.

Fair comment, apologies.

 

[Engineer54]

Oh do grow up man, childish sarcasm to prop up my argument? Using the scenario of an installation on the moon? Might it have been humour? Lighten up and stop taking yourself so seriously!

Me grow up?? ...Who started this whole fiasco, and why??

Might it have been humour?? ...I don't know what you call humour, but that wasn't your intention in this case. Sorry, but i do take myself very seriously when called to professionally defend myself. That's not being egotistic as you would imply either, but rather professional integrity...

Using the scenario of an installation on the moon? ...I really don't know where you have been living and working all these years, i really don't. Such building construction, was and still is to a great extent, the staple building construction type for low rise office and residential blocks (among others)!!! The fact that you may not have much experience of them is neither here nor there!! Maybe these day's the water services as well as most other internal pipework is now installed in PVC or the like, but there are plenty where virtually ALL the internal pipework was metal of one type or another. ...Literary thousands upon thousands upon thousands of them in fact!!!

With relevance to this thread and the original question, as has been mentioned above (not by me) what I wrote was 100% correct!

But you weren't responding or replying to the original question were you?? You were replying to my post, questioning the need to bond services that had been supplied via plastic incomers. In that respect your 100% Wrong, but still won't/can't admit it....

Now jog on and let's agree to differ-the strength of this forum is the broad experience of many members from the domestic-only electrician to the likes of you and the larger projects and everyone in between. As Malcolm said, there isn't a one size fits all solution.....

You can jog on ...(another bit of humour??) Perhaps you will do well to remember that one size doesn't fit all. Perhaps then, this fiasco wouldn't have even been started...

And on that note, i hope this is an end to all this nonsense.
At least the OP did get the guidance he was asking for, despite the unnecessary high jacking, apologies for which on my part...

 

[marcusone]

Probably one of the most enjoyable threads I have read for a good while. Nice one gents. Heated but interesting.

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2

 

[La Poste]

I agree very enjoyable.

If there's one thing I will take from this thread it will be: Always test.

 

[CLB]

Funny isnt it over here the gas safe are insisting that these connections are made at the meter , not inside the building , regs state inside the building ,so i go with the regs , bonding should be connected with 600mm of the incomming service ,

The regs also state "...as near as practically possible".
If it is uneconomical to dig up the floor so you can get within 600mm of the incoming gas supply (read: the customer refuses to pay for it), then as near as possible is acceptable. It's down to individual choice as to what is practically possible and for many sparkies, if the CU is located in the same broom closet as the boiler (as in our house) that's where the gas pipes are going to be bonded as I've no intention of digging up a concrete floor from the closet to the front door to run a single piece of 10mm earth wire.

 

[Jimmy Boy]

Interesting ? I have gone through eight boxes of Pop Corn and a tray of Stella reading this lmao