Wago Junction boxes not meeting the requirements of BS7671

[fazhols]

Two reasons.

1) if you have used a non compliant product and don't disclose on your certificate or if it is found to be less safe than the standard allows then it's negligence.
2) the electrical Equipment act, low voltage directive and electrical safety at work act all state that it is a criminal offence to supply a product that does not meet the minimum standards specified. So when the electrician supplies labour and materials the he needs to be pretty sure that all equipment meets standards!

I have just been told that the NICEIC are giving out a guide to course students that confirms this issue.

 

[Mark_Burgess]

I think I will stick to the J501's, at least I can happily screw those buggers to the joist!

 

[fazhols]

So what we are saying is that line complies as a jb where accessable - ie spot lights (for which I think are perfect) but NOT inaccessable places ... yet. Is that how we see it?

I will email line and ask. Watch this space tomorrow.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

In what way does does a JB that complies with BS EN 60998 become a non compliant product?
The low voltage directive applies to the manufacture of goods for sale in the European Community, and it is encumbant upon the munufacturer or importer to ensure standards have been complied with.

 

[Mark_Burgess]

I will email line and ask. Watch this space tomorrow.

Better still, get them to comment on this thread. Job done.

 

[NJG28]

Hi. Interesting discussion as I am currently considering using WAGO. Wagobox.com has an explanation of why it thinks it IS compliant. Comments appreciated.
View attachment Wagobox_BS7671_Regs.pdf

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Hi. Interesting discussion as I am currently considering using WAGO. Wagobox.com has an explanation of why it thinks it IS compliant. Comments appreciated.
View attachment 8766

It does comply with BS7671, just not for use as a maintenance free joint.

 

[netblindpaul]

...

Wago manufacture the connectors and are testing the connectors to extra requirements of amendment A for mf ( ie bs5733). Once Wago confirm the connectors comply Line with wago will be fine. If you look at page 131 in amend A you will see that mf clause says: when used in accordance with manufacturers instructions!
...

Amendment A to what please?
Is this an amendment to BS5733?

 

[LineProducts]

Hi all.

I have been asked to comment on this post.

Although I believe that LINE is the best, I will aim to be factual. Feel free to pick me up if I slip!

The issues being debated here are complex. I have been asked by the IET to write an article for Wiring Matters on the subject of “compliant products”.

Before I start I would like to clarify “chiplards” point. LINE do not claim to be the only compliant JB. We do However, claim to be the only compliant JB enclosure that can be used with ANY BS 60998/9 connector and in any of the typical JB applications. This means that if you prefer Wago, Helacon, IDEAL or even good old chocbloc, so long as it meets the standard you can use it safely with line.

BUT as always in this game: check if the manufacturer has any restrictions on the use or only specify a narrow application! Many of the big players imply that a product can be used but do not actually say that you can……and no surprise….the product usually does not comply with that use and its ALL at your risk. This is one of my frustrations with the industry.

BS EN 60998/9
BS EN 60670-22 is standard for Enclosures that house BS 60998/9 connectors.
BS7671 is the standard for electrical wiring INSTALLATIONS. BS 7671 requires JB’s to comply with BS EN 60670-22.

BS5733 is a standard that, amongst other things, has performance and other criteria for MF products. BS 7671 Amendment A (which is applicable to all installations started from 1 Jan 2012) specifies that MF products must be marked and meet requirements of BS5733.

Up until 1 January 2012 (and for projects started beforehand) the MF products criteria are as they have always been for the 17[SUP]th[/SUP] edition.

Spinlondon (post #4) is spot on with his summary of the standards so I wont repeat.

One of the difficulties of BS5733 is that, unlike BS EN 60670-22 it does not categorise enclosures according to the method of securing the connectors i.e. i) moulded in, ii) subsequently secured, iii) held in place (non removable) and iv) free floating. Under BS EN 60670-22, all enclosures i) to iii) can only be used ONLY with connectors actually tested for safety (including heat build up). Category iv) allows ANY

MF marking an enclosure that is categorised according to i) and ii) is easy as they are only ever used with integrated connectors eg Ashley. However, enclosures to iii) and iv) usually offer a choice of connector eg. Wagobox and LINE. BS 7671A1 deals with the problem (526.3 vi)) by saying that the installer must “install in compliance with the manufacturers instructions”.

This will no doubt lead to confusion.

LINE (enclosure) meets all the requirements of BS5733 for the enclosure so can technically be marked BUT unless I specify which connectors you use for MF applications it will just be misleading. I have asked all the manufacturers of screw-less connectors to confirm that their connectors have passed the tests specified in BS 5733 but as yet none have confirmed this.

The test that stands out to me is the running of the connector at twice the rated Amperage and ensuring that heat and voltage drop do not become a factor. My rule of thumb has always been that a connector on a supply rated at half the connectors rating will most likely qualify as MF. e.g. a WAGO 30A connector but limited to 15A.

Ashley at present has the only MF marked JB. However, Ashley MF uses the WAGO 862 connector. So, theoretically (assuming you trust Ashley and Hagar) the WAGO 862 has been tested and could therefore be used with LINE.

