Change from P.I.R to E.I.C.R's

[Abacusgroup]

It cant have escaped everyones notice that the codings on the New EICR document are somewhat different to the old PIR Document. Most importantly the old Code 4 - Does not comply with current regulations is no longer in existince. Just wandered in general what fellow 2391 Inspectors thoguhts were on a few of the more common things we come across on the new C1, C2, C3 Codings on the new EICR.

(01) No 230V / No 415 V Warnign Sticker
(02) No Mixed Wiring Sticker
(03) No RCD Test Sticker
(04) Neutral out of order on Neutral Bar / Earths out of order.
(05) IP4X failures (Missing gromeets etx)
(06) IP2X failures missing blanks and holes in side of old DB's
(07) Multiple Cables in MCB.s (Reg 314.4 Failures) (I know this will cause a stir)
(08) No RCD Protection on Socket Circuits likely to be used outdoors.
(09) Unknown and Untraced Cirucits on DB's

Thoughts please folsk ont he new coding system.....

 

[Deleted member 26818]

(01) Code C3.
(02) Code C3.
(03) Code C3.
(04) Code C3.
(05) Code C2.
(06) Code C2.
(07) No Code.
(08) Code C2.
(09) n/a.

 

[Adam W]

The best practice guide is downloadable from the NICEIC website and gives guidance on EICR codes.

 

[Abacusgroup]

For Number 7 I should have differentitated on multipel cables in MCB's between lets say 2 x radials in 2.5mm in a B20 compared to a 2.5mm Ring and a 2.5mm Radial in a B32 which is of course dangerous.

Number 9 according to our company is also a code 3 fault.

 

[IQ Electrical]

For Number 7 I should have differentitated on multipel cables in MCB's between lets say 2 x radials in 2.5mm in a B20 compared to a 2.5mm Ring and a 2.5mm Radial in a B32 which is of course dangerous.

Number 9 according to our company is also a code 3 fault.

Is this 'radial' not just a spur?

 

[Abacusgroup]

Nope ... the current carry capacity of a single piece of 2.5 T & E is what 27 Amps... for the whole length of the circuit... its not spurred off with protection by means of a 13A Fused Spur which would protect it... in the case at hand it was a radial socket circuit with 4 sockets on it.... Also you have the old Reg 314.4 Argument and the fact that MCB's should not have more cables in them than they are designed for....

Anyway 27 Amps CCC of the cable in a 32A breaker for that undividual circuit.... Thoughts.

Also the reason you can spur 1 socket off each outlet ona ring is of course that the one socket should not be overloaded under normal conditions i.3 no more than 13 Amps running through it.

 

[HandySparks]

Also the reason you can spur 1 socket off each outlet ona ring is of course that the one socket should not be overloaded under normal conditions i.3 no more than 13 Amps running through it.

26A if it's a double (still allowed).

 

[malcolmsanford]

Multiple cables alone in an MCB as on your OP would not in itself warrant a code, it could be a single spur socket of a RFC, or even say an outside light which is sited on the ground floor and is connected into the ground floor lighting circuit for ease of installation, so in your OP scenario as Spin says no code

There is not mention in 314 concerning about how many cables an MCB is designed for, obviously 3 x 1.5mm cables would be a better termination than say, 3 x 10mm so in the case of the 3x 10mm you could say regulation 526.1 is contravened and depending on what you find, ie signs of burning then either a code 2 or 3

As for a 27amp cable on a 32amp protection device then yes you are contravening reg 433.1.1 (ii) for Iz and IMO a code 2

 

[Des 56]

quote
Nope ... the current carry capacity of a single piece of 2.5 T & E is what 27 Amps... for the whole length of the circuit... its not spurred off with protection by means of a 13A Fused Spur which would protect it... in the case at hand it was a radial socket circuit with 4 sockets on it.... Also you have the old Reg 314.4

In the case where there are 4 outlets it does indeed




There is as you know an exception for a ring circuit

An unfused spur should feed one single or one twin socket outlet
An unfused 2.5mm spur may be taken from the origin of the circuit in the dist board

Here is some information I found that gives perhaps reason why it is permitted


All MK socket-outlets are manufactured to comply with BS1363 part 2: 1995 and are rated at 13A per unit. Double socket-outlets have been manufactured and tested to exceed this rating by margin that allows electrical safety and reduces the risk of heat and mechanical damage to components due to overloading. It should be noted that BS1363 part 2: 1995 does not allow double sockets to operate at twice the permissible maximum loading and it should be remembered that double socket-outlets are not manufactured to be able to withstand a 26A load for sustained periods of time.

Research by ourselves and third party organisations has shown that all MK double sockets can safely withstand a continuous load of 19.5A for an indefinite period. Increasing the load slightly will begin to cause heat and mechanical stresses on the components in a relatively short period. Testing showed that a load of 22.3A was sufficient to cause heat stress that would cause a browning of the faceplates and sufficient heat to cause insulation damage to cable cores. A load of 24A for 43 hours was sufficient to cause significant heat damage to the material in which the socket-outlet was situated and within 75 hours sufficient to cause significant damage that would lead to the very real potential of fire.