consumer units

[trickyb]

Hi all realy silly question maybe. Doing consumer change on old consumer 3036 type! now if all test,s out right is it our job to fit rcd protected mcb,s or rcbo,s or indeed any rcd protection at all ! or is it down to what the customer wants to pay ? what are the rules on this? thanks ian

 

[ezzzekiel]

if you are replacing the consumer unt then you are altering the protective devices and so additional protection should be taken into consideration along with earthing and bonding arrangements etc..

unless of course you are carrying out a pir in which case it would be noted in observations compared to current regs.

 

[telectrix]

if you are replacing a CU, then you must work to current regs' that means either 2 rcds or rcbos. earthing and main bonding to be tested and brought up to regs if reqiured.any faults corrected, deviations from regs. noted, EIC on completion, and of course, notifiable to the suits at LABC.

 

[telectrix]

just beat me there ezzz.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Circuits of special locations are required to be RCD protected.
Other than that there is no requirement to place RCD protection in the CU.

 

[trickyb]

thanks all great help . so rcd protection on all circuits yes !

 

[telectrix]

Circuits of special locations are required to be RCD protected.
Other than that there is no requirement to place RCD protection in the CU.

what about socket outlets, cables in walls buried in plaster

 

[Sparky Ninja]

thanks all great help . so rcd protection on all circuits yes !

Without too much of an understanding of the regulations, yes. Installing RCD's (more than 1) on the consumer unit will 'cover your ---' with compliance.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

what about socket outlets, cables in walls buried in plaster

Not required to be at the CU.
In fact there is some merit to the argument that RCD protection for circuits of special locations does not have to be at the CU.

 

[SirKit Breaker]

I see all the arguments. But i am inclined to disagree with Spinlondon. If you replace a CU then it has to be to the latest regs 7671, Part P etc. And my understanding is that with very few exceptions all cables in a domestic property have to be RCD protected. If you add or alter an additional installation and it