LINE will have an amendment 1 MF solution ready for use on 1 January 2010. The only matter we are working on is the rating that we will specify.


Is LINE scaremongering? Not intentionally but we should be scared!

The image on the LINE Forumshop site is a link. Click on it and you will see a simple checklist to compliance. I find the Ashley one a bit vague on some matters.

I believe that it is unreasonable for working electricians to know the ins and outs of every standard. We need to put more pressure on the government and registration bodies to police the industry properly so that we can order products in confidence. As one wholesaler explained; "I know its a non compliant product but its cheap and if I dont sell it all my customers will go to the shop around the corner and I will go bust!"

Its not only dodgy imports. I have an Ashley JB (commonly available) that fails a safety requirement of BS EN 60670-22 as well as the Safety Acts.

In an ideal world ALL the manufacturers would be honourable and not sell non compliant products to the wholesalers. The wholesalers would be honourable and not buy products that did not comply and you would not need to worry!

However, according to a trading standards officer I have spoken to, they are starting proceedings against wholesalers who stock 8 (EIGHT) JB’s that are commonly available and used. (Two of them were clearly visible at ELEX Sandown!!!) This demonstrates how bad the problem is. The checklist on our site does not guarantee that a JB does actually comply, but if it fails and Health and Safety prosecute, you should be able to demonstrate that you did everything reasonably expected of you to use a safe product. The blame will then pass to the wholesaler and manufacturer. (Please note that this problem is not unique to JB’s!)

Spinlondon asked about how a BS EN 60670-22 compliant product can become non compliant. A truly BS 60670-22 compliant JB will always be. However, the fact that a JB has BS EN 60670-22 written on it does not mean that it complies (anyone could print it on). However, if the JB has a CE mark then someone else has taken the responsibility to confirm that it is fit for purpose. This does not mean that it is but at least you have a fall back position. There is a top selling JB on the market that has a CE mark on it BUT does NOT comply with BS EN 60670-22!!! This is fraud and is one of the enclosures trading standards are investigating.

Note that most product standards have options for testing. So having a certificate does not necessarily mean that the product complies with every application. Don’t be fooled.) Another trap is that a JB can be BS EN 60670-22 and not have tool only opening. The tool only opening concept is from BS7671 and BS5733. So application and instalation also matter.

Whilst the Low Voltage Directive etc are initially the responsibility of the manufacturer this is mainly to do with marking CE and creating a safety document and file. All other requirements get passed down from one to the next. The key is: Whoever makes the SUPPLY to the end user is the person exposed!

As electricians we can get out of BS7671 by disclosing departures BUT we can not walk away from safety law which requires us to use safe products in safe installations!

I hope this has helped. Feel free to get back to me on any issues.

And…in the spirit of things…I need to state… that the views above can not be taken as legal advice. The safest is to meet the requirements!! If you are unsure, put pressure on your registration body to issue a guidance note!

 

[netblindpaul]

LineProducts,
IF you do write an article for WM, then please get your references correct.

 

[LineProducts]

Hi. Interesting discussion as I am currently considering using WAGO. Wagobox.com has an explanation of why it thinks it IS compliant. Comments appreciated.
View attachment 8766

I have just read the document you refer to with interest. Off course I would like you to use LINE and take advantage of our special forums deal, but if you want to go with WAGOBOX this is what you need to think about:

1) As explained in my comment above. 60670 - 22 is a manufacturing standard. Having a certificate does not mean that it will meet the installation standard.
2) the author does eventually focus on the main issue:BS7671 clause 412.2.2.3: "Where a lid or a door in an insulating enclosure can be opened without the use of a tool or a key, all conductive parts which are acessible if the lid or door is open shall be behind an isulating barrier ...(IPX2)... preventing a person coming unintentionally into contact with those conductive parts. "

I think we all agree that both the WAGOBOX and the old 6220 meet this requirement. However, the final line of 412.2.2.3 states: "This insulating barrier shall not be removeable without the use of a tool or key"

416.2.4 iii is more specific "..., by use of a tool or a keyto remove the intermediate barrier."

Reg 120.4 - innovation etc has in amendment A become 133.5 which states: "Where the use of a new material or invention leads to a departure.....the resulting degree of safety shall be NOT LESS than that obtained by compliance with the regulations. Such use is to be noted on the ...certificate"

So ask yourself:
a) once you have opened the enclosure can you remove the barrier (i.e. reach a live conductor) without a tool or a key?
b) is the situation less safe than the regulations request?

If either answer is yes......

 

[LineProducts]

LineProducts,
IF you do write an article for WM, then please get your references correct.

Please elaborate so I can correct or explain. Thanks

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Been in contact with Ashley Hager.
Apparently their product is CE marked, but this mark is on the packaging rather than the product.
Something that is allowed by the low voltage directive.
However following some feedback at a recent trade show, they intend adding the CE mark to the product itself.

 

[netblindpaul]

LineProducts,
If you re-read your long post it should jump out at you.

