breff Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 If this law applies to wiring (even if 12v) does that mean that there are no regulations for diy wireless???? The opinions I express are mine and are usually correct! (Except when I'm wrong)(which I'm not) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest anguscanplay Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 If this law applies to wiring (even if 12v) does that mean that there are no regulations for diy wireless???? LOL - theres always one isnt there, as long as its not screwed to the structure anywhere and plugged in then I would say PP doesnt apply other bits do though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topalarms Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 have you not bothered to read any of the previous posts in this thread? EN/PD6662 is the only way practical way to comply with the requirments for wiring contained within the building regs IE A LAW ( or are you another one thinks 12v dc isn`t wiring?) and the said requirments for wiring regs apply equally to a person installing for gain or a so called DIY`er.I believe the electricity at work act carries some clout too You really have some funny ideas - makes good forum fodder though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arfur mo Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 to be going on with http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/uploads/b...d_Bldg_Regs.pdf its about page 30 hi Angus, i'm trying to work with you here - honest, so be patient . Page 30 refers to Part P, from what i've read elsewhere and outside of this forum, the term 'extra low voltage equipment' is in reference to kit that was traditionally run on 240 volts, but now replaced with 12 volts such as spots, which although low voltage and reducing risk of fatal shock, draw very high currents posin the risk of fire from shorted cables or heat from the bulbs so wiring schemes have to cope with that element. but i cant find anything that 'iron clad' incorporates intruder, telephony or any other equipment running on both low voltage and low current. it would apply i'd assume, if anyone was to fit the main panel in the bathroom but we can always quote the dafter exceptions. the panels instructions invariably state where and where not to install it i.e. damp or moist environments, direct sunlight etc. slight aside on safety, you will see 'may contain nuts' on the side of bag of kp peanuts, but never seen 'may contain screws' on the side of any terminal block. regs alan If you think education is difficult, try being stupid!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest anguscanplay Posted January 30, 2008 Share Posted January 30, 2008 hi Angus,i'm trying to work with you here - honest, so be patient . Page 30 refers to Part P, from what i've read elsewhere and outside of this forum, the term 'extra low voltage equipment' is in reference to kit that was traditionally run on 240 volts, but now replaced with 12 volts such as spots, which although low voltage and reducing risk of fatal shock, draw very high currents posin the risk of fire from shorted cables or heat from the bulbs so wiring schemes have to cope with that element. but i cant find anything that 'iron clad' incorporates intruder, telephony or any other equipment running on both low voltage and low current. regs alan you didn`t actually read it did you ? PAGE 1 - 3RD LINE UP FROM THE BOTTOM "not exceeding ...............in relation to direct current 120V..........." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arfur mo Posted January 30, 2008 Share Posted January 30, 2008 you didn`t actually read it did you ? PAGE 1 - 3RD LINE UP FROM THE BOTTOM"not exceeding ...............in relation to direct current 120V..........." hi Angus, i was 'totally beat' last night having got in 21:30 over that G490 niggle. so i only read page 30 as you suggested. had a quick read so ok work with me for a moment, i'm not trying to side track or wriggle here, just to demonstrate the basis of my interpretation on this. when i wanted an exemption certificate for working on sites the tax man said 'no' as my trade was not part of the 'construction industry' although acknowledged as often carried out on construction sites. he went on to qualified this view my works were not needed for the basis of a building to be assembled, errected and to function. obviously a building needs plummers, carpenters, bricklayers etc. as well as intruder alarms, that also included telephones, networking even installing security lighting in their definition. he accepted what building can operate without phones would be few, it was not vital, and i still have the basic letter somewhere. ok, that was back 1988 (i think), but if that ruling on the boundaries holds true outside of the tax mans remit, our works imo could strongly be argued as 'not part of the construction'. The Construction Industry is the term used in that document to designate it's 'authoritative borders' for want of a better term. regs alan If you think education is difficult, try being stupid!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amateurandy Posted January 30, 2008 Share Posted January 30, 2008 So, in summary, despite Angus' best efforts to try and find a reason why various standards that apply to Professional alarm installers should also apply to us DIY-ers, they just don't. That's not to say they wouldn't help us do the job better and comply to other things (already mentioned) that we must do, but they aren't mandatory. (takes me back to the Part P debate a while back - I've still got a full copy of Part P in PDF format on my desktop!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arfur mo Posted January 30, 2008 Share Posted January 30, 2008 So, in summary, despite Angus' best efforts to try and find a reason why various standards that apply to Professional alarm installers should also apply to us DIY-ers, they just don't.That's not to say they wouldn't help us do the job better and comply to other things (already mentioned) that we must do, but they aren't mandatory. (takes me back to the Part P debate a while back - I've still got a full copy of Part P in PDF format on my desktop!) , angus is right to flag his concerns based on his strongly held interpretation, i wonder if anyone with the proven 'clought' and the appropriate knowledge will comment, or perhaps someone will run the stoty by their NSI/SSAIB rep? it's an interesting debate imo, especially as for a change i'm not out to blow angus right out of the water (well lets face it, been there done that got the tea shirt/s x NNNN (lost count) ). seriously though, the proper interpretation of it and if it actually applies to trade and diy or just trade or not at all is well worth exploring fully. if i'm wrong (who said that?) i will not be alone, and such an 'error' could be expensive. regs alan If you think education is difficult, try being stupid!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IPAlarms Posted January 30, 2008 Share Posted January 30, 2008 So, in summary, despite Angus' best efforts to try and find a reason why various standards that apply to Professional alarm installers should also apply to us DIY-ers, they just don't. Totally agree People will do whatever they want within their own home - regulations or not. Free Alarm Monitoring over the Internet from IP Alarms Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arfur mo Posted January 30, 2008 Share Posted January 30, 2008 Totally agree People will do whatever they want within their own home - regulations or not. Hi VM, we are not really disputing that, what we are defining is it actually 'illegal' in some way to do so, if so how? Angus beleives there is legislation that could be used, that implies a liability to be fined by the BCO (if not jailed as a criminal by the 'old bill' ). regs alan If you think education is difficult, try being stupid!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.