Rules and Guidelines
Want to participate in the discussions? Please read our Community Rules and Guidelines. Need some help? Visit Support and Answers.

  • State Suggested Answer
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 64 replies
  • Helpful Answers 1 Helpful answer
  • Subscribers 38 subscribers
  • Views 12476 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

Bonding in greenhouse

Alan B

On an eicr

I have a greenhouse connected to a sub DB in an outhouse, which is on a TT earth. Circuit is protected by upstream 30mA and 100mA RCD's.

I am debating in my mind if the frame of the greenhouse should be bonded to the single socket in the green house.

I would consider the frame as an extraneous part and therefore first reaction is to bond it.

But then thinking about it. bonding would reduce the risk of shock inside the greenhouse in the case of the socket became live but increase the risk of shock outside the greenhouse if the socket and greenhouse became live.

On balance I am tempted to go with not bonding, what are your thoughts?

Parents
  • 0

    I think the Building Act or other legal definition would be used?

    This one?

    121 - (1) The word "building", for the purposes of-
    (a) Part I oft his Act, and
    (b) any other enactment (whether or not contained in this
    Act) that relates to building regulations, or that men-
    tions "buildings" or "a building" in a context from
    which it appears that those expressions are there in-
    tended to have the same meaning as in Part I of this
    Act,
    means any permanent or temporary building, and, unless the
    context otherwise requires, it includes any other structure or
    erection of whatever kind or nature (whether permanent or tem-
    porary).
    (2) In subsection (1) above, "structure or erection " includes
    a vehicle, vessel, hovercraft, aircraft or other movable object
    of any kind in such circumstances as may be prescribed (being
    circumstances that in the opinion of the Secretary of State justify
    treating it for those purposes as a building).

    (with the possible exemption of schools and buildings belonging to statutory undertakers under 4.(1)?)

    Sounds to me like my bean poles would be included in that one.

       - Andy.

Reply
  • 0

    I think the Building Act or other legal definition would be used?

    This one?

    121 - (1) The word "building", for the purposes of-
    (a) Part I oft his Act, and
    (b) any other enactment (whether or not contained in this
    Act) that relates to building regulations, or that men-
    tions "buildings" or "a building" in a context from
    which it appears that those expressions are there in-
    tended to have the same meaning as in Part I of this
    Act,
    means any permanent or temporary building, and, unless the
    context otherwise requires, it includes any other structure or
    erection of whatever kind or nature (whether permanent or tem-
    porary).
    (2) In subsection (1) above, "structure or erection " includes
    a vehicle, vessel, hovercraft, aircraft or other movable object
    of any kind in such circumstances as may be prescribed (being
    circumstances that in the opinion of the Secretary of State justify
    treating it for those purposes as a building).

    (with the possible exemption of schools and buildings belonging to statutory undertakers under 4.(1)?)

    Sounds to me like my bean poles would be included in that one.

       - Andy.

Children
  • 0 in reply to AJJewsbury

    Surely a beanpole, like my antenna masts, would be an erection, not a building. 

    Titter ye not ladies and gentlemen..

    But this is pedanty. TT the supply and all talk of underfloor grids goes away - I've never seen one under an earth floored barn, but there is plenty of fairly shonky TT where the electrode is the building steel, or the taps, or indeed just missing. Luckily RCDs mean even these last are usually non-lethal. I'd expect a greenhouse to be similar.

    Mike

  • 0 in reply to mapj1
    mapj1 said:
    Luckily RCDs mean even these last are usually non-lethal. I'd expect a greenhouse to be similar.

    I suspect so. Depends whether voltages are imported from outside to exposed-conductive-parts though. Again, little different to Class I appliances outdoors ...

    Interesting discussion though, and definitely good evidence that the deprecated term 'equipotential zone' from 16th Ed is often misleading.

Community Rules & Guidelines