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!
