The IET is carrying out some important updates between 17-30 April and all of our websites will be view only. For more information, read this Announcement
Mike M:
I take it those labels where the phase to phase voltage was 400 were being applied as part of a client request and not a requirement of some BS standard ?
well it was in l the IEE wiring regs of the day -which is what it was called long before the the IEE became the IET and BSI got involved in all this electricity stuff.
I am going back to about 1980; but there are quite a few installations from that era.
It would really clarify things if BS7671 514.10.1 used the term nominal instead of maximum.
mapj1:Mike M:
I take it those labels where the phase to phase voltage was 400 were being applied as part of a client request and not a requirement of some BS standard ?well it was in l the IEE wiring regs of the day -which is what it was called long before the the IEE became the IET and BSI got involved in all this electricity stuff.
I am going back to about 1980; but there are quite a few installations from that era.
Yes, the requirement in the 16th Edition BS 7671:1992 and its amendments,was any voltage (U or U0) above 250 V "and where presence not expected", or where in separate enclosures but simultaneously accessible, needed a voltage warning label indicating the voltage.
I'm fairly certain the change was made in 16th Edition BS 7671:2001, to pretty much the current requirement based on U0 of 230 V in any enclosure.
The logic of the current requirement likely circles around two factors:
We're making some changes behind the scenes to deliver a better experience for our members and customers. Posting and interactions are paused. Thank you for your patience and see you soon!
For more information, please read this announcement