Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Admin  
#1 Posted : 14 March 2004 06:14:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Brian Moughtin I am trying to convince construction managers, for refurbishment work in our tenanted dwellings that a risk exists of electric shock from the wet plaster that is applied to newly installed wiring within the kitchen replacements we are doing. I argue that because I consider a risk exists they as contractors should address the issue. Their response is that they have never had a problem and that therefore I am wrong. I have only 20 years experience in electrical contracting but in my experience there is a very real risk but I need evidence to prove my case, can anyone help please !
Admin  
#2 Posted : 14 March 2004 12:18:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Stuart Nagle Brian. an intersting issue! How do you arrive at the findings of your assessment, and what level of risk is there? I assume, as you state you have worked in this industry for 20+ years, you have previous experience of this type of problem occuring regularly - electric shock from wet plaster that is - and you need to guard/prevent further occurrences of this, or are you assuming that wet plaster will contact live electrical terminals within boxes in walls ect or in junctions ect on cabling runs in truncking set in walls ect? I personally have never heard of this type of incident, and wonder if you are being a little exuberant in your assessment of risk, or if there is a precedent for this? Are there any method statements concerning the precautions to be followed, i.e. preventing contact with wet materials and live electrical circuits ect already available in the building trade, e.g the problem is known and accounted for? In the past I have observed refurbs being carried out with live electrical systems turned off and generators used to supply lighting, but I think this was more a case of the electrical supply not being finnished/complete rather than risks from the live supply and wet materials... I too would be interested to hear the comments of colleagues from the building and electrical supply area on this question... Stuart
Admin  
#3 Posted : 14 March 2004 13:23:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Brian Moughtin Stuart In the Electricity At Work Regulations I believe the wording is "Prevent so far as reasonably Practical, Danger" So if I see a risk I seek to prevent it. Similarly the work we do does fall under CDM. My view is obviously going to be more focussed as Electricity is generally all I deal with so yes I am " a bit keen " ! In my last job in a Design Consultancy I heard of an incident where an elderly tenant had her kitchen replaced and received a shock from recently done plastering as she used the wall for support when answering the door, the plaster was live due to a fault caused by a damaged cable under the plaster most commonly caused by poor installation work ie labourer or apprentice is told to install capping over the cables but the clout nail just slightly breaks the insulation, and the wet plaster is enough to create the shock hazard. The installation must be tested before being energised but this can be before plastering and in any case a slight damage to the insulation would not be detected. Another aspect is that if the installation is tested prior to plastering, the flush socket boxes may not be installed as they are intended in the finished job ie the IP rating would be higher when the plastering is finished, I have personally seen an installation where a cable entered a flush socket box from the top, and due to the plastering not being finished a tenant had used the gap between the cable and box as a pen holder ! So another similarly small item could be inserted. I realise the likelyhood may be small but the severity is potentially high and with a bit of thought the contractors will be able to devise a system that addresses the issue. I'm sure your aware with electricity it's not just the initial shock but other injuries due to falling caused by the shock etc. Thanks for the reply hope theres plenty more !
Admin  
#4 Posted : 14 March 2004 13:37:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Mike Miller I work for a local authority as a building inspector. As a precaution I cap off gas at the meter and isolate electrical supply prior to commencing refurbishment work to empty properties. In occupied dwellings I isolate the ground floor electrics at the box if we are fitting kitchens. I agree with you that the likelyhood is very small but the potential for harm is very high Mike
Admin  
#5 Posted : 14 March 2004 13:50:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Stuart Nagle Thank you for answering my question. I did realise the 'danger' but wondered what the modus operandi was for the work, which you have now exemplified. In looking at the responses, it occurs to me that the main risk is not the wet plaster, but the quality of the electrical installation. It was my understanding that under 16th edition, all new installations had to be enclosed in ducting/boxes ect and that wires should not be laid 'bare' into walls or surfaces that would be rendered/plastered ect. In this case, if the work is undertaken to the standards required and tested to the standards required, should this not remove most of the risks, and is it an additional risk that could be overcome, by for example the use of dry products, such as plasterboard etc in vulnerable areas, or if wet materials need to be used, some degree of either exclusion or drying time before access. I do realise we live in the real world and that wet trades and other trades must get the job done efficiently in respect of time ect, but as I mentioned previously, and as the Local Authority referred to, should isolation and an alternative source of power be the method of prevention, rather than leaving supplies live? and could then alternative materials be used where appropriate, such as plasterboard? Are these options and/or acceptable Brian? Regards... Stuart
Admin  
#6 Posted : 14 March 2004 14:54:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Brian Moughtin Mike Isolation is the sort of thing we do normally i.e. make the kitchen a 6 week no go area and provide temporary cooking facilities etc. but in this project the job is Design and Build and through construction partners who don't have the same priorities, and due to the procurement method we can't impose the restrictions we would usually have. Your response does confirm that our usual method is what others do, all I need is validation of why and I've cracked it! Stuart I agree the workmanship is the root cause, the cables are protected by pvc capping but this is intended only to provide protection against the plasterers float cutting into the cable, the clout nail's that are used to fix the capping in place over the cable can be difficult to use and of course you can't see where the cable is beneath the capping and once the nails are driven in you can't tell if you've just nicked the cable (different if you drive the nail straight into the cable)
Admin  
#7 Posted : 15 March 2004 11:05:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Ian Lynch I find your arguement a little strange Your concern is that electrical shock could be recived from fresh plaster over electrical cable is this correct? I fail to see how this is possible except in the case where there is a problem with the wiring. The wiring should be in plastic ducts and all connections sealed Correct? If this is correct how then is it possible to get a shock and if it is possible I would think there is a bigger issue here Considering the work is been carried out in a kitchen where there is considerable coninsation will this mean that all walls with condinsation will pose a risk to shock?
Admin  
#8 Posted : 15 March 2004 11:54:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Robert Dunlop It's simple really, I think it's about communication. Isolate , lock off, tell the other trades and check / test the circuit(s) when they are finished. It's showing a duty of care. Surely no-one can argue with that.
Admin  
#9 Posted : 15 March 2004 18:00:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Brian Moughtin Ian Yes, I have heard of one of our tenants receiving a shock from fresh plaster I have heard of this elsewhere in past jobs but never had to justify myself, I'm used to giving a instruction and people doing, in this case people question my judgement and it appears the only way I'm going to be able to prove it is by getting my wellies and rubber gloves on hitting a nail into cable plastering the wall and daring the management to stand on an earthed metal plate and put their fingers into the plaster, Problem solved ! Re condensation, yes I have heard of this causing a shock but we were talking a small kitchen closed windows due to breathing problems extract fan not working, and cooker dryer etc all going at the same time. Equipment has to be selected according to the environment its going to be used in, ie lights in a swimming pool are ok!
Users browsing this topic
Guest
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.