Online assistance for electrical trade people Login  |  Register  |   Forgot Password
Assistance for electrical trade people
 

 

 

 


Click here to send Ron a pdf document for publication on this Topic

Documents must be less than 200k in pdf format

Posted By Topic: New AS/NZS 60079.14 and 17: 2017

Albajohn
Jan 18 2018 06:14

The new AS/NZS 60079.14 and 17: 2017 standards have arrived at last even though they will not be required to be used until cited in the ESR,s or the NZ Gazette.

I am very disappointed in these new standards as the variations to the IEC edition are at the back on this standard under APPENDIX ZZ and this makes for harder interpretation as you are continually jumping from one section of the standard to another where clarification is sought.

This was not the case under the previous AS/NZS 60079.14 and 17: 2009 where any variation to the IEC edition was directly under the clause in question which made it much easier to understand the changes needed in the inspection.

To make thing ever harder Standards NZ have not left any room under the clauses that need to be updated to allow you to write the amendment in yourself even though they mention in APPENDIX ZZ that you have to change the mentioned clause by adding the quoted text.

Why did Standards NZ do this ?? Is it just laziness on their part ?? Why change the system from the previous standards that worked well ???




   

pluto
Jan 18 2018 06:39

I don't blame Standards NZ for all of the re-arrangement on the presentation mehtod of AU and /or NZ variations to a IEC standard.

Most of the present mess was inspired in Standards Australia and the AS/NZS 60079 series is NOT the only standards being affected.

For those who use electronic copies of standards, in my view this policy is a backward step.

For those who use a hard copy of the standard, gluing in a slip of paper with the amendment makes sure that the amendment or variation is not overlooked.

There are a number of other persons objecting to the current mess of the publishing arrangement or variations and AU/NZ amendments of a standard IEC document closer to the Standards publishing area, so you are not alone.

Hopefully this mess can be fixed before the present poblication policy goes too far.

BTW write to Standards NZ on your dislike of the new system using the statement in every standard inside the front cover for "Keeping Standards up to date". Unless many advise their displeasure of this new policy it will not be changed.
   

AlecK
Jan 18 2018 08:52

Agree the concept of separating the AS/NZS changes into an appendix is very awkward & impractical.
Certainly made it difficult - bordering on impossible - to comment on the draft; as only the changes were issued for Public Comment and had to refer to an IEC edition we didn't have access to to get the context.
Difficult to believe the Committee wanted this format.
Time for SA & SNZ to realise that the purpose of Standards is to be used; so making them difficult to use - apparently in the interests of easier editing / publication - is just plain wrong.
   

AngryClient
Jan 18 2018 09:03

Yeah it barks like a dog. Very poor.

In this day and age the number of people using hard copies of standards is surely a minimum, apart from the obvious fact that carrying all that paper around is impractical, there are times when reference is needed and the hard copies are not on hand.


   

AlecK
Jan 18 2018 11:05

With a soft-copy, there's no reason they couldn't include internal two-way hyperlinks between the AS/NZS changes and the clauses being changed.
Could be done for any internal cross-reference.
Wouldn't help for hard copy though.
And having the changes located adjacent to what's being changed is better.
   

AngryClient
Feb 13 2018 18:02

Does the same apply to these as per the "updated 3000 regs" conversation in respect of best practise guideline?
   

pluto
Feb 13 2018 19:32

AngryClient Feb 13 2018 18:02

Your comment
Does the same apply to these as per the "updated 3000 regs" conversation in respect of best practise guideline?

My comment

AS/NZS 3000:2018 will not use the policy adopted for directly adopted IEC standards, as it is a AS/NZS joint standard and the revised edition is the first issue of a new edition.

There are limited changes in the new edition and any part that has had major changes from the AS/NZS 3000"2007 +A1 and A2 edition will a have a * mark in the margin.


Please write to Standards NZ of your displeasure of the new format of AS/NZS 60079, if you all yell load enough it may be changed.
   

AngryClient
Feb 14 2018 16:21

Yeah that didn't answer the question.
   

AlecK
Feb 14 2018 17:37

Not asure exactly what question you're looking for an answer to.

I'd see the new "3000" as being relevant guidance, up until it's cited.
After that, assuming it gets cited as mandatory, it will be minimum acceptable practice.
Same applies to the new "60079" Standards, and any others published but not yet cited.


NONE of them can be called "best" practice; but certainly "acceptable" practice.

----------------
If you're asking about the format of the New "3000", while it is largely based on relevant IEC Standards it isn't derived directly from them. It's not a direct adoption (unchanged), and it isn't a direct adoption with changes inserted / in the back.
It's a standalone document.
So it won't have the problems that "60079.14" & "60079.17" are going to cause.
It will be largely set up like the current edition.

Can't say (yet) whether the publishing format will be A4, A5, ring-binder, spiral-bound, or hard-bound; etc

   

AngryClient
Feb 14 2018 18:00

"Same applies to the new "60079" Standards, and any others published but not yet cited."

Ah that's what I was looking for. Thanks AK.
Just having an issue with this so called acceptable practise versus that which has a legal pathway. (in case law particularly)
   

AngryClient
Feb 14 2018 18:04

Yeah not fussed about format issues, although as stated above the IEC MOD versions are a big hairy smelly mud covered dog.

Pluto - is there an organisation that will complain on my electrical workers behalf?

   

AngryClient
Feb 14 2018 18:11

"as being ***relevant guidance***, up until it's cited."

Sorry this above is what we are struggling with. What does that even mean in relation to a formally cited version preceding it?
   

AlecK
Feb 14 2018 18:15

Caveat to above:

doesn't happen often because mostly each amendment / new edition is a step up from previous. But it can happen that a later document sets a lower minimum acceptable practice.
So while following latest will mostly keep you on the right side of things, always pays to check that it doesn't lead you into non-compliance with a clause of the older doc that's cited as mandatory.
   

pluto
Feb 14 2018 20:45

AngryClient Feb 14 2018 18:04

Your comment (part only)
Pluto - is there an organisation that will complain on my electrical workers behalf?

My cooment

In evety published dtandard, usually inside the front cover, is paragraph called "Keeping Standards Up to date" and this directs you to the contact address to use. If invites you as the Standards end users to make comment as you see fit. Usually best if the comment given is constructive and it is helpful to make a practical solution if you have one.

If you are in NZ use the Standards NZ address. If serves no useful purpose to send NZ comments to Standrards Australia.