Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Discuss Review of EICR in the UK Electrical Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net
Dear all professional electricians
This is the report we were sent by our seller. Does this report look okay, especially the readings. If anything is missing I would be grateful if you could point it out.
Thank you for your inputs.Couple of things stand out.
61009 is not a suitable main protective device type.
Mainswitch rating is stated as 100V as well as 100A. Should be 230V
Every measured Zs is exactly the same. (0.68 ohms) This should be different for every circuit….
His C3 coding at the beginning mentions putting surge protection in, but his circuit schedule has a surge device ticked as being present.
Looks like a rush job to me….
Do you know how long they were in the property for?
It should be AC supply, right? This is the second report commissioned, NICEIC registered electrician.It's also down as a D.C. supply. TN-C-S wjth an earth mat?
There is quite a lot wrong with ir.
I am feeling so let down.This report is worthless as per the replies given above. I am suspecting this is a copy and paste job with bits left in from a previous report. ie Earth Mat for details of the Electrode when it is already stated it is TN-C-S and earthing is supplied by the distributer and Earth Electrode is N/A.
As other have said DC for the supply? 100V main Switch and it is apparently only 1 pole.
As stated above readings all the same on different circuits?
Could go on.
A type 1 SPD which, if such was required on this installation, would also need a type 2 deviceHis C3 coding at the beginning mentions putting surge protection in, but his circuit schedule has a surge device ticked as being present.
IR test voltage is quoted as 200 but probably should be 250.
No RCBO readings or types, assuming they are 61009.
No ring final readings.
I suspect the protective devices are 6ka not 10ka.
Has confirmed phase sequence when it is probably single phase.
According to the schedule circuit 3 is spare with a missing cover, Code 2?
Yes, this report says 'Satisfactory'.The list of mistakes is getting longer.
I did notice the IR was “200” on some and “>200” on others, which is more likely. Pointed out by westward above
Also, out of interest, was the overall outcome marked as “SATISFACTORY”? Which is what a single C3 would bring about?
Without being on site ourselves, we can’t say how good the installation actually is, but it’s a sure thing that the report itself is a load of rubbish.
Reply to Review of EICR in the UK Electrical Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net