Supplementary equipotential earth bonding points for Group 1 medical locations

BS7671 clause 710.415.2.1 requires that in each medical location of Group 1  activity, supplementary equipotential bonding connection points shall be installed.

It states: Supplementary equipotential bonding connection points for the connection of ME equipment shall be provided in each medical location, as follows: Group 1: a minimum of one per patient location.

For a consulting room in a Healthcare Centre, where patients will walk in and:

- the patient is only seeing a consultant for an appoint so is not in the room for any period of time

 - the patient is typically in reasonably health and does not been supported/assisted in seeing the consultant

 - there are no invasive procedures.

 - the equipment being used is a blood pressure monitor, (type BF as defined in BS EN 6061)

Is the Supplementary equipotential bonding connection point needed - as there is no availabe connection point on the equipment to connect to the bonding connection point. ?

 

Is a deviation from the regulation permitted as long as the reason is stated on the test certificate?

Parents
  • BS7671 clause 710.415.2.1 requires that in each medical location of Group 1  activity, supplementary equipotential bonding connection points shall be installed.

    It states: Supplementary equipotential bonding connection points for the connection of ME equipment shall be provided in each medical location, as follows: Group 1: a minimum of one per patient location.

    Who classified this as a Group 1 location? For example, 'examination or treatment room' is listed in Table A710, but that is a "list of examples' and the text of A710 says 'Regulation 710.3 cannot be satisfied by using this table alone'.

    Specifically, Regulation 710.3 says that medical staff should provide an input, so to assist in classifying the locations ... there are further details in the HTMs as to how the classification is assigned.

    Is a deviation from the regulation permitted as long as the reason is stated on the test certificate?

    BS 7671 permits 'intended departures' (Regulation 120.3) but :

    (a) given Regulation 710.3, is this a decision for the electrical installation designer alone? and

    (b) Regulation 120.3 requires that 'The resulting degree of safety of the installation shall be not less than that obtained by compliance with the Regulations.'

  • Who classified this as a Group 1 location? For example, 'examination or treatment room' is listed in Table A710, but that is a "list of examples' and the text of A710 says 'Regulation 710.3 cannot be satisfied by using this table alone'.

    Specifically, Regulation 710.3 says that medical staff should provide an input, so to assist in classifying the locations ... there are further details in the HTMs as to how the classification is assigned.

    Graham, I do not disagree with anything which you have written, but to my mind, examination and treatment are very different.

    Classically, a diagnosis requires: history, examination, and (sometimes) investigations. Rather like an EICR: any problems?; visual examination, tug-test, etc.; and application of MFT. It could be done in an igloo.

    Treatment is likely to involve something electrical, e.g. application of heat.

    As for medical input, I assume that you are referring to an Electrical Safety Group. However, the medics' contribution seems to be limited to saying what will be done using what equipment. If the engineers say that is the use of an applied part, it becomes difficult to assign Group 0.

    BTW, I think that the forum is being a bit flaky this evening. GK's contribution was not visible when I made my last one.

Reply
  • Who classified this as a Group 1 location? For example, 'examination or treatment room' is listed in Table A710, but that is a "list of examples' and the text of A710 says 'Regulation 710.3 cannot be satisfied by using this table alone'.

    Specifically, Regulation 710.3 says that medical staff should provide an input, so to assist in classifying the locations ... there are further details in the HTMs as to how the classification is assigned.

    Graham, I do not disagree with anything which you have written, but to my mind, examination and treatment are very different.

    Classically, a diagnosis requires: history, examination, and (sometimes) investigations. Rather like an EICR: any problems?; visual examination, tug-test, etc.; and application of MFT. It could be done in an igloo.

    Treatment is likely to involve something electrical, e.g. application of heat.

    As for medical input, I assume that you are referring to an Electrical Safety Group. However, the medics' contribution seems to be limited to saying what will be done using what equipment. If the engineers say that is the use of an applied part, it becomes difficult to assign Group 0.

    BTW, I think that the forum is being a bit flaky this evening. GK's contribution was not visible when I made my last one.

Children
  • Graham, I do not disagree with anything which you have written, but to my mind, examination and treatment are very different.

    That, then, is a comment on BS 7671 (Table A710), and IEC 60364-7-710 (Table A.710.1) ... but they are, after all, only lists of examples (well, prety much the same list of examples).

    As for medical input, I assume that you are referring to an Electrical Safety Group. However, the medics' contribution seems to be limited to saying what will be done using what equipment.

    Generally, yes ... and I agree this is not always straightforward ... but I still don't think it's down to the 'designer' on their own, with zero input from the Client.

    BTW, I think that the forum is being a bit flaky this evening. GK's contribution was not visible when I made my last one.

    Agreed