Ridiculous conclusion! Please explain how you think a significant potential could occur between the close surface and the clearly large area of metal very close by? What about the 200 million or so street lamps installed in the Country? No deaths!

Ridiculous conclusion! Please explain how you think a significant potential could occur between the close surface and the clearly large area of metal very close by? What about the 200 million or so street lamps installed in the Country? No deaths!

no need to be rude about conclusion mate, not the vibe of the forum. We haven't concluded anything, that's why we posted. We don't work on streetlights but when we've installed metal outdoor lighting pillars we tend not to export the PME and put it on an RCD and TT. Was just putting it out there for feed back. Thanks for getting back and have a great day

But you are "trying" to do an EICR! If you don't know the regulations very well or industry practice, you should be nowhere near an EICR of a public building. That is what is ridiculous. Ok, Which regulation bans feeding outdoor lighting with any supply type? Simple question, not a simple answer? Which regulation in BS7671 says anything about exporting PME to street furniture? I imagine you find the OSG sufficiently specific?

I am not trying to be rude, I am simply protecting your customer and the Public in general. As you see Lyle makes exactly the same points as I have, but I question your ability because that is a risk to everyone. According to the HSE, the safety of PME is not in question, but you see a risk? I take it that you would happily charge to make this circuit TT, as you admit to having done before for lighting outdoors? Was this fair in view of what you now know?

There is nothing to suggest that were going to give it a code or that we go around trying to find problems where there aren't any. God know we're busy enough as it is and don't need to go around finding problems where there aren't any.  I was wondering if I should make a comment on the EICR.  I'm aware that there's no regulation with exporting PME in this  situation but as we both know there are plenty of special locations where folk could be simultanously touching earthed metal work with a lost neutral and be in contact with true earth and that PME is not permitted. Because of this, on a new installations we would not usually export the PME outside the equipotential zone say to metal shed or a summer house with extraneous conducting parts and would put the system on a TT and very little extra cost ie an earth rod and a terminated unconnected PME earth. This is normal and have had numerous discussions with my NICEIC inspector about this over the years. 

In this case we were doing a standard EICR on a commercial building and they asked us to include the floodlights. And I'm simply asking for people's thoughts on this because although we'rev aware of the regulations we were interested in the opinions of those professionals who install floodlights. We do this because we're aware that we don't know it all and take an interest in growing and developing professionlly by engaing. 

Been on and off this forum for years even back in my rookie days when I'm sure I asked some dumb questions and was always answered professionally, supportively and courteously by all users. Are you  a regular Twitter poster? 

Patrick Hammond said:

Because of this, on a new installations we would not usually export the PME outside the equipotential zone

"export"! Why export? If, as is often the case nowadays, there are no extraneous conductive parts, there is no equipotential zone.

TT-ing the lamp posts is not without risk. It depends upon satisfactory long-term operation of an RCD, which is probably less likely than a lost neutral.