Caravan site wiring

[nickjohn]

Sorry about asking this question as I think similar posts have been made before but I could not find one along the same lines as this.

A friend of mine has a residential static caravan site (as in the caravans on the site are lived in 24/7 52 weeks a year by the same people).
The configuration of the site wiring is there is a central building incorporating the incoming mains which splits into individual meters for each van, this goes to a 60a sw fuse then into a 60A 30ma RCD then a swa sub main (with the old vans the swa went into the van and connected into a CU incorporating another 60A 30ma rcd and breakers) with the new vans the sparks has installed an external housing adjacent to the van which has a cu with a 60A 30ma rcd and 16A breaker, this then connects to an external 16A socket with a flex into the vans CU - the new vans cu has a 30ma RCD.

He says the vans must have a means of disconnection of the supply adjacent to them as they are mobile homes... some have to be lifted in with a crane so they are not mobile in the true sense of the word.. he also says the vans are limited to what they can use electrically wise as they are mobile homes hence the 16A breaker.

Now the problem is that as the vans are permanent residences they have washers / dryers / toaster / TV's / kettles etc etc which puts more load on them than say a holiday home.

My friend does not understand why we cannot just connect the swa direct into the van as they were before as the swa has an rcd at source which should give the protection necessary, also the small 16A breaker is already causing problems with the resident as it overloads all the time.

Can anyone shed any light on what is the correct connection configuration.

 

[happysteve]

It is the wording of the regs that is the problem, there is a lot of grey areas and overlap, and some incompatibities, also a few downright mistakes, they have to produce a series of guides for a guide for christ sake.

[chopped purely for brevity]

the regs should not be taken in isolation they depend on other factors and sections in the BGB, sometimes you have to satisfy two very different seemingly contradictory criteria.

Thanks for taking the time to reply. I will have a look at the sections, and you make a very good point about taking things as a whole.

Thanks for trying to help me understand this.

Sh***ing Nora, is that the time?!? Time for bed, said Zebedee...

 

[spark 68]

Agreed.


Interesting reference. I agree with you, according to this reference, (and generally) I would also call a static caravan a caravan too.

The BGB makes distinctions, though, that the 1960 Act does not. Why would this be the case? Well, tourers, camper vans suffer lots of vibrations as they get moved around for one thing... hence the supplementary requirements of (eg) 721.521.2 (flexible class 5 conductor or stranded cables) and 721.522.7 (vibration). Statics don't get moved around as much. Are statics wired in T&E? (Open question, I don't know the answer... they were 20 years ago, no idea about now!)



Against someone as respected and experienced as yourself, and others who disagree with my perspective on this, I know my words pretty much count for nothing.

So please help me understand how, within the scope of the BGB, "caravan" is clearly defined in part 2, as is "motor caravan"; both definitions exclude mobile homes and residential park homes ("statics"), as they are not "designed to meet the requirements for the construction and use of road vehicles." 721.1 explicitly states, "The particular requirements of this section... do not apply to the electrical installations of mobile homes, residential park homes."

Is there genuine ambiguity here?

Where the regs are concerned there is always ambiguity see my previous post, you could put a dozen sparks in a room ask a question and get a dozen different answers!

your words always count for something, if nothing else it makes us look again from a different perspective, and sometimes makes us disregard preconcieved ideas.

 

[Des 56]

For once at least,on this forum,we have dispute and a discussion to boot that is probing and driven by understanding
The thread has been interesting from a watchers point of view, the contributions by all have been appreciated

Keep it up please

 

[Badged01]

The BGB makes distinctions, though, that the 1960 Act does not.

Just for some further thought around the definition of Caravan, the Act is Law the BGB is guidance?

- - - Updated - - -

For once at least, on this forum,we have dispute and a discussion to boot that is probing and driven by understanding

Agreed, a very useful thread if only for further "education" on the subject ..... could that be classed as continuing professional development!!

 

[happysteve]

For once at least,on this forum,we have dispute and a discussion to boot that is probing and driven by understanding
The thread has been interesting from a watchers point of view, the contributions by all have been appreciated

Keep it up please

Yeah, I agree. This sort of thing, plus a bit of banter (nowt wrong with banter) is the stuff I'm interested in.

Those who've given me their perspective: cheers. I will think on this, and read a bit more of the BGB and the GNs. Nothing I've heard so far has convinced me (yet).

This was me, last night:

(xkcd.com/386/)

Long may this sort of stuff continue!

 

[nickjohn]

Hi just to continue with the current site installation. I had a look at the work done on site and wondered if you guys had any thoughts on what has been installed.

The external weatherproof housing has been screwed to the side of the van, it is a screwed shut external housing with the main sw and rcd inside, my initial thought is that if the rcd trips at any time the tenant has to remove the cover exposing the switches / connections which surely must be wrong, especially if it is raining etc etc.

Also the ground spike earth goes to the earth connection within the housing but there is no separate earth bond to the chassis is this right?? and the gas bond (10mm) is connected to the internal c/u which only has the earth from the 4mm flex going back to the external sw..

I would have expected to see within the external housing a small 1 way c/u with the main sw and rcd fully enclosed, also I had expected to see a 10mm earth bond continuing to the main chassis and gas or am I wrong??

 

[happysteve]

Oh. Oh my. I... no. No words.

I'm gonna bow out of this one, perhaps I'll resume the discussion on the nuances of the BGB in another thread in the "theories and wiring regs" forum. For this, I'm out.

 

[nickjohn]

Is it that bad or is it my assumptions that are so far out??

 

[D Skelton]

Four words:

Rip out, start again!

 

[nickjohn]

I think you can see why the owner of the site is getting a little brassed off, the sparks who did this work supposedly only does work on caravan sites!!!
He has also suggested putting the external boxes under the vans out of the way but I see from the regs guide that they must be no lower than 500 and, again, how would you access them if the trip went...
I will speak with her tomorrow and advice getting a new sparks....

 

[loz]

the best bet for your friend is to get in touch with oneof these 3 companies, all of them specialize in caravan/mobile home parks, and all work for haven, park dean, park resorts, caravan club etc etc hawkins electrical (the best but the most expensive) rolec services (cheap, but not the best) caravan park electrical services (middle of the road in terms of quality and price) all have websites

 

[D Skelton]

Or call a local spark who knows what he's doing?? This isn't exactly specialist stuff you know. You don't have to specialise in caravan park wiring to be any good at it??

 

[DPG]

So the RCBO is behind a fixed cover. And it's not even transparent, so at least you could SEE if it had tripped. And it's got a removable plug and socket but the box is screwed to the van. Mmmmmmm. Daz