T&E Sub Main

nickblake · Jul 23, 2014

Why don't people know the difference between series and parallel

shanky887614 · Jul 23, 2014

farmelectrics said:
would you run a seperate cpc to sub boards as the earth in 16mm te is undersized

most of us would never wire a sub board in T+E

swa, micc,fp or singles in galv trunking/conduit

Guest77 · Jul 23, 2014

shanky887614 said:
most of us would never wire a sub board in T+E

swa, micc,fp or singles in galv trunking/conduit

Correct, who would consider twin and earth on a commercial job? and even worse a domestic 50 quid split board, appalling, gasp.

GMES · Jul 23, 2014

All I can say is............

acestu · Jul 30, 2014

D Skelton said:
You cannot use a 100mA s-type to provide additional protection to a buried cable in a wall. Only 30mA or less can be used for additional protection. If the board supplied by the submain needs RCD protection, this would have to be via a 30mA RCBO in the main board feeding its supply. If this is not a workable solution, the only way round it would be to somehow provide protection for the T+E in the walls and stick it on an MCB instead.

All this being said, how do you know that the T+E isn't protected in the walls with galv conduit? Normally, if I have to run a T+E submain and bury it in a wall at any point then it will be run in a length of galv.

May I ask why the boards need replacing??? You haven't gone in all Electrical Trainee style and told 'em that "coz they ain't 17th edition boards, they gotta come out!" have you?

Hi,

Thanks for all your replies, I am the maintenance supervisor at the premises in question but we have an electrical contractor come in and do all the testing as I do not have the time, they recommended that 5 distribution boards be replaced in one of the buildings to bring them up to current spec which I thought was unnecessary really, are they creating work for themselves ?

thanks
Acestu

D Skelton · Jul 30, 2014

acestu said:
Hi,

Thanks for all your replies, I am the maintenance supervisor at the premises in question but we have an electrical contractor come in and do all the testing as I do not have the time, they recommended that 5 distribution boards be replaced in one of the buildings to bring them up to current spec which I thought was unnecessary really, are they creating work for themselves ?

thanks
Acestu

If they said it had to be done or they strongly recommended it be done, then in a word; YES!

Without a shadow of a doubt!

acestu · Jul 30, 2014

D Skelton said:
If they said it had to be done or they strongly recommended it be done, then in a word; YES!

Without a shadow of a doubt!

Hi,

Thanks for the 2nd opinion, we are a registered childrens charity and money is really tight at the moment so we could do without giving him £900 for no reason.....

cheers
Acestu

davesparks · Jul 30, 2014

acestu said:
Hi,

Thanks for all your replies, I am the maintenance supervisor at the premises in question but we have an electrical contractor come in and do all the testing as I do not have the time, they recommended that 5 distribution boards be replaced in one of the buildings to bring them up to current spec which I thought was unnecessary really, are they creating work for themselves ?

thanks
Acestu

For what reason have they recommended they be replaced? They should tell you exactly why they are recommending this, just saying that they 'don't meet regs' is not acceptable.

As the building has yourself as a maintainence supervisor then it would be fair to say the installation is under supervision of a skilled or instructed person so would negate quite a bit of the requirement for RCD protection .

So if they want to change them just to add RCDs then I think they are taking the Mickey.

However if they are saying they recommend they be replaced because there is significant damage to the boards or similar then that's a different story.

malcolmsanford · Jul 30, 2014

davesparks said:
For what reason have they recommended they be replaced? They should tell you exactly why they are recommending this, just saying that they 'don't meet regs' is not acceptable.

As the building has yourself as a maintainence supervisor then it would be fair to say the installation is under supervision of a skilled or instructed person so would negate quite a bit of the requirement for RCD protection .

So if they want to change them just to add RCDs then I think they are taking the Mickey.

However if they are saying they recommend they be replaced because there is significant damage to the boards or similar then that's a different story.

Not after June next year Dave if the IET approve the new amendment.

But your spot on he should ask why they need changing, and want proof that they are unsafe for continuing use.

Octopus · Jul 30, 2014

malcolmsanford said:
Not after June next year Dave if the IET approve the new amendment.

But your spot on he should ask why they need changing, and want proof that they are unsafe for continuing use.

How can we stop this march for RCD everything in sight?

Madness.

malcolmsanford · Jul 30, 2014

What is getting me though is this "Risk Assessment" thing, this is going to really put someones neck on the line.

If I remember right, and to be honest a my age remembering things is getting harder, it was branded about before the 1st amendment that work undertaken on a MIEWC ie spurring a socket of an existing RF, that if the cable was buried etc it could have been "risked assessed" not fitting an RCD. This idea was scrapped because I believe the IET felt it was inappropriate at the time.

Now 3 yrs down the road we will have guys all over the place, especially hhmmmm lets just say the less experienced risking assessing the bejesus out of everything

D Skelton · Jul 30, 2014

Next they'll be risk assessing jabbing two sets of tails into one meter termination!!!

Bloody IET!

Excuse me a minute whilst I go puke!

davesparks · Jul 30, 2014

How exactly does one 'risk assess' the requirement for an RCD?

davesparks · Jul 30, 2014

malcolmsanford said:
Not after June next year Dave if the IET approve the new amendment.

But your spot on he should ask why they need changing, and want proof that they are unsafe for continuing use.

Well then we'll just have to rely on the item 1 of the 'notes on completion' of the EICR which are included as part of the model forms.

malcolmsanford · Jul 30, 2014

How are you going to submit this risk assessment, are we going to have another bloody certificate to fill out?
Who are you going to give it too, what are the time limitations on it, 15 yrs down the road some poor sod gets electrocuted and there is a risk assessment done by you are the electric police going to come a calling.
I have mostly championed the IET I often felt that they were on to somewhat an hiding to nothing, trying to please everyone all the time, but this to me does open a really dangerous can of worms.
We all know how our industry is going in respect of training and workmanship, but it beggers belief that judging by some of the post on here by some so called electricians, I wouldn't trust them to risk assess walking a dog let alone an electrical installation .
Said it before I'm so glad I'm at the end of my time in this game

T&E Sub Main

nickblake

shanky887614

-

Guest77

GMES

acestu

D Skelton

-

acestu

davesparks

malcolmsanford

-

Octopus

malcolmsanford

-

D Skelton

-

davesparks

davesparks

malcolmsanford

-

News and Offers from Sponsors

Similar threads

OFFICIAL SPONSORS

YOUR Unread Posts