On 25/04/17 21:45, ARW wrote:

I have said it before, and I'll say it again.

Bathroom electrics will one day need supplementary bonding fitting again.

RCDs are not good enough.

It's worth noting (from the Red Book, I've mislaid my green):

701.415.2

"
....
Supplementary equipotential bonding may be installed outside or inside a
room containing a bath or a shower, preferably close to the point of
entry of extraneous conductive parts into such rooms."

(I'd be grateful to know if that wording remains in the latest 17th?)


....So you don't have to make a mess of a tiled room and have clamps on
show everywhere to meet SB.



I've been thinking about your argument Adam, and it is persuasive. And I
would not be surprised either if they revise it - maybe in 10 years when
a couple of people who never test their RCDs have got a belt.


I am going to build SB into my shower room (we're laying the floor
screed for that in 2 weeks) - that's really trivial as the shaver socket
and pipes all pass through to or back onto the lobby cupboard so the
clamps can go there.


I am tempted, at some point to add SB back to the main bathroom at some
point. The 17th exemption seemed like a good idea at the time, but...

Only problem there is the SB runs are tortuous. Pipes exit under the
stairs 1m from bathroom - that's OK, convenient and fairly obvious
clamping point. But to get to shaver socket and bit of pipe to high
level loo cistern (if that's in the zones, have to check) require going
up through the ceiling and some 5-7 metres around. It would work and I
can see nothing in the regs that precludes this - it just won't be
terribly obvious what's going on to anyone else.


What's your opinion on that (long SB wire routing)?

Cheers,

Tim