IET
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: 18th Edition for in progress jobs
Topic Summary: Should all live design jobs comply?
Created On: 08 January 2019 10:51 AM
Status: Read Only
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch
Search Topic Search Topic
Topic Tools Topic Tools
View similar topics View similar topics
View topic in raw text format. Print this topic.
 08 January 2019 10:51 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



GR1981

Posts: 47
Joined: 29 February 2016

ok I suspect I may be leaving myself open to a bit of abuse here, but I have a query regarding design jobs in progress.

Having done some research, keep finding the following quoted:

"The Regulations apply to the design, erection and verification of electrical installations, also additions and alterations to existing installations."

Does this mean that any job that was starting to be designed back in November will now have to be brought up to snuff with the 18th edition?
 08 January 2019 11:08 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



mapj1

Posts: 12039
Joined: 22 July 2004

I'd hope that the areas where the regs differ are not so great that it suddenly becomes dangerous.
Firstly if the work is now in progress and there was a 'design freeze' in November, then it is reasonble to say finish building it to the regs that were in force when the paper design was frozen.
This is common on large building projects, where building regs change etc, any change after the ground is dug, is optional. (which usually means only the bits that make it easier to build are updated...)

But if you are coming to a design that was completed and comissioned last year, and are now asked to extend it, then this is new works, and design phase for the new bit is right now, and the new rules would apply.

If the design phase is so long that it is still in progress, and the first reel of cable is yet to be ordered, then you could probably argue it either way - there may be a contractual clause to build "to the latest edition", or equally " to the 17th edition" that fixes it, but often not.

-------------------------
regards Mike
 08 January 2019 11:27 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



AJJewsbury

Posts: 17795
Joined: 13 August 2003

Does this mean that any job that was starting to be designed back in November will now have to be brought up to snuff with the 18th edition?

No - an installation naturally has to be installed & tested according to its design, so it's the date of the design that counts.

As BS 7671 itself puts it (in the introduction on page 4) "Installations designed after 31st December 2018 are to comply with BS 7671:2018."

No problem if you wanted to comply with the 18th earlier though (it's just not a requirement).

- Andy.
 08 January 2019 11:13 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



gkenyon

Posts: 5354
Joined: 06 May 2002

Originally posted by: GR1981

ok I suspect I may be leaving myself open to a bit of abuse here, but I have a query regarding design jobs in progress.



Having done some research, keep finding the following quoted:



"The Regulations apply to the design, erection and verification of electrical installations, also additions and alterations to existing installations."



Does this mean that any job that was starting to be designed back in November will now have to be brought up to snuff with the 18th edition?
According to the BSI web-site, BS 7671:2008+A3:2015 was listed as withdrawn on 29 June 2018.

-------------------------
EUR ING Graham Kenyon CEng MIET TechIOSH
G Kenyon Technology Ltd

Web-Site: www.gkenyontech.com
 09 January 2019 08:33 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



GR1981

Posts: 47
Joined: 29 February 2016

Thanks for your all your responses.

Originally posted by: mapj1
I'd hope that the areas where the regs differ are not so great that it suddenly becomes dangerous.


Fair point. for the porjects in question, only minor tweeks are required to bring it in line with the changes. Granted its going to bump up the cost of the install, but we'll warn the client ahead of it going to tender.


thanks again guys!
 09 January 2019 10:48 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



mapj1

Posts: 12039
Joined: 22 July 2004

According to the BSI web-site, BS 7671:2008+A3:2015 was listed as withdrawn on 29 June 2018.

True, but even a 6 month change over period is not going to suit projects that span many months or even years. As examples I understand that both Heathrow terminal 4 and the London Olympics constructions (or at least parts of them) were ' design frozen' to a previous issue of the regs, as in both cases the project and construction straddled the 16th edn/17th edn transition, so the process has a good precendent. Just be clear who agrees to do what and when.

-------------------------
regards Mike
 09 January 2019 12:21 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



euringharris

Posts: 42
Joined: 09 May 2002

Mike

You are right- regardless of the start of design which is often a bit blurred on large projects (I mean the real start for those who can categorically say design stage XX started XXXX).

Despite the wording of BS 7671 which coves all types and sizes of installations, there is a logical case for designing a scheme to the latest requirements.

First of all it is usually an improvement or clarification of former requirements, secondly if you start in the transition period and are going to take 18 months to 2 years to complete the design it is likely regardless of a phased start that the install will be completed within 2 years of design completion. so in effect you could start on A3 of the 17th and complete the works when everyone is talking about A1 of the 18th.

Everyone has forgotten what was required, certification has moved on and it its a brand new job left in a moment of time.

However, there are cost implications and on large scale projects there a re mechanisms for changes over time eg costs, legal requirements, VAT etc so it is not unreasonable to assume that a mechanism may be in place for change (where impact is minimal) ie when the design hasn't properly started.

