Could somebody please clarify a certain aspect of this for me? I have posted in the IET forum and got no reply.
So say you install cables in a wall/partition less than 50mm below the surface. You run the cables in the specified zones and you protect it with a 30ma RCD.
Do you still need to use earth armouring, earthed metal sheath or earthed steel conduit? Or is the RCD sufficient?
Reg 522.6.204 of BS 7671:2018 seems to state it is not.
I'm studying to do the latest regs and was under the impression cables were permissible at a depth of less than 50mm as long as they we're protected by RCD 30ma. Is this now not the case with the new regs (18th edition). Do they need this mechanical protection too?
[automerge]1588514851[/automerge]
No need to answer this I have found the answer. Guidance notes 3 clearly states that a RCD 30ma is sufficient protection.
It is clearly worded, unlike the regs, the on-site guide
and the explained illustrated 18th Edition Wiring Reg books, which are very unclear and seem to be missing an OR from their wording which would clearly indicate this to be the case. Well that was 2 hours of study time wasted!
So say you install cables in a wall/partition less than 50mm below the surface. You run the cables in the specified zones and you protect it with a 30ma RCD.
Do you still need to use earth armouring, earthed metal sheath or earthed steel conduit? Or is the RCD sufficient?
Reg 522.6.204 of BS 7671:2018 seems to state it is not.
I'm studying to do the latest regs and was under the impression cables were permissible at a depth of less than 50mm as long as they we're protected by RCD 30ma. Is this now not the case with the new regs (18th edition). Do they need this mechanical protection too?
[automerge]1588514851[/automerge]
No need to answer this I have found the answer. Guidance notes 3 clearly states that a RCD 30ma is sufficient protection.
It is clearly worded, unlike the regs, the on-site guide
and the explained illustrated 18th Edition Wiring Reg books, which are very unclear and seem to be missing an OR from their wording which would clearly indicate this to be the case. Well that was 2 hours of study time wasted!
Last edited: