Can a power point go in the corner where the blue cross is?
Sink zones
Sink zones
Are these corners supposed to be a radius like the bath and shower zones? Or a straight line?
Can a power point go in the corner where the blue cross is?
Can a power point go in the corner where the blue cross is?
Re: Sink zones
I believe this has come up a few times and Alec said that the pictures were incorrect. I believe it's like the usual string theory he mentions and should be rounded like you've indicated.
6.2.2.2 the actual clause that gives the measurements rather than the informative pictures to me indicates a 150mm from any point of the rim not squared off like the above picture which would infact have a larger distance on the corners.
Just obviously have to be careful with those who disagree and could report for such things, then you have to deal with whatever the EWRB deems correct which could be a gamble and go either way
6.2.2.2 the actual clause that gives the measurements rather than the informative pictures to me indicates a 150mm from any point of the rim not squared off like the above picture which would infact have a larger distance on the corners.
Just obviously have to be careful with those who disagree and could report for such things, then you have to deal with whatever the EWRB deems correct which could be a gamble and go either way
Re: Sink zones
Thanks Jamie. I couldn't find any previous threads on here...
The problem is that people think that the "vertical plane" must only be flat, as shown in the diagrams, and not radius around the corner.
Also more confusing when the bath and shower clauses actually specify radius, such as: "the vertical plane 1.2 m radius from the shower fixed plumbing...", whereas the sink clause doesn't mention radius at all.
If it was something that just needed to be updated, it doesn't seem to have any priority by the committee. In 3000:2018 incl amendments, the only change to the "other fixed water containers" clause was the size reduction. Everything else hasn't changed.
Maybe they do mean it to be square in the corner?
Which is a little silly, because if the sink was around 170mm or more off the wall, the outlet could go directly behind it anyway.
The problem is that people think that the "vertical plane" must only be flat, as shown in the diagrams, and not radius around the corner.
Also more confusing when the bath and shower clauses actually specify radius, such as: "the vertical plane 1.2 m radius from the shower fixed plumbing...", whereas the sink clause doesn't mention radius at all.
If it was something that just needed to be updated, it doesn't seem to have any priority by the committee. In 3000:2018 incl amendments, the only change to the "other fixed water containers" clause was the size reduction. Everything else hasn't changed.
Maybe they do mean it to be square in the corner?
Which is a little silly, because if the sink was around 170mm or more off the wall, the outlet could go directly behind it anyway.
Re: Sink zones
Important to remember that these Figs do not set the requirements; they only illustrate what's set in the relevant clause.
They're there to assist with understanding the rules; and we have to apply the words of the clause and not just take the Fig by itself.
That's usually - but not always - the case; sometimes Figs do set requirements.
So we need to be able to identify when they do and when they don't.
Often the Fig Title includes a word like "example" or "typical"; which makes clear that it's simply an illustration.
In this case Fig 6.10 & 6.11 are called up by clause 6.2.2.2; as "examples".
Even when only an example, a Fig should be absolutely correct.
And it's true that some of the "damp situation" Figs are not 100% correct in illustrating the relevant clauses.
The anomalies have been noted for correction in next revision.
Including an intent to include words to define 'string measurement'; which is a term used by - but not defined in - relevant IEC Standards
Correct that a "vertical plane" is not necessarily flat (ie two dimensional).
In 6.2.2.2; the limit of Z0 is set as the interior of the basin - whatever shape that may have.
Z2 inner limit is naturally identical to Z0 outer limit.
And Z2 outer limit is specified as being either 0.15 m or 0.5 m horizontally from the inner ;limit (depending on capacity of Z0)
It follows that outer limit of Z2 must be exactly parallel to inner limit, and will have a shape that's a larger version of the shape of the interior of the basin. If the interior has corners, then Z 2 will have corners. Otherwise not.
They're there to assist with understanding the rules; and we have to apply the words of the clause and not just take the Fig by itself.
That's usually - but not always - the case; sometimes Figs do set requirements.
So we need to be able to identify when they do and when they don't.
Often the Fig Title includes a word like "example" or "typical"; which makes clear that it's simply an illustration.
In this case Fig 6.10 & 6.11 are called up by clause 6.2.2.2; as "examples".
Even when only an example, a Fig should be absolutely correct.
And it's true that some of the "damp situation" Figs are not 100% correct in illustrating the relevant clauses.
The anomalies have been noted for correction in next revision.
Including an intent to include words to define 'string measurement'; which is a term used by - but not defined in - relevant IEC Standards
Correct that a "vertical plane" is not necessarily flat (ie two dimensional).
In 6.2.2.2; the limit of Z0 is set as the interior of the basin - whatever shape that may have.
Z2 inner limit is naturally identical to Z0 outer limit.
And Z2 outer limit is specified as being either 0.15 m or 0.5 m horizontally from the inner ;limit (depending on capacity of Z0)
It follows that outer limit of Z2 must be exactly parallel to inner limit, and will have a shape that's a larger version of the shape of the interior of the basin. If the interior has corners, then Z 2 will have corners. Otherwise not.
