Amendment 3 2024, BS7671 2018.

[HappyHippyDad]

I can't see any thread started on the amendment, this is because. ..
A) I've had one strong beer and haven't looked hard enough.
B) It's not terribly important.
C) No one has thought about it yet.

Is this going to have much of an effect on us?
Personally, I don't fit PV or battery installs. I do install the odd EVCP though.

Will the manufactures update there MI to include the need (or not) for bidirectional devices?

 

[suffolkspark]

Lewden did a vid on their bi directional rcbos, i did ask if they actually differed internally or if it was simply re labelled, got a kinda generic reply, would be interested to see a teardown of uni directional and bi directional devices to see if they actually differ inside.

Presumably were now giving C2 to uni directional rcbos or rcds with downstream solar on an eicr if there is a very genuine risk it might scupper them?

 

[oscar21]

Can you imagine the conversations in the IEE office,

"look man we need to get a new book out ASAP I need a new Rolls Royce. But sir we cant release a new book until we've had 3 amendments to the current book. Well what are you waiting for, get an amendment out now. What on sir. Anything, I don't care there must be something you can think of."

 

[UNG]

Lewden did a vid on their bi directional rcbos, i did ask if they actually differed internally or if it was simply re labelled, got a kinda generic reply, would be interested to see a teardown of uni directional and bi directional devices to see if they actually differ inside.

Presumably were now giving C2 to uni directional rcbos or rcds with downstream solar on an eicr if there is a very genuine risk it might scupper them?

Why only solar it could also affect EV's where they are used as an energy store and back feed when required

 

[suffolkspark]

Why only solar it could also affect EV's where they are used as an energy store and back feed when required

Yea those too i guess if present, would be interested to know what actually happens or doesnt happen when a unidirectional device is subjected to this, and with that info what the coding consensus is.

 

[UNG]

Can you imagine the conversations in the IEE office,

"look man we need to get a new book out ASAP I need a new Rolls Royce. But sir we cant release a new book until we've had 3 amendments to the current book. Well what are you waiting for, get an amendment out now. What on sir. Anything, I don't care there must be something you can think of."

There is going to be an amendment 4 the Draft for Public Consultation is published on the 7th of this month with comments going till November

 

[SparkySy]

There is going to be an amendment 4 the Draft for Public Consultation is published on the 7th of this month with comments going till November

This is getting out of hand!
In all my years I cannot remember any previous amendments being this close together!!
Or is it just me getting old and time feeling like it's going faster?

 

[HappyHippyDad]

This is getting out of hand!
In all my years I cannot remember any previous amendments being this close together!!
Or is it just me getting old and time feeling like it's going faster?

Probably a bit of both
2026 is a fair way away, so your £80 is safe for a while.

 

[SparkySy]

Probably a bit of both
2026 is a fair way away, so your £80 is safe for a while.

Yeah your probably right there!

Still another exam to go and sit and another new book or 3 at least!
My loft is starting to bulge with the amount of former regs books, guidance notes and onsite guides I have amassed since 1995.

 

[Julie.]

I can't see any thread started on the amendment, this is because. ..
A) I've had one strong beer and haven't looked hard enough.
B) It's not terribly important.
C) No one has thought about it yet.

Is this going to have much of an effect on us?
Personally, I don't fit PV or battery installs. I do install the odd EVCP though.

Will the manufactures update there MI to include the need (or not) for bidirectional devices?

I think it's probably B)

It amounts to "where a RCD may be fed from either direction, it must be suitable for feeding in either direction"

Or perhaps even more succinctly "equipment has to be suitable for the application "

I know they're both a bit brief for inclusion in a modern standard (probably why I haven't been involved in writing/amending standards since the late '80s) but that is effectively it.

I think most good electricians would have been aware of this (along with "open the door before you try to walk through the doorway" sort of thing) so to the people on here - the likelihood is it isn't really adding anything.

My only thought is dismay that it has to be specifically included in a standard.

That means effectively that there are people out there (professionals?!) who are not selecting equipment suitable for purpose or perhaps even thinking about if the equipment they supply/install is actually suitable for the application.

How wide does this go, do they fit 5A switches on 13A immersion heaters? (because they then only need to carry one switch type for all lighting and everything else?)

The standard was clear before that equipment has to be suitable for the application, now it has to be "suitable for purpose PLUS don't forget, it really has to be suitable for purpose!"

 

[Simon47]

Has anyone actually come up with a scenario where an RCD might not work with reverse power flows ? Assuming the designer didn't add extra complexity just to make it unidirectional.

 

[Julie.]

Has anyone actually come up with a scenario where an RCD might not work,
with reverse power flows ? Assuming the designer didn't add extra complexity just to make it unidirectional.

It's to do with the detection/test circuit if they're tied specifically to one side, then they may not work with the wrong direction, and would still be energised when off. The manufacturer is the only one who knows if this is a problem or not.

 

[littlespark]

What happens if you put in 2 RCDs in “series” but one of them is put in backwards?


I’m sure this doesn’t need yet another amendment… just a note in the manufacturers instructions that we are supposed to be reading anyway

 

[Simon47]

It's to do with the detection/test circuit if they're tied specifically to one side, then they may not work with the wrong direction

Do you have a mechanism in mind where it wouldn't detect an imbalance between the line and neutral lines which are AC ?
Unless it specifically calculated the phase angle (why do that ?) then it would see the same imbalance whichever way the device is inserted.

and would still be energised when off.

So ?
The detection circuit is normally energised 100% of the time. If you mean the trip circuit, when it's tripped, the fault will disappear. The only exception might be a N-E fault with a single pole device that doesn't switch the neutral, but who fits those ?

 

[ipf]

Downloaded, but I'm not printing off 10 pages with hardly anything on them and stapling to the brown book (as told by latest assessor). Could print off pages required only, or just get the biro out.
A numbered Amendment containing two definitions and reg change regarding operational direction of devices...what a waste of time, paper and Amendment number.
Why not just send out one sheet as an update, as we used to get for changes/printing mistakes?