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 3 replies
  • Subscribers 37 subscribers
  • Views 1191 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

Use of AFDDs

alex

Hi,

Amendment 2 to the 18th Edition states:

For all other premises, the use of AFDDs is recommended for circuits supplying sockets not exceeding 32A

Surely this would mean its "recommended" all circuits supplying sockets 32A and under should have AFDDs? This would be in all buildings, in addition to the list of buildings where mandatory? 

  • 0

    Yes it is recommended. Whether or not anybody here is sold on AFDD is another story

  • 0

    I informed this forum some years ago that I had been vigorously pursued by an insurance company following a fire in a large domestic property. I was responsible only for the inspection and testing. The forensic report gave two possible ignition sources, one of which was attributed to arcing between conductors and perhaps something which an AFDD would have prevented from developing into a full fire situation. 
    It was a worrying time for me. Luckily my documentation was detailed and comprehensive. Now imagine a contractor acting as designer who ignores this AFDD recommendation without a well-documented reason and a fire results from an event that might have been otherwise detected. I imagine it could be a difficult time for them!

  • 0 in reply to lyledunn

    Well the fire people have a 50/50 chance of getting it wrong, and their usual tactic when the cause isn't obvious is to blame it on an electrical fault. The thing is, that old frayed electric fire flex which runs under granny's hearth rug wouldn't have been picked up by an AFDD in any case.

Community Rules & Guidelines