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 5 replies
  • Subscribers 32 subscribers
  • Views 612 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

Ambulatory, non-ambulatory, ...?

AJJewsbury
Something Graham just mentioned in a Webinar has go me thinking...


BS 7671 Regulation 511.1 (compliance with standards) Every item of equipment shall comply with the relevant requirement of the appropriate British or Harmonised Standard .... The edition of the standard shall be the current edition. (my emphasis).


I take it that's meant to be read as current at the time of reading of BS 7671 (e.g. the time of design) rather than current at the time BS 7671 itself was written.


That seems to mean that a given version of BS 7671 doesn't have a single fixed meaning, but it can vary over time as other standards change. A design or installation that complies with BS 7671:2018 today, might not comply with BS 7671:2018 tomorrow, if say BS 1363 changes.


If so, BS 7671 is of itself "ambulatory", then when incorporated into legislation (e.g. the Private Rented regs) that legislation must also be considered ambulatory even when only a single fixed version of BS 7671 is referred to. In effect the committe behind any of the standards referred to in BS 7671 can in principle change the meaning of legislation, without parliament/ministers having any say in the matter. Isn't that just what the mandarins were trying so hard to avoid by refusing to refer to the "current version of BS 7671" in legislation - which would have made our lives so much easier.


  - Andy.
Parents
  • 0
    It is interesting to understand the history of this standardisation process. When I first started work there were many fewer standards, and these were fairly obvious in function. They tended to cover simple things like interchangeability and interfaces between various systems and components, for example, the diameter and threads on conduit and fittings. When we joined to Common Market things immediately became much more complex, because the "level playing field" (you may have heard of that!) adopted a large number of standards, particularly from Germany, and made them mandatory. I am not commenting on whether this was a good or bad thing, it worked both ways. At some point, which was never very clear there became standards for virtually everything, and once it became the EU, these standards were changed in many cases to directives from unnamed bureaucrats. Suddenly following the standards became terribly important, and the minefield had really started. All the standards interacted, and cross-referenced one another, just as BS7671 does. In many cases the standards were written by "experts" in a particular area, often manufacturers of particular products and the standards tended to evolve to suit certain competitive advantage. This was because having to produce a product to a very specific standard made cost advantage from better design or innovation very difficult, exactly the purpose of the supposed level playing field, and the only way to gain advantage was to modify the standard by the tortuous committee process to introduce something new where short term gain could be achieved. This is still happening!


    This may appear slightly cynical, but literally, years spent in small rooms do have an effect, and in retrospect saved some of the public from unnecessary additional costs.
Reply
  • 0
    It is interesting to understand the history of this standardisation process. When I first started work there were many fewer standards, and these were fairly obvious in function. They tended to cover simple things like interchangeability and interfaces between various systems and components, for example, the diameter and threads on conduit and fittings. When we joined to Common Market things immediately became much more complex, because the "level playing field" (you may have heard of that!) adopted a large number of standards, particularly from Germany, and made them mandatory. I am not commenting on whether this was a good or bad thing, it worked both ways. At some point, which was never very clear there became standards for virtually everything, and once it became the EU, these standards were changed in many cases to directives from unnamed bureaucrats. Suddenly following the standards became terribly important, and the minefield had really started. All the standards interacted, and cross-referenced one another, just as BS7671 does. In many cases the standards were written by "experts" in a particular area, often manufacturers of particular products and the standards tended to evolve to suit certain competitive advantage. This was because having to produce a product to a very specific standard made cost advantage from better design or innovation very difficult, exactly the purpose of the supposed level playing field, and the only way to gain advantage was to modify the standard by the tortuous committee process to introduce something new where short term gain could be achieved. This is still happening!


    This may appear slightly cynical, but literally, years spent in small rooms do have an effect, and in retrospect saved some of the public from unnecessary additional costs.
Children
No Data

Community Rules & Guidelines