Amendment 2 new circuit SPD?

[catdog1121]

So I need to add a new circuit, I was going to do it to amendment 2.. Its a commercial property and will be adding a new circuit for a defibrillator cabinet and associated accessories (lights)... There is a decent enough 3 phase board in place, but there is no SPD.. Obviously if we add a new say socket circuit it has to have RCD protection even if there is no RCD protection in the existing board, this could require a new board. With SPD's now being mandatory (Apart from if customer refuses) what are peoples opinions.. There is no room to add an SPD in this three phase board so to add an SPD it would require a completely new board which would cost thousands and its out of the question...

The transformer is only a few houses away and all cables are underground and in the 60+ years the property has been there they have never had an issue with a transient voltage..

Is it ok to add a new circuit under amendment 2 without an SPD? (I am leaning towards yeah just add the circuit, having to add an SPD to an existing installation when it is not easily done is ridiculous)

 

[timhoward]

One reason here that SPD seems important here is this is for a defibrillator -

I think, that surprisingly, the supply isn't in any way connected to the defibrillator, not even to a charger. I was surprised to find that one I did was simply a small heater to maintain an ambient temperature, presumably to extend battery life. The defibrillator just sits completely stand-alone in it's cosy little box. Lithium batteries really are very good at holding a charge....

I guess it still applies that if the the heater fails and the battery prematurely drains it has life changing possibilities, but it's one step further on the tenuous scale!

 

[pc1966]

I think, that surprisingly, the supply isn't in any way connected to the defibrillator, not even to a charger.

Ah - OK in that case I would not be so concerned!

EDIT: Maybe check what the manufacturer says just in case!

 

[catdog1121]

Ah - OK in that case I would not be so concerned!

EDIT: Maybe check what the manufacturer says just in case!

Manufacturer doesn't say any more really than install to BS7671 by a qualified electrician.. A few other bits about type of silicone etc but Tim is completely right all it is is a metal cabinet, with a small 200w heater that only comes on in very cold temperatures and a small LED light... They currently have no SPD, there has never been an issue with a transient voltage in its 60+ year history, the transformer is about 50yrds away and cable underground.. So the pre amendment 2 you would use the argument of I am only taking responsibility of what I am installing, I am not installing anything that would increase the value of the installation so you can argue an SPD is not needed based on the value.. However now its mandatory, I think its just about having the conversation with the customer and adding on the EIC, but customers don't seem to like this.. I have spoken to one of the two charities and explained and they don't care and are happy just to say its not needed, I think the other charity will also be ok also so it covers me..

 

[catdog1121]

My usual pragmatic test is if doing an EICR afterwards would the change be worse than a C3.
But If installing a new circuit that circuit will comply with amendment 2.

For example - you get asked to add an outside light in a care home, and it has a Hager dual rcd board (type A for arguments sake). The lighting breakers are already 'busy' but there's a spare way. Do you:
a) add yet another branch to one of the lighting circuits
b) add a B6 to the spare way
c) say sorry you need a new metal CU with SPD and AFDDs, quote to fit outside light is £1200

This is a good way of looking at it, I could have come off an existing circuit, the only reason I didn't want to is political in that the defibrillator has been funded by one charity and the building owned by another, with one taking responsibility for the defibrillator, having it on its own circuit will mean nothing else can affect it and it wont affect anything else..

You might have type AC RCD's on that same board and it has an SPD, fitted not long ago, suddenly you need type A RCD's, although hopefully not so expensive.. with type A RCD's it should be easier to replace unless of course the manufacturer no longer makes them, in which case we could again be talking of a new board change just to add a circuit for an outside light..

I guess at some point common sense has to prevail, if you add a new circuit when you could extend an existing just because it is easier does that make it suddenly more dangerous... Its the part of the job I have always struggled with, how far do you go..

 

[pc1966]

I guess at some point common sense has to prevail, if you add a new circuit when you could extend an existing just because it is easier does that make it suddenly more dangerous... Its the part of the job I have always struggled with, how far do you go..

Very much so.

The usual consideration is never to make anything less safe by new work, but for some cases the regs would now expect type A RCD/RCBO for sockets, etc, and SPD generally. But unless the customer wants upgrades, or unless the new circuit is something where you would expect those to be important such as medical support, you have to draw a sensible line based on how cost-effective any changes to meet latest regs are.

 

[timhoward]

you have to draw a sensible line based on how cost-effective any changes to meet latest regs are

To go even further (and hopefully not start world war 3) it's worth occasionally remembering that while the regs are an excellent way of helping prove that the EAWR are complied with, the regs are not a statutory document in their own right.
I'll get my coat.

 

[catdog1121]

Very much so.

The usual consideration is never to make anything less safe by new work, but for some cases the regs would now expect type A RCD/RCBO for sockets, etc, and SPD generally. But unless the customer wants upgrades, or unless the new circuit is something where you would expect those to be important such as medical support, you have to draw a sensible line based on how cost-effective any changes to meet latest regs are.

I totally agree, although I did check with NAPIT support and the guys initial response was no you would not have to add an SPD for just adding a circuit, then he said he would double check, after reading the regs though he then said yes it was technically needed and to not fit it the only option would be for the customer to refuse.. He agreed that it was completely mental. I mean you wouldnt fit a metal consumer unit if it was plastic for a new circuit but then I guess that is slightly different.. It is getting to the point where the regs are becoming impossible to actually realistically be followed.. I have been fitting SPD and type A rcd's as standard basically since the 18th edition..

On the plus side its a good way to upsell.. Kerching...

 

[Amp&Henry]

There is a bit in the regs that state something about if the circuit/s are supplying equipment for prevention of injury etc (smoke alarms/emergency lighting etc) then surge protection is mandatory and you can't get round it with a risk assessment. Don't know the reg no. off the top of my head, sorry.