Thread: 15amp welders on 10amp circuits

Why not? I can do just about anything else around the house legally (with appropriate planning permission). The only things I'm not allowed to do are electrical and plumbing. Maybe I'd like to run some wiring along the driveway for some lights, or add a power point under the house, or install a ceiling fan. The sort of thing that people in the UK and US take for granted. I've got plenty of 15A points, but you never know, I might need another one.

So what's your angle? Out with it

Yes but why? Is it to save a buck? Do you think with proper training you could be a safe DIYer? rhetorical - you must. On what basis do you believe that there could be a safe DIY system in Australia?
Must I have an angle?

Cheers
Michael

Not to save a buck, no. I have a mate who does it at mate's rates anyway.

I like to do things myself. Otherwise I would have paid a builder to build the house and be done with it. Owner building is (or can be) enjoyable.

I think the system they have in the UK allows a home owner to do things like swap out existing points, add new ones, upgrade lighting etc without any regulation. But if you want to string a new circuit or wire up your new house, it has to be notified and inspected. I don't see anything wrong with that approach.

The point has been well made that people DIY anyway, despite the legislation, and if it was legal and information was widely available and there was actually encouragement to do it properly, rather than "you're not allowed to do it", then DIY at some level might work.

Must you have an angle? People usually do

[quote=silentC;1239142][QUOTE]

Your entry into this debate was to suggest that the standard should not be assumed to be all about the safety and suitability of the product or service - that there are often other factors involved which may be introduced, or left in place, through complacency or vested interests. Nobody is disputing that.

Glory be - they see the light at last!.

However you haven't given us any grounds to suggest that the particular part of the wiring standard that pertains to 15amp GPOs is at issue in that regard.

Nope - I was not in the room at the itme, nor am I an electrical safety expert or a building safety statistician. But other countries don't take the same stance, and we can assume that the UK and NZ electrical regulation bodies, and others, are not run by idiots.

What I'd like to know is how you suggest people should now proceed, given your revelation? Should we disregard every standard, on the grounds that at least two of them have, in your opinion, invalid sections which are there for some ulterior motive? Where would we be then?

Subtlety and nuance are not your strong point, but you do like the rhetorical.

For the third time, I repeat that most regulations (including legislation and standards) are perfectly justified and correct. At the edges, marginal decisions (in simple terms for you - six of one, half dozen of the other) can be swayed in favor of any particular stakeholder.

Given the rest of the world goes the other way on the DIY wiring of points, I suggest this might be the case here. Or is that too complex for you?

In answer to your rhetorical question, we would be going to hell in a hand-basket if people disregarded every standard.

Not that I have suggested that.

I

t seems to me that, as a professional lobbyist, your work would involve detecting an error or flaw in the standard and then setting about having it rectified, presumably to improve the standard. I'm assuming that means that you see value in having standards - or maybe manipulating them in favour of your or your client's purposes is your aim. In which case I'd say that you are no better than the people you accuse

I am no better than the people whose work I described.

I would never "accuse" them because lobbying is perfectly legitimate activity, not just legally allowed. The involvement of industry and other stakeholders often adds a great deal, and normally avoids completely undeliverable regs.

I think I made the point a couple of times in previous posts.

As for the rest, all I'm doing is responding to your comment that "the standard we have been discussing ... has financially benefited the electrical trades, by removing competition from DIYers". The standard has done no such thing. The legislation has done that. We could have the standard without the bit of the legislation that requires a license. You could make it legal for a home owner to do his own wiring, so long as it complies with the standard. The standard would not have to change to support it

.

Sure, I take your point. Swap the word "standard" for the word "legislation" - my point still stands.

By the way, I had always assumed you knew how the hierachy of regulation works (first legislation, which grants the power to make and enforce regs, then standards that are technical descriptions of how/when/what). The further down the chain, the more techically detailed the document. The higher up, the more about principles and responsibilities. The standards and regs are empowered by the legislation, and the legislation is given greater weight and importance. Sorry.

Originally Posted by JillB

hi RustyArc, have a look at my post no 58 on this thread where I explained exactly what you want to know

Ahh, cheers for that. I think I must have ignored it because the argument was completely fallacious - you suggested that the wiring in a 10A GPO circuit is rated to only handle 10A - that's wrong.

A 10A GPO circuit is typically protected by a 16A breaker. The breaker's role is to protect the cable from excessive heating and/or failure, hence the cable must be able to carry a current up to 16A safely.

I made this exact point at post #9 in this thread - I also conceded that the weak link was in the 10A socket. My argments since then have revolved around whether a 10A socket does indeed have an inferior current-carrying ability compared to a 15A socket.

Subtlety and nuance are not your strong point

There's absolutely no need for the condescending attitude. Are you capable of making your point without offering up insult?

Nope - I was not in the room at the itme, nor am I an electrical safety expert or a building safety statistician. But other countries don't take the same stance, and we can assume that the UK and NZ electrical regulation bodies, and others, are not run by idiots.

You are still confusing the wiring standard with the legislation. Wiring in Australia and NZ is covered by the same standard: AS/NZS 3000.

I really don't think I am the person who has trouble with nuance.

Originally Posted by silentC

I think the system they have in the UK allows a home owner to do things like swap out existing points, add new ones, upgrade lighting etc without any regulation. But if you want to string a new circuit or wire up your new house, it has to be notified and inspected. I don't see anything wrong with that approach.

