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 67 replies
  • Subscribers 29 subscribers
  • Views 3707 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in
This discussion is locked.
You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

AFDDs AMD 2

John Peckham
In response to the suggestion of separate threads for individual changes to the 18th I thought I would start this one for AFDDs.


So what are the forum members views on the new requirement for AFDDs?


What is the safety case for the change? E.g impact on public safety, fires etc.Evidence?


What is the impact on the installation industry? How easy to fit, cost advantages disadvantages etc?


Will you feedback to the BSI on the changes and what will you say?


Parents
  • 0
    Chris Pearson:
    AJJewsbury:

    Double stacked (two row) CUs probably aren't acceptable on new builds either if you need to meet AD-M's requirements of the toggles being within a 100m band between 1350mm and 1450mm above floor level - if one row is within that range the other one isn't likely to be...


    It isn't a requirement in an ordinary visitable dwelling; it is merely a recommendation in the Approved Document.




    As I understand it there is a requirement for accessibility - and AD-M gives examples that satisfy the requirement - while we are of course free to meet the requirements in other ways if we choose, how could we hope to demonstrate compliance if we put things outside of that range? How could we make something that was outside of that range just as accessible?

       - Andy.


Reply
  • 0
    Chris Pearson:
    AJJewsbury:

    Double stacked (two row) CUs probably aren't acceptable on new builds either if you need to meet AD-M's requirements of the toggles being within a 100m band between 1350mm and 1450mm above floor level - if one row is within that range the other one isn't likely to be...


    It isn't a requirement in an ordinary visitable dwelling; it is merely a recommendation in the Approved Document.




    As I understand it there is a requirement for accessibility - and AD-M gives examples that satisfy the requirement - while we are of course free to meet the requirements in other ways if we choose, how could we hope to demonstrate compliance if we put things outside of that range? How could we make something that was outside of that range just as accessible?

       - Andy.


Children
No Data

Join us to get the best from IET EngX.

Joining EngX lets you personalise your experience so you stay up to date on the topics that interest you, plus you’ll be able to make connections who are looking to collaborate, exchange ideas and more.

Join us Not now

Community Rules & Guidelines