Could it be argued that 463.1.3 requires a separate switch for items like an oven, hob, refrigerator or washing machine etc. where the appliance has no means of external isolation/control except those on itself? Or are functional controls on the appliances adequate and sufficient?
Z.
I will let others argue as to whether my proposed "readily accessible socket outlet or double pole switch" is for emergency switching or for isolation. That is why I used the wording "means of disconnecting from the electricity supply"
In my view it is unacceptable to rely on a possibly distant consumer unit for this. An ordinary person preparing a meal or doing the laundry should in my view have a readily accessible means of disconnecting the electricity supply to an appliance that is defective or on fire.
I see no need for an emergency stop button, a simple and READILY ACCESSIBLE socket outlet or double pole switch is fine.
I will let others argue as to whether my proposed "readily accessible socket outlet or double pole switch" is for emergency switching or for isolation. That is why I used the wording "means of disconnecting from the electricity supply"
I'm pushing on the intent, because in its current form, the proposed requirement with words "means of disconnecting from the electricity supply" would never fly. We really need to use the correct term, so that an appropriate device can be selected from Table 537.4 - either a device for "on load isolation" or a device for "emergency switching".
In my view it is unacceptable to rely on a possibly distant consumer unit for this. An ordinary person preparing a meal or doing the laundry should in my view have a readily accessible means of disconnecting the electricity supply to an appliance that is defective or on fire.
So, either isolation, or emergency switching, or both ... which one do we want. The ready means of disconnecting in an emergency would be "emergency switching ", though:
Emergency switching. An operation intended to remove, as quickly as possible, danger, which may have occurred unexpectedly.
Just an aside on this ... isn't the recommendation still "get out, stay out, call us out" ?
I see no need for an emergency stop button, a simple and READILY ACCESSIBLE socket outlet or double pole switch is fine.
That would imply isolation, because Reg 537.3.3.3 says that "Plugs and socket-outlets shall not be provided for use as means for emergency switching off."
"Readily accessible" in a modern kitchen can be very tricky, and really needs some further definition also. I don't subscribe to "back of the counter" (either over the appliance or to the side) being any safer (or even more "readily accessible") than a suitably-located socket-outlet in an adjacent cupboard, especially if the homeowner knows where these all are - and when there are large knives etc. out on the work surface ...
An functional/isolation switch that is "adjacent to the associated equipment" is a good idea. 462.3. Whether it fully meets the exact definition of an "emergency switch" is not important. It will still do the job of isolation or emergency switching if an appliance becomes faulty, dangerous or tries to flood the floor with water. The main thing is that by its position it is pretty obvious what its function is, it is easily used, and it can prevent or remove danger. 460 Scope.
Z.
An functional/isolation switch that is "adjacent to the associated equipment" is a good idea.
So, we go down that road and require a device for on-load isolation (which could be a plug and socket-outlet rated up to 20 A) - great for domestic, except for the discussion of what "adjacent" means, and the differing opinions but that can come later in the process.
What we now need to do is understand circumstances where it may not be needed, or will cause issues:
- Launderettes and malicious use.
- Commercial laundries and kitchens where the appliance is supplied from a system controlled by emergency switching arrangement.
Any others?
That'll be the "adjacent" of 462.3.
I'll go with, "next to."
Z.
That'll be the "adjacent" of 462.3.
I'll go with, "next to."
Z.
OK, so that won't work in most domestic kitchens, because adjacent to the dishwasher is a cupboard (under the sink) ... unless you're saying put it in the door of the cupboard under the sink in that case?
Or are you being more pedantic than that? In which case, the appliance can't be installed in accordance with the instructions from the manufacturer which require a certain distance gap all round the appliance (ruling out "adjoining" meaning of adjacent).
Again, I'm not being picky for the sake of it ... I have been involved in standardization for nearly 20 years now, and I am very familiar with the discussions. However, we do need to make sure the requirements can be verified. Hence one person's "adjacent to" could well be "a few feet away", "close by in the room" etc, whilst another person's might be "adjoining".
Case in point, in AMD2:2022, Regulation 710.511.1, the term "immediately adjacent to' is used ... Is this "nearer than adjacent to" ? Consider the discussions that must have gone on over the wording of that revision (compare with 710.511.1 in BS 7671:2018 and you'll see what I mean).
That'll be the "adjacent" of 462.3.
People are happier with that, because of the guidance available such that "adjacent to" means it may not need locking off as the person performing the isolation may be able to be in control of it at all times? I'm not defending a position, just openly discussing the sorts of things that influence the wording used for requirements in BS 7671.
Hence one person's "adjacent to" could well be "a few feet away", "close by in the room" etc, whilst another person's might be "adjoining".
The Judge's weasel words would be that the meaning of "adjacent to" is the ordinary meaning of the words.
This is why the issue of "interpreting standards" is very complex, and, I believe this has been mentioned in the Forum recently, one of the reasons why the IET Technical Helpline web-page has the disclaimer and other statements it does.
The Judge's weasel words would be that the meaning of "adjacent to" is the ordinary meaning of the words.
So how would Their Honour or Their Lordship / Their Ladyship deal with "immediately adjacent to" ? (And of course, is "immediately" a redundant word in the phrase "immediately adjacent to" ?)
We're about to take you to the IET registration website. Don't worry though, you'll be sent straight back to the community after completing the registration.
Continue to the IET registration site
