Consumer Unit Installation Up to Scratch??? NICEIC approved Installer. | Page 2 | on ElectriciansForums

Discuss Consumer Unit Installation Up to Scratch??? NICEIC approved Installer. in the Certification NICEIC, NAPIT, Stroma, BECSA Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net

Sorry my mistake. The Ze was 0.3. I did a quick pefc I think it was, and it was nice and high. Could've been 1600amp.

It was my house that was 0.19Ze and that's definitely a tns.
You cannot base the earthing system from a Ze
 
With Amd 3 pfc is calculated as 230 x.95 (Cmin) = 218.5/0.3 = .73 Ka (pg. 127 GN3) Not that it makes much difference but it certainly would if you had 0.03 which is becoming more common. I think you need to set your loop test to high output as no trip loop test can be innacurate especially on Ze test.
 
Thanks everyone. Plenty for me to think about which is exactly what I need!

My understanding is any incoming metal service pipework needs to be earthed regardless? Incidentally, just found out my friend was charged for the bonding and meter tails upgrade whatever the requirements are!
 
Thanks everyone. Plenty for me to think about which is exactly what I need!

My understanding is any incoming metal service pipework needs to be earthed regardless? Incidentally, just found out my friend was charged for the bonding and meter tails upgrade whatever the requirements are!


"Bonded"
shinypen,Bonded

He was more than likely stung by a not too rare company which has been badged by the naughty Niceic money grabbers
Maybe the type of courses that enable registration these days promotes standards that are questionable all too often
 
Cmin isn't factored
Better tell the people who wrote GN3.
  • Fault current, I = U0 × Cmin /Zs
where:

U0 is the nominal voltage to Earth,

Cmin is the minimum voltage factor to take account of voltage variations depending on time and place, changing of transformer taps and other considerations.
Pg. 127
 
Last edited by a moderator:
@Risteard If you look in the regs at 411.4.5 411.5.4 etc. and onwards you will see Cmin is factored in to Zs x Ia < Uo x Cmin. Although they dont actually give that formula it is clear in BS7671 it is meant to be factored in by impication. btw I quoted the GN3 verbatim and page number. Although I do agree the Cmax factor may be more appropriate as a safety margin.
 
There is a difference between the prospective fault current and the fault current calculated from the I = U0 × Cmin /Zs formula.
In the second case this formula is being used to determine the trip time of a protective device and so should be the lowest value of fault current that may occur on the installation.
Where you are determining the prospective fault current this is to ensure that the protective device an handle this current so you are determining the maximum expected value that may occur on the installation.
Any protective device must be capable of operating quickly enough at the lowest fault current and also capable of withstanding the highest fault current.
 
Just as a follow up. Had another look today.

The 3 neutrals in to one were actually as follow: 3 x 1.5mm in to one 2.5mm. The mcb was 6amp so not actually dangerous if a little lazy???

There was definitely no bonding in place even though he'd charged for it and recorded it on the cert. Thanks.
 
Cmax is defined in guidance note 6, but not in BS7671, as far as I know; the value of 1.1 (and 0.95) is taken from a cenelec technical report "Determination of cross-sectional area of conductors and selection of protective devices" in 2011.
 
Cmax is defined in guidance note 6, but not in BS7671, as far as I know; the value of 1.1 (and 0.95) is taken from a cenelec technical report "Determination of cross-sectional area of conductors and selection of protective devices" in 2011.
It's just 230v x 1.1 is 253v. It's the electricity safety quality and continuity regulations which allow +10% to -6% of 230v
230v +10% is 23v
230+23v is 253v 230x 1.1 =253v
But yeah cmax isn't in bs 7671 unless I've missed it.
 
Despite all the discussion, going back to the op, there def seems to be some issues with the certification,
if the bonding box is ticked, but there isn't any (and they've been charged) that's an issue
I can't see why you wouldn't measure and record a ze.
They obviously haven't done any zs testing either.
Externally at least, the cu sounds like a right lash up.
All makes you wonder what else they have bodged their way through.
 
Thanks everyone. Plenty for me to think about which is exactly what I need!

My understanding is any incoming metal service pipework needs to be earthed regardless? Incidentally, just found out my friend was charged for the bonding and meter tails upgrade whatever the requirements are!
Bonded not earthed
 
Hopefully it's been sorted now as they've had two years...
 

Reply to Consumer Unit Installation Up to Scratch??? NICEIC approved Installer. in the Certification NICEIC, NAPIT, Stroma, BECSA Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net

Similar Threads

Replies
97
Views
12K
nicebutdim
N
  • Question
From the fact that you have not identified any socket-outlets specifically for equipment racks, and from the dimensions I am inferring that it is...
Replies
1
Views
2K
Hi, My probe was on the outgoing neutral of the RCBO. I will be testing again this week so I will play around, many thanks for your reply.
Replies
7
Views
4K
NICEIC Certification Scheme Certifying Submain using niceiconline
There you go.....not so much of a bell end then, ian;)
Replies
5
Views
3K

OFFICIAL SPONSORS

Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Electrician Courses Green Electrical Goods PCB Way Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Pushfit Wire Connectors Electric Underfloor Heating Electrician Courses
These Official Forum Sponsors May Provide Discounts to Regular Forum Members - If you would like to sponsor us then CLICK HERE and post a thread with who you are, and we'll send you some stats etc

YOUR Unread Posts

This website was designed, optimised and is hosted by untold.media Operating under the name Untold Media since 2001.
Back
Top
AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website. For the best site experience please disable your AdBlocker.

I've Disabled AdBlock    No Thanks