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

Electrical Installation Design Guide (2018)

I have a 17th ed, AMD 3/3rd ed copy, but was thinking about getting the 18th ed vs. So I'm wondering, if anyone has both copies, other than regulation numbers, is there a significant change in the 18th ed, to warrant getting a copy? 


Thanks


F
  • Yes Farmboy it is definitely worth gaining access to the 18th edition regs.


    Z.

  • Zoomup:

    Yes Farmboy it is definitely worth gaining access to the 18th edition regs.


    Z.




    Regs? I'm referring to the design guide. I can't see that the electrical principles will have changed from one edition to the other, so it's whether there's significantly new info about e.g. spd's, afdd's, etc.


    F

  • I haven't compared in any detail but a look through the table of contents suggests there is little change -  the chapter titles and number of pages per chapter are more or less identical between revisions.


    A quick search for SPD throws up no results and AFDD only appears on the sample test sheets in chapter 9
  • I agree nothing significant has changed. As the OP says, the laws of maths and physics don't change and the book is focussed on calculations rather than regulations.


    regards
  • Thanks for the feedback Dgmeica and Burn, much appreciated.


    Regards


    F

  • I agree nothing significant has changed. As the OP says, the laws of maths and physics don't change and the book is focussed on calculations rather than regulations.



    It might have been nice to have a bit of background to the calculations behind the SPD risk assessment - i.e. the physics behind why an screened underground cable is as much as half the risk of the same length open wire overhead (previously we were given the impression that underground cables were far less vulnerable) and why we only consider 1km of cable and so on. Not new physics for sure, but an area we didn't previously have to consider...


       - Andy.