25mm split con sub main eicr code?

[Bellendian]

Just done an EICR on a domestic, the sub main running from origin to cu is 25mm split con. Hard to know if its more than 50mm deep in walls etc without intrusive investigation. So could run with FI, but obv that doesn't deliver a satisfactory report.
Bit of a tricky one as it would have complied with 16th, but the place appears to have been otherwise installed to 17th. Previous EIC 2009 plus dual rcd board. I'm leaning toward C3 but would like to hear opinions...cheers

 

[Strima]

C3 for me.

 

[buzzlightyear]

me has well so thats c3 then .

 

[Dave OCD]

I'd have to go with C3 too, but protecting this sub main at source with a 30ma RCD would also make it non compliant.

 

[Bellendian]

I'd have to go with C3 too, but protecting this sub main at source with a 30ma RCD would also make it non compliant.

Exactly....that's my dillema...what is the 'improvement recommended'?
Split con conforms to BS7870, so we're not into SY/CY arguments, only change so far as I can tell, was that it was delisted as being suitable for being buried in building fabric less than 50mm deep without additional protection.
So a couple of test holes in plaster to prove depth, results in no code at all, no improvement required, and all is well?

 

[snowhead]

It may well be in the Cavity,,Unsupported..

 

[davesparks]

It's unlikely to be greater than 50mm deep if it's chased in, so I'd assume it doesn't comply with current regulations.
The problem is that it doesn't have a complete armour layer connected to earth, most of the concentric layer is connected to neutral. So ordinarily it will function in the same way as far as preventing metal objects penetrating the cable from becoming live. However it is not technically compliant and you could argue that its possible there could be a neutral fault at the same time as someone hammers a picture hook into the cable.

I agree with the others that it should strictly be a C3, but I don't think it would be practical or economically viable to improve this considering how small the actual practical improvement would be.

 

[davesparks]

Exactly....that's my dillema...what is the 'improvement recommended'?

Replace with SWA or add an earthed metal plate over the cable to protect it.

 

[Taylortwocities]

Replace with SWA or add an earthed metal plate over the cable to protect it.

That’s the remedial process. We are talking about the correct EICR code.
Per the above C3 is the kiddy.

 

[Bellendian]

Thanks, C3 it is....forever! Can't see this one being fixed for a few years yet!

 

[davesparks]

That’s the remedial process. We are talking about the correct EICR code.
Per the above C3 is the kiddy.

The post I was replying to asked specifically what the improvement that is being recommended is.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Unless BS7671 prohibits the use of split con for domestic use, no code.

 

[DPG]

Unless BS7671 prohibits the use of split con for domestic use, no code.

It's buried in the wall

 

[Deleted member 26818]

It's buried in the wall

It has an earthed sheath.

 

[Ian1981]

It has an earthed sheath.

Not fully encasing the cable it doesn’t.
This will not comply with 522.6.204 indent (i )
Split con does not incorporate an earthed metallic covering which actually covers the entire cable