Rules and Guidelines
Want to participate in the discussions? Please read our Community Rules and Guidelines. Need some help? Visit Support and Answers.

  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 15 replies
  • Subscribers 32 subscribers
  • Views 1794 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

Weekend Quiz

ebee
What`s this weeks quiz Zoom?
  • 0

    ebee:

    Satisfactory is not what Zoom asked. He asked if it was safe. Hence my one word answer - no




    Surely an installation which is in a satisfactory condition for continued service must be safe; but one which is unsatisfactory (C2, not C1) may be safe until a fault develops.

  • 0
    IF the PVC is in good condition, it may be safe, in the sense that there is no immediate danger.

    I'm assuming no smashed fittings, burnt lamp holders or exposed red/black cores.

    It is not compliant with current regs, but changing the VOELCB to an RCD may be enough. to 'make it so' apart from one issue.

    You have spent some time describing the fusing arrangements, but ceramic and wood are a lot less flammable than the plastic CUs of which a great many are in service

    even if deprecated today. I am not convinced of any great immediate danger from this description.

    Neither I suspect are the occupants.
  • 0
    Chris, no I was being pendantic. Safe in the purest sense rather than relatively or comparitively safe which we all usually mean. Electrically the only safe premises would have no electric. In a workshop a grinding wheel is not safe, we could make it pretty safe by fully enclosing the wheel but not useable  then it becomes less safe if we remove a small amount of the enclosure so we can actually use it. For electrics we tend to compare with current practices wheras yesteryear we never thought as things being dangerous that we might do now. It is all relative
  • 0

    ebee:

    Chris, no I was being pendantic. Safe in the purest sense rather than relatively or comparitively safe which we all usually mean. Electrically the only safe premises would have no electric. In a workshop a grinding wheel is not safe, we could make it pretty safe by fully enclosing the wheel but not useable  then it becomes less safe if we remove a small amount of the enclosure so we can actually use it. For electrics we tend to compare with current practices wheras yesteryear we never thought as things being dangerous that we might do now. It is all relative




    It is indeed all relative. One of the leading cases in occupational medicine is Paris v Stepney Borough Council [1951] AC 367. A one-eyed employee suffered damage to his good eye and the employer (the Council) was liable because of the extra risk. Please don't tell anybody, but when PPE prevents me from seeing or hearing what I am doing, I don't use it. 

  • 0
    I was at the bungalow doing something else but just gave the existing installation a quick look over and tested the sockets for earthing and correct polarity, also the earthing at the cooker panel socket with a loop tester. I was considering the "usage" of the installation as a factor connected with safety. The old retired couple are not going to use an outdoor electric strimmer in the garden, or a nail gun in the home. The old boy can hardly move due to illness. So, should we consider the use to which an installation is put and the users concerned, as well as the installation's condition. When the old couple leave this earth the bungalow will no doubt be re-wired. As Andy has pointed out there are many parts of the installation that may not comply with the 18th edition of B.S. 7671 but I was looking beyond that.


    651.2 Note 2.


    Z.

Community Rules & Guidelines