Re: Sink zones
Thanks AlecK.
Just to clarify, when you say "If the interior has corners, then Z 2 will have corners."
Do you mean if the bowl has square corners, then Z2 will have square corners?
Or you mean it will follow the string measurement and have a radius on the outside, even if the bowl has a square corner?
Just to clarify, when you say "If the interior has corners, then Z 2 will have corners."
Do you mean if the bowl has square corners, then Z2 will have square corners?
Or you mean it will follow the string measurement and have a radius on the outside, even if the bowl has a square corner?
Re: Sink zones
Good point; I got that last statement wrong. Apologies
"String" measurement applies; even though not currently referred to as such.
And if I had been thinking in terms of string measurement, instead of looking at the (incorrect) box-shape for Z2 shown in the Fig; I wouldn't have made this error.
Maintaining a distance (of length " x") from from an inner Zone will result in the outer limit
a) running parallel to straight (or curved) "sides" of the inner zone; and
b) where the inner Zone has a corner, the fixed distance will be a radius of "x" (plan view).
This applies to all corners (in plan view), regardless of whether they are part of the water container itself,
or where a Zone dimension "string" wraps around a zone-limiting obstruction.
The best of the current batch of Figs in this regard is Fig 6.14 for swimming pool; which clearly shows how "string measurement' works.
Not only from the square corners of the pool itself, but also around the end of barriers (with radius reducing at each step),
and where two barriers meet to create an inner corner.
Looking at Fig 6.10; the basin has (fairly tightly) curved 'corners'.
So the Z2 rear outer limit curves parallel to those, at 150 mm distance.
At the left rear corner, this curve starts in line with the back edge of the basins, and continues until it hits the wall behind the basins.
This curve will not have a visible "centre point", which makes it harder to draw out on a plan.
If the basin's corner curve is circular, you can calculate its center, and that will also be the centre of the Z2 outer curve.
But with more complex curves, that won't work
The key fact is that every point on the Z2 outer limit is 150 mm from inside edge of basin.
At full size; imagine using a 150 mm block of wood as a spacer for your pencil.
Assuming Z2 outer limit does hit the wall, that will create a "corner" between this curve and the (presumably straight) wall (as drawn on a plan view). For the straight-sided basins shown, this corner will be somewhere between 0 mm and 150 mm from being in line with the left-hand sedge of the basin.
Similarly there can be an un-Zoned area at the corner between the walls (right rear of right-hand basin).
And if the two basins had more than 300 mm between them, there could be an un-zoned length of wall in the middle.
The length of wall that's in zone will always? be less than the max overall dimension of the Zone
At the front, the Zone also curves around from each end on the floor; not square as shown.
There's no stated dimension between rear of basins and wall, but by eye it appears approximately the same as the stated 0.15 at the sides.
If that is the case in practice; then the wall surface may be exactly on the Zone boundary - ie not actually in the Zone.
However equipment mounted on the wall would likely protrude into the Zone.
-----------------
It's unfortunate that several of the current Figs have errors in this regard.
And that they are largely limited to standard configurations
eg the baths & showers are all shown as being against the wall;
and there are no Figs illustrating the complexities of a typical bathroom, having several sets of Zones in close proximity.
However if we apply the words of the clause; these errors become less important
It will never be possible to accurately illustrate all possible situations.
Especially for 'hand basins' which now come in a huge variety of shapes
Including some that are basically flat, so don't have any water-containing "interior" , so no Z0;
but still have a 'splash zone' around them that should be treated as Z2.
Yet some would argue that such a hand-washing facility doesn't count as a "fixed water container" at all.
"String" measurement applies; even though not currently referred to as such.
And if I had been thinking in terms of string measurement, instead of looking at the (incorrect) box-shape for Z2 shown in the Fig; I wouldn't have made this error.
Maintaining a distance (of length " x") from from an inner Zone will result in the outer limit
a) running parallel to straight (or curved) "sides" of the inner zone; and
b) where the inner Zone has a corner, the fixed distance will be a radius of "x" (plan view).
This applies to all corners (in plan view), regardless of whether they are part of the water container itself,
or where a Zone dimension "string" wraps around a zone-limiting obstruction.
The best of the current batch of Figs in this regard is Fig 6.14 for swimming pool; which clearly shows how "string measurement' works.
Not only from the square corners of the pool itself, but also around the end of barriers (with radius reducing at each step),
and where two barriers meet to create an inner corner.
Looking at Fig 6.10; the basin has (fairly tightly) curved 'corners'.
So the Z2 rear outer limit curves parallel to those, at 150 mm distance.
At the left rear corner, this curve starts in line with the back edge of the basins, and continues until it hits the wall behind the basins.
This curve will not have a visible "centre point", which makes it harder to draw out on a plan.
If the basin's corner curve is circular, you can calculate its center, and that will also be the centre of the Z2 outer curve.