Such basic mistakes have discredited your competence with me already.

 

[not clever]

2010 ?

 

[Guest123]

Its not only dodgy imports. I have an Ashley JB (commonly available) that fails a safety requirement of BS EN 60670-22 as well as the Safety Acts.

You had me until....^^^:disguise:

 

[chiplard]

I have just read the document you refer to with interest. Off course I would like you to use LINE and take advantage of our special forums deal, but if you want to go with WAGOBOX this is what you need to think about:

1) As explained in my comment above. 60670 - 22 is a manufacturing standard. Having a certificate does not mean that it will meet the installation standard.
2) the author does eventually focus on the main issue:BS7671 clause 412.2.2.3: "Where a lid or a door in an insulating enclosure can be opened without the use of a tool or a key, all conductive parts which are acessible if the lid or door is open shall be behind an isulating barrier ...(IPX2)... preventing a person coming unintentionally into contact with those conductive parts. "

I think we all agree that both the WAGOBOX and the old 6220 meet this requirement. However, the final line of 412.2.2.3 states: "This insulating barrier shall not be removeable without the use of a tool or key"

416.2.4 iii is more specific "..., by use of a tool or a keyto remove the intermediate barrier."

Reg 120.4 - innovation etc has in amendment A become 133.5 which states: "Where the use of a new material or invention leads to a departure.....the resulting degree of safety shall be NOT LESS than that obtained by compliance with the regulations. Such use is to be noted on the ...certificate"

So ask yourself:
a) once you have opened the enclosure can you remove the barrier (i.e. reach a live conductor) without a tool or a key?
b) is the situation less safe than the regulations request?

If either answer is yes......

I think a bit of common sense needs to come into the argument about the use of key or tool.

With regards to the lid or door then a wagobox is the same as a ceiling rose. They can both be opened without a tool or key and if installed CORRECTLY then no live parts are accessible. ie no live core can be touched.

From my understanding of what you are saying is that the Wago connectors can be twisted off or levers lifted etc etc. How far can a regulation cover stupidity? If people want to expose an obvious live part then they will. I mentioned the ceiling rose earlier, the live parts cannot be exposed without the use of a tool unless someone really wants to ie causing damage.

This makes ceiling roses with regards to the regs the same as Wago JB's. ie live parts can be exposed without use of a tool. Yet ceiling roses are fitted and used without any issues regarding compliance with the BRB.

 

[philipkeaveney]

the biggest problem with wago is when inserting the tri- rated cores people think its ok to twist the cores it is not designed for twisted cores it should be connected as made off to allow the core to spread evenly across the contact i personally wouldnt use solid cores

 

[JamesBrownLive]

i personally wouldnt use solid cores

Good luck with that then :rolleyes4:
Just how are you planning on doing any installation work if you are not going to use any solid core cable :confused5:

 

[Burnt Fingers]

I like Wagos but come up against much resistance (ooo sorry) when I get them out, particularly from some of my mates who are a bit set in the old ways.

I have a bit of fear lurking in there though - lighting circuits well....ok and 12/24V Wagos every time, but has anyone heard of or seen one fail under a big load? They look so flimsy compared to a fithy spider filled bakelite one.

 

[philipkeaveney]

I havent came across any solid cores in years. All of the installations ive been involved in over the last few years would have been cabled in yy & cy cable which are trirated or xlpe which is stranded the only time ive worked with solid would have been with twin and earth

 

[stan794]

Mine arrived at the weekend, mmmmm. Will use them then go back to me go old Wagoboxes.

 

[Guest123]

It is so blindingly obvious that Fazhols IS line!

Dont think Admin knew....they soon will!!

 

[LineProducts]

I think a bit of common sense needs to come into the argument about the use of key or tool.

With regards to the lid or door then a wagobox is the same as a ceiling rose. They can both be opened without a tool or key and if installed CORRECTLY then no live parts are accessible. ie no live core can be touched.

From my understanding of what you are saying is that the Wago connectors can be twisted off or levers lifted etc etc. How far can a regulation cover stupidity? If people want to expose an obvious live part then they will. I mentioned the ceiling rose earlier, the live parts cannot be exposed without the use of a tool unless someone really wants to ie causing damage.

This makes ceiling roses with regards to the regs the same as Wago JB's. ie live parts can be exposed without use of a tool. Yet ceiling roses are fitted and used without any issues regarding compliance with the BRB.

Ultimately you need to choose if you want to work to bs7671 or not. It is not law until you sign the completion certificate . If you have not worked to bs7671 then please fill in the departures to bs7671. (ps bs7671 does make allowances for ceiling roses, es and bayonet fittings, ceiling switches).

 

[LineProducts]

You had me until....^^^:disguise:

Lenny,

I was not referring to the j 501.

As a senior person on this forum I would be interested in your opinion. Building regulations, not to mention the registration bodies encourage compliance with bs7671. BS 7671 deals with installation standards and refers to manufacturing standards - the reason is to promote safety. Is it acceptable for manufacturers to sell the trade products that do not meet the requirements of these standards whilst telling the trade that they do?