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 20 replies
  • Subscribers 45 subscribers
  • Views 3875 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

BS 7671 18th Edition AMD 2

John Peckham

The 18th Edition AMD 2 was signed off by the Chairman of JPEL 64 on Monday. So it can now go to the printers for publication on the 28th March.

The IET have issued a press release which gives some detail of the changes.

This can be found here. https://www.theiet.org/media/press-releases/press-releases-2022/24-january-2022-iet-and-bsi-publish-amendment-2-2022-to-bs-76712018-iet-wiring-regulations/

JP

Parents
  • 0

    Thanks JP. Absolutely marvellous. I somehow think that AFDDs will not be appropriate for the majority of basic domestic installations, but it will be a jolly good money spinner for some company.

  • 0 in reply to Legh Richardson

    The thing is; there is no regime in place to monitor the effectiveness of the things, which may mean that in the event of a follow-up post-future incident it will be impossible to prove that the incident would not have occurred had a AFDD been fitted.

    Personally, having read quite a lot of info thus far, it seems that it is nigh-on impossible to get accurate fire statistics about anything related directly to the cause in this country. Even the lazy fire brigade investigators just tick the "Caused by an electrical fault' box when all other avenues have been exhausted, and all of the easy low-hanging fruit has been picked over. They don't drill down any further to find whether or not the fault was on the DNO kit or the consumer's equipment.

    It's the same with SPDs - no one really knows how effective they really are, since nothing is being recorded about the service of these things. And what if they fail and do not prevent a surge from damaging kit? Who is to blame then? Same goes for AFDDs.

Reply
  • 0 in reply to Legh Richardson

    The thing is; there is no regime in place to monitor the effectiveness of the things, which may mean that in the event of a follow-up post-future incident it will be impossible to prove that the incident would not have occurred had a AFDD been fitted.

    Personally, having read quite a lot of info thus far, it seems that it is nigh-on impossible to get accurate fire statistics about anything related directly to the cause in this country. Even the lazy fire brigade investigators just tick the "Caused by an electrical fault' box when all other avenues have been exhausted, and all of the easy low-hanging fruit has been picked over. They don't drill down any further to find whether or not the fault was on the DNO kit or the consumer's equipment.

    It's the same with SPDs - no one really knows how effective they really are, since nothing is being recorded about the service of these things. And what if they fail and do not prevent a surge from damaging kit? Who is to blame then? Same goes for AFDDs.

Children
No Data

Community Rules & Guidelines