Must you have an angle? People usually do

But on what basis do you hold up the British system a model for Australia? Do you have any evidence that the British system is safe?

Hmmm angle, I suppose if I have to think of my angle it would be either, that I want the information from a person who's opinion I highly regard or I like to ask questions, I have two ears but only one mouth so I listen twice as much as I talk or I just wanted to get in on the banter. You choose, but perhaps it is none of those.

Cheers
Michael

I only have a cursory understanding of the UK system so I can't hold it up as a model for anything really, other than as an alternative system that people frequently put forward as being, in their opinion, better than ours. So I'm not about to say that it is safe but as an example of a system that allows DIY and, it would seem, has the approval of the British government, who am I to question it?

If I have any reservations about it, it is that there are people around who I would not trust to change a light bulb, but we let the same people breed and drive cars, and some of them are probably electricians, so what can you say? The oft quoted phrase "you cannot legislate against stupidity".

In terms of evidence, you don't really need any to hold an opinion but you do if you're making an assertion.

People who try to infer that one example of a class of things shares certain properties with other examples of the class are attempting proof by example, which is a logical fallacy.

Originally Posted by silentC

I only have a cursory understanding of the UK system so I can't hold it up as a model for anything really, other than as an alternative system that people frequently put forward as being, in their opinion, better than ours. So I'm not about to say that it is safe but as an example of a system that allows DIY and, it would seem, has the approval of the British government, who am I to question it?

If I have any reservations about it, it is that there are people around who I would not trust to change a light bulb, but we let the same people breed and drive cars, and some of them are probably electricians, so what can you say? The oft quoted phrase "you cannot legislate against stupidity".

In terms of evidence, you don't really need any to hold an opinion but you do if you're making an assertion.

People who try to infer that one example of a class of things shares certain properties with other examples of the class are attempting proof by example, which is a logical fallacy.

It's just my opinion but anything with the approval of government should be questioned in detail and placed under close scrutiny, otherwise we end up with, for example, people being fried in roof spaces when installing insulation in a government scheme. And I hate to use that example lest you infer that I am linking it because of the electrical aspect.
Your last statement about classes and logic - Could you spell it out just what you mean in relation to this thread? I hate to be obtuse, it's just I don't see the specific examples in this thread, could you give specific examples?. In fact I wonder how those things got into classes if it were not by sharing certain properties with other members of the class.

Cheers
Michael

Originally Posted by silentC

The only things I'm not allowed to do are electrical and plumbing.

Plumbing is only if you are connected to mains water/sewerage....

You can do what you like if you are not connected to those things....

Originally Posted by mic-d

Why would you like to do your own wiring?
Cheers
Michael

You can do a better neater job yourself....Bit like building your own house.... Seen too many qualified carpenters in love with their nail gun...After all they don;t have to live in the house they build for you.... If they leave a 20mm gap somewhere, they never have to see it again...

It's just my opinion but anything with the approval of government should be questioned in detail and placed under close scrutiny

Not saying that it shouldn't be questioned, just that I'm not qualified to question it. It's existence and the apparent lack of public outcry suggests it works for them. Maybe there is a lobby over there to have it rescinded. I don't know. I'm not an advocate for change, I just have a personal motive for it.

Your last statement about classes and logic - Could you spell it out just what you mean in relation to this thread?

Regarding the last bit: When someone suggests that a thing should not be done because it is prohibited by the standard and then another person suggests that the prohibition is not necessarily valid because other standards they know of contain prohibitions or directives that, they say, have a political source, this is proof by example. A thing is true for one standard so it might be for another. There is absolutely no basis for making that claim unless you can point to an aspect of the directive which shows evidence of being political.

All standards are examples of a class called "standard". They share the property of being descriptions of how a product or service should be provided. Some standards are voluntary, some are enforced by legislation. That is another property but it is not shared equally. Apparently some standards also have the property of being politically interfered with (around the margins). That is a property of the example, not of the class.

Plumbing is only if you are connected to mains water/sewerage....

Not sure about that. We are connected to neither, but as it happens my old man is a licensed plumber and he did all the work here. We were required to have the plumbing inspected before the trenches were filled in. The Home Building Act says that plumbing work must be performed by a licensed contractor (and there is no proviso regarding mains connection) but that refers to the work being done by a third party. Last time I looked I couldn't find anything that prohibits you from doing your own plumbing, so I guess you may be right.

Originally Posted by silentC

There's absolutely no need for the condescending attitude. Are you capable of making your point without offering up insult?


You are still confusing the wiring standard with the legislation. Wiring in Australia and NZ is covered by the same standard: AS/NZS 3000.

I really don't think I am the person who has trouble with nuance.

Silent C

I tried very hard to keep this debate civil and respectful (as I always do), but if people (e.g you and VernonV) treat my opinions with condescention, I will reply in kind.

I did not insult you (as you did to someone else with "armchair expert with a pimply bum").

I have granted your point that the standard is different to the legislation and that its the Australian legislation that bans DIY wiring, but you cannot see my point that legislation, plus regs, plus wiring standards form a framework of regulation, and it is irrelevent in practice whether the prohibition on DIY wiring is contained in the legislation, or the regs or the technical standards.

Hypothetically speaking, the joint NZ/Aus wiring standard could have an additional clause that all work under that standard in Australia has to be done by a properly qualified person. Clearly, that is not the case and it is silent on the qualifications required.

This is all getting very pedantic.