Just a thought

Paul
 09 January 2019 12:33 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



gkenyon

Posts: 5354
Joined: 06 May 2002

Originally posted by: mapj1

According to the BSI web-site, BS 7671:2008+A3:2015 was listed as withdrawn on 29 June 2018.


True, but even a 6 month change over period is not going to suit projects that span many months or even years. As examples I understand that both Heathrow terminal 4 and the London Olympics constructions (or at least parts of them) were ' design frozen' to a previous issue of the regs, as in both cases the project and construction straddled the 16th edn/17th edn transition, so the process has a good precendent. Just be clear who agrees to do what and when.
Mike, you're not wrong in terms of what's stated in the intro to the 18th Edition.

This is an example of a version of a standard that's still current, but superseded: https://shop.bsigroup.com/Prod...pid=000000000030239882

BS 7671:2008+A3:2015 went straight to "Withdrawn" on 29 June 2018, which puts a different perspective on the situation and provides a point of debate, as withdrawn standards shouldn't be used - in particular, as I've highlighted in other threads over the past few months, what should you use for Periodic Verification?

Perhaps it should have gone to "Current, Superseded" on 29 June 2018, and then "Superseded, Withdrawn" or simply "Withdrawn" on 1 January 2019? That would have made it clearer.

-------------------------
EUR ING Graham Kenyon CEng MIET TechIOSH
G Kenyon Technology Ltd

Web-Site: www.gkenyontech.com
 21 January 2019 09:37 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



burn

Posts: 328
Joined: 06 June 2003

Originally posted by: gkenyon

BS 7671:2008+A3:2015 went straight to "Withdrawn" on 29 June 2018, which puts a different perspective on the situation and provides a point of debate, as withdrawn standards shouldn't be used - in particular, as I've highlighted in other threads over the past few months, what should you use for Periodic Verification?



Perhaps it should have gone to "Current, Superseded" on 29 June 2018, and then "Superseded, Withdrawn" or simply "Withdrawn" on 1 January 2019? That would have made it clearer.



If withdrawn standards shouldn't be used, does this mean mean a design started 18 months ago, that is still not finished, must now be completed to the 18th edition?


It is a subject still being argued between contractors and consultants. Does anyone know where I can find a definative answer in any relevant documents or standards to settle it?

burn
 21 January 2019 10:36 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



chrispearson

Posts: 1095
Joined: 15 February 2018

Originally posted by: burn

If withdrawn standards shouldn't be used, does this mean mean a design started 18 months ago, that is still not finished, must now be completed to the 18th edition?


It should all be in the contract.

It would be absurd to have to upgrade work, which includes design work, because of a change in BS 7671 which could not have been known at the time the contract was agreed.
 21 January 2019 02:03 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



gkenyon

Posts: 5354
Joined: 06 May 2002

Originally posted by: burn

Originally posted by: gkenyon



BS 7671:2008+A3:2015 went straight to "Withdrawn" on 29 June 2018, which puts a different perspective on the situation and provides a point of debate, as withdrawn standards shouldn't be used - in particular, as I've highlighted in other threads over the past few months, what should you use for Periodic Verification?







Perhaps it should have gone to "Current, Superseded" on 29 June 2018, and then "Superseded, Withdrawn" or simply "Withdrawn" on 1 January 2019? That would have made it clearer.






If withdrawn standards shouldn't be used, does this mean mean a design started 18 months ago, that is still not finished, must now be completed to the 18th edition?





It is a subject still being argued between contractors and consultants. Does anyone know where I can find a definative answer in any relevant documents or standards to settle it?



burn
No, but potentially there's an argument to state that one started in August 2018 should have done ... regardless of whether the completion date is before 31 December 2018 ...

-------------------------
EUR ING Graham Kenyon CEng MIET TechIOSH
G Kenyon Technology Ltd

Web-Site: www.gkenyontech.com
 21 January 2019 02:04 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



gkenyon

Posts: 5354
Joined: 06 May 2002

Originally posted by: chrispearson

Originally posted by: burn



If withdrawn standards shouldn't be used, does this mean mean a design started 18 months ago, that is still not finished, must now be completed to the 18th edition?




It should all be in the contract.



It would be absurd to have to upgrade work, which includes design work, because of a change in BS 7671 which could not have been known at the time the contract was agreed.
Agreed - and the process for dealing with variations etc. should also be in the contract.

-------------------------
EUR ING Graham Kenyon CEng MIET TechIOSH
G Kenyon Technology Ltd

Web-Site: www.gkenyontech.com
Statistics

New here?

  • To participate in discussions, please log in and introduce yourself.

See Also:



FuseTalk Standard Edition v3.2 - © 1999-2021 FuseTalk Inc. All rights reserved.

 
..