Butchering a consumer unit Part deux

[littlespark]

Heating system in a local church which is basically tubular heaters under a few pews.

A local company has already quoted thousands to rip all this out and start again. The committee are reluctant to spend massive amounts as the building only gets used for 2 hours once a fortnight.
It’s old, but it all works.

Main switch on left is always on to power everything here.
The silver box next is a contactor.... will get to that in a minute..
Next is the mainswitch for the fuseboard... they turn this on during the week before a service.... but only sends power to the top of the contactor.
Next is the fuseboard.... 6 fuses across 3 phases going out on the old twin and earths that disappear into the wall below it then go to heaters.
The rightmost MEM switch doesn’t get used. Neither does the circular mechanical time clock below.... which is marked as suppliers clock.
The electronic programmer beside it appears to have replaced another mechanical clock which energises the contactor coil.... the switch below that overrides the programmer.... which is now surplus to requirements as the electronic programmer has its own override button.

So, just to make things a little safer without tearing it all out, could I take the guts out the fusebox and install a DIN rail with rcbo’s?
Leave the box and lid as it is, but fix a Perspex shield with a hole for the rcbo’s to stick through so they can be reset, but all the connections are safely behind the barrier.

Whew... long post.
There’s a fairly modern 4 gang plastic CU elsewhere serving lighting and power, so I’m quoting to change this to rcbo as well.

ps, the other box a foot below the switch is a room thermostat, and if it’s also surplus, it’s coming out for LN.

 

[westward10]

Leave it why does it need replacing.

 

[littlespark]

Leave it why does it need replacing.

It doesn’t. I know that, but the committee are worried about how “safe” it is in regard to what the other company had said and I was suggesting what could be done without going overboard.

Their insurance may state that circuits must be up to a certain standard not just EICR satisfactory, which I assume this is.

 

[westward10]

Generally insurance requirements are that the Report comes back as satisfactory, I can't see that attracting anything more than a C3.

 

[littlespark]

Generally insurance requirements are that the Report comes back as satisfactory, I can't see that attracting anything more than a C3.

Yeh. Maybe.... but I can see whoever did the last check to push those C3’s up to a C2 just to make work for themselves.

the committee just looking for a second opinion, I’m looking for a third...

 

[westward10]

I know not ideal but you could divert the supply into an rcd.

 

[littlespark]

I still need to work out what the mech time clock actually does. It’s still ticking away so it has power, and there’s a really old handwritten instruction sheet by a previous committee stating it belongs the Electricity Board and shouldn’t be touched.
I think, there was off peak heating at some time, as some of that MEM switchgear is labelled as off peak.

The clock is mounted on a 4x4 adaptable metal box with the 6181Y single cables coming through unprotected holes in the lid.

 

[loz2754]

The time clock is on its original mounting box from the look of it, and also from the look of it it's not doing anything because the lever actuators on the dial are not there...

 

[MrPupsi]

As above, looks like an old Sangamo time clock which is no longer in use.

I imagine the terminals are still in use though and it’s just being used as a junction box now, hence why you can still hear the ticking as it still has power.

I think technically the din rail and RCBOs would work, but then you’d be the constructor of said ‘homemade’ DB, and whilst you’ll sign it off as safe, I’d imagine the next person carrying out an EICR may well fail it in 5/10 years time.

 

[littlespark]

As above, looks like an old Sangamo time clock which is no longer in use.

I imagine the terminals are still in use though and it’s just being used as a junction box now, hence why you can still hear the ticking as it still has power.

I think technically the din rail and RCBOs would work, but then you’d be the constructor of said ‘homemade’ DB, and whilst you’ll sign it off as safe, I’d imagine the next person carrying out an EICR may well fail it in 5/10 years time.

This has been part of the problem.... the most recent eicr said it needed changed, but all previous ones, it was fine.

ive not read the report yet, maybe they were just more “listy” with any C3’s and it just looked like there was a lot of problems.... that coupled with a quote to “put things right”

Of course, the ‘sbestos fairy will need a visit- there could be flash pads behind those fuses.

I believe I can make a tidier job adapting and building a CU than some people can with an all new board with all the right bits.

 

[telectrix]

So, just to make things a little safer without tearing it all out, could I take the guts out the fusebox and install a DIN rail with rcbo’s?
Leave the box and lid as it is, but fix a Perspex shield with a hole for the rcbo’s to stick through so they can be reset, but all the connections are safely behind the barrier.

that would be my way also, if ,indeed, upgrading is desirable. nowt wrong with it as it is, although lack of RCD protection for sockets could be classed as a C2 - Mrs.Mop wth her dyson hoover.

 

[UNG]

So, just to make things a little safer without tearing it all out, could I take the guts out the fusebox and install a DIN rail with rcbo’s?
Leave the box and lid as it is, but fix a Perspex shield with a hole for the rcbo’s to stick through so they can be reset, but all the connections are safely behind the barrier.

My first thought would be to investigate fitting a skeleton CU into the existing DB enclosure rather than trying to use a homemade modification which may be called into question at the next EICR

 

[Rockingit]

So long as the cable hasn't degraded I'd trust that far more than some modern bish-bash-eicr-in-it-for-the-remedials mob. Just a question - why would you need to have the levers of the rcd/rcbo's actually exposed anyway? Mounted internally on DIN rail behind the original panel would be fine by me - it's not been made worse and affords a level of protection in keeping with the spirit of 133.1

 

[brianmoooore]

So long as the cable hasn't degraded I'd trust that far more than some modern bish-bash-eicr-in-it-for-the-remedials mob. Just a question - why would you need to have the levers of the rcd/rcbo's actually exposed anyway? Mounted internally on DIN rail behind the original panel would be fine by me - it's not been made worse and affords a level of protection in keeping with the spirit of 133.1

Rockingit has essentially posted just what I was going to post after reading page 1.
The main switch for the fuse enclosure is separate from it, so make sure the fuse enclosure is clearly labeled "isolate before opening" and the switch is equally clearly labeled as to its purpose.

 

[DPG]

So long as the cable hasn't degraded I'd trust that far more than some modern bish-bash-eicr-in-it-for-the-remedials mob. Just a question - why would you need to have the levers of the rcd/rcbo's actually exposed anyway? Mounted internally on DIN rail behind the original panel would be fine by me - it's not been made worse and affords a level of protection in keeping with the spirit of 133.1

People cannot operate the test button for one thing.