Ha, of the 3 CE companies I regularly use for my structural stuff only 1 of them shows up on there.
None of my local ones do.
i dont think the 1090 is worth doing for shed bashing tbh, there is no money in making bog std agri portal frames and alike i've bought a few off the internet for not much more than i chould buy the steel for they come with a certificate of something its fake or worthless but how am i menat to know what it should look like or say
some of the frames are really crap tho
The BCSA only show companies that hood accreditations according to their requirements, usually the companies would be members or have been audited by specific NoBo’s (like SCCS or BM Trada for example). A company can be accredited to EN 1090 and be audited by other NoBo’s, they then wouldn’t show up on the BCSA website. Their is also the 1090 register, but that kind of works the same. In my experience the smaller guys go with the cheaper NoBo’s and just comply, where as the bigger guys go a bit behind that and are generally members of BCSA.
I am an external RWC for a coupe of companies just doing EXC 2 work, one of them is very small and have a very basic FPC manual, a coupe of procedures and do no NDT at all. They only do work for builders really and the odd shed. The other is a big company turning out a lot of big stuff and is a BCSA member, they wouldn’t get most of their work if they weren’t members, they have loss of procedures and do regular NDT.
Neither way is right or wrong, just depends what kind of work the company is going for.
I haven’t heard of any prosecutions, but I do know of a coupe of companies that have had visits from trading standards.
It is a legal requirement to be accredited to EN 1090 if you sell structural steelwork in the EU market. I don’t know the real reason as to why it’s not policed more rigorously. But as matt1978 has said, it’s pretty well policed for the bigger guys just by the fact that they wouldn’t get any work if they didn’t have it. For the smaller guy it’s more just that you would t want something to happen and then not be covered.
There will apparently be a change when we leave the EU though, at that time if a company sells structural steelwork to the EU then they still need to be CE marked obviously, but everything sold in the UK will then fall under the new UKCA mark (some more I do here https://www.steelconstruction.info/images/b/b0/Steel_construction_-_UKCA_Marking_v2.pdf ). I sat in on an audit a month or so ago and the rumours are that it will be building control that police this, so that will then mean anything that has to be signed off by building inspector, they will be asking for the companies accreditation. If this happens or not time will tell.
Since the outset back in 2014 I was under the impression that Building Control were to police EN 1090 and Trading Standards were to enforce it. Local Building Control here in Norwich and Norfolk Trading Standards really are not interested in EN 1090 and the amount of alterations, extensions and renovations with non conforming steel work around here must be astronomical.
Today I drove across the city to buy a second-hand lawn mower and I just happened to spot this on a house extension as I passed by and I damn well know it was done by the business I have described in the previous post quoted above (although I don't have proof).
Apologies for the quality of the photograph but I only had my compact digital camera in my pocket and I took this photo from the pavement alongside the road and I was probably 30-35 metres away from the extension build on the rear of the house.
Can you spot the errors?
None of these schemes are actually policed. They depend on something going wrong. Then if you cant demonstrate compliance your insurance becomes invalid and someone loses money. Its the same with product approvals from Lloyds (who are an insurance company, DnV, TuV etc etc.........they know that there are counterfeit products out there claiming compliance so its down to you to make sure the product you use is accredited....if not the whole ship cannot be insured.
So the same with many of these schemes....a catastrophe is needed before there are any prosecutions.
I would call local building control and inform them, that can not be left like that
Should have been M12’s but the lad had a pocket full of M10’s so used those instead
Good/fast/cheap... Pick any two
I’m 100% proud to say you can pick all 3 on one of my jobs.
That job on the photo up there, terrible detailing. Is it a rafter or a hip rafter. It looks like they’ve cut it short with the gas. Looks like it’s all Galvanised too.
Also looks like someone got the first hole in the wrong place on the fin plate that has no beam attached to it.
It all looks puny stuff (152 x 89 UB) so nothing nasty will happen to it, so they will get away with it.
They wouldn’t be interested in it. Quite happy to pull you up on an insulation detail or want to know the ins and outs of the hole you have just dug for a foundation , but they aren’t qualified to say if a steel connection is suitable.
I've reported stuff like this before and neither the city council building control or county council trading standards were interested because I was only a fabricator/welder and not a qualified structural engineer...…. my City & Guilds, coding, 40 years experience and a B.Eng in Agricultural engineering didn't count for diddly squat.
Last year I was called in to put a job right on-site that the customer had complained and the building contractor decided to use me instead of the original fab shop to put the job right because of my reputation. When I was putting the job right the building control inspector was there looking at trenches and soil pipes and wasn't interested in what I was doing because it meant clambering up the scaffolding.
This is what I know from my short observation of it and from the photo I took.
152 X 89 beams, M16 bolts, beam too short and with a free hand gas axe cut for some reason, fin plates made from available off-cuts of 10 x 100 MSF, additional hole drilled when it all didn't line up (swarf just visible on horizontal). I estimate the post to be 100x 100 x 6 box with a mill end and not fab shop square cut end and no cap. Second fin plated punched incorrectly so additional attempt made right next to first, definitely painted with grey primer and not galvanised. Decent mig weld, but the guy doing welding had no pride because the splatter has not been chiselled/scraped off
Not knowing the overall lengths etc, but a 100 x 100 box ( could be any thickness) with 10 thick fin plates would be about right, I’m assuming it’s not a massive span as they have used a 152 x 89 UB ( ha, got that right in my estimation above )
M16 ok ( little too close for edge distance on one connection there by the look of it). Could of got away with M12 probably.
No end cap on the column, on my movie set work I can get away with it as they are temp structures, but anywhere else , water is going to get down in there.
Trouble is builder WGAS as they will just want to crack on, and the customer most probably wouldn’t have a clue what they were looking at anyway.
On the plus side , they have at least put both beams on from the same side
Almost makes you want to put a hard hat and hi-viz on and stand close by with a clipboard taking notes and photos just to put the wind up em
It's shoddy work like that which caused all these rules and regulations to come in to effect in the first place.
Does anyone know if the SME 1090 grant is still available from the MAS?
I don’t know,but I received just over £1000 from them 3.5 years ago when I registered for en1090. Guess you’ll have to contact them.good luck.
As far as i know the MAS doesn't exist now. It morphed into LEP (Local Enterprise Partnership) - round our neck of the woods anyway. I would be suprised if a grant wasn't available to those who are eligible, but you might find the grant is conditional on it creating a job/jobs.
We got a few grand at the time which took the edge off 1090.
I've looked around, and the MAS was re-launched a few years back, but without the grant funding arm Oh well.
It will be interesting to see how it all goes with new NSSS 7th edition.
Separate names with a comma.