But with more complex curves, that won't work
The key fact is that every point on the Z2 outer limit is 150 mm from inside edge of basin.
At full size; imagine using a 150 mm block of wood as a spacer for your pencil.
Assuming Z2 outer limit does hit the wall, that will create a "corner" between this curve and the (presumably straight) wall (as drawn on a plan view). For the straight-sided basins shown, this corner will be somewhere between 0 mm and 150 mm from being in line with the left-hand sedge of the basin.
Similarly there can be an un-Zoned area at the corner between the walls (right rear of right-hand basin).
And if the two basins had more than 300 mm between them, there could be an un-zoned length of wall in the middle.
The length of wall that's in zone will always? be less than the max overall dimension of the Zone
At the front, the Zone also curves around from each end on the floor; not square as shown.
There's no stated dimension between rear of basins and wall, but by eye it appears approximately the same as the stated 0.15 at the sides.
If that is the case in practice; then the wall surface may be exactly on the Zone boundary - ie not actually in the Zone.
However equipment mounted on the wall would likely protrude into the Zone.
-----------------
It's unfortunate that several of the current Figs have errors in this regard.
And that they are largely limited to standard configurations
eg the baths & showers are all shown as being against the wall;
and there are no Figs illustrating the complexities of a typical bathroom, having several sets of Zones in close proximity.
However if we apply the words of the clause; these errors become less important
It will never be possible to accurately illustrate all possible situations.
Especially for 'hand basins' which now come in a huge variety of shapes
Including some that are basically flat, so don't have any water-containing "interior" , so no Z0;
but still have a 'splash zone' around them that should be treated as Z2.
Yet some would argue that such a hand-washing facility doesn't count as a "fixed water container" at all.
- Rating: 16.67%
Re: Sink zones
Thanks for the clarification Alec.
It's certainly not easy to produce a perfect diagram, or clause for that matter.
The 3000:2018 new clause for open cooking surfaces (4.7.3) and fig 4.17 is another good example. It's not really clear how the vertical surface behind the cooking surface should be treated. It should really reference the "shall not be mounted in such a position that the user must reach across the open cooking surface to operate it" requirement as well.
Just out of interest, are you still participating on EL001?
Thanks again for the detailed reply.
It's certainly not easy to produce a perfect diagram, or clause for that matter.
The 3000:2018 new clause for open cooking surfaces (4.7.3) and fig 4.17 is another good example. It's not really clear how the vertical surface behind the cooking surface should be treated. It should really reference the "shall not be mounted in such a position that the user must reach across the open cooking surface to operate it" requirement as well.
Just out of interest, are you still participating on EL001?
Thanks again for the detailed reply.
Re: Sink zones
Yes, I'm still active on EL 001.
And with Covid having prevented any face-to-face meetings for over 2 years now, the whole process has become slower.
WRT 4.7.3 & Fig 4-17 (the 'new' zone around an open cooking surface in 2018 edition, so not yet enforceable in NZ);
same general rule applies: follow the clause.
The restriction applies for 150 mm from the hob in any direction.
So whether, and to what extent, it affects the wall behind the hob - or a wall to one side - depends on how much space there is between.
Typically will be less than 150 mm behind, and often same to one side; as illustrated in the Fig; \
so nothing can be placed on such walls / cupboard sides.
Where the gap is > 150 - as shown to right of hob in Fig - the zone extends for 150 mm.
coincidentally the same dimension as for the < 45 l basins we've been discussing above.
And - similarly to damp area zones - this zone will have curves at the 'corners' (in plan view).
But since it doesn't extend below the level of the cooking surface, it doesn't drop down to floor level and affect the under-bench cupboards.
Where the hob has discrete elements / burners, might be possible to argue that the zone applies to each element separately.
But it's clear that the intent is for it to apply to the hob unit as a whole.
Who wants to be the person answering a question form coroner?
And with Covid having prevented any face-to-face meetings for over 2 years now, the whole process has become slower.
WRT 4.7.3 & Fig 4-17 (the 'new' zone around an open cooking surface in 2018 edition, so not yet enforceable in NZ);
same general rule applies: follow the clause.
The restriction applies for 150 mm from the hob in any direction.
So whether, and to what extent, it affects the wall behind the hob - or a wall to one side - depends on how much space there is between.
Typically will be less than 150 mm behind, and often same to one side; as illustrated in the Fig; \
so nothing can be placed on such walls / cupboard sides.
Where the gap is > 150 - as shown to right of hob in Fig - the zone extends for 150 mm.
coincidentally the same dimension as for the < 45 l basins we've been discussing above.
And - similarly to damp area zones - this zone will have curves at the 'corners' (in plan view).
But since it doesn't extend below the level of the cooking surface, it doesn't drop down to floor level and affect the under-bench cupboards.
Where the hob has discrete elements / burners, might be possible to argue that the zone applies to each element separately.
But it's clear that the intent is for it to apply to the hob unit as a whole.
Who wants to be the person answering a question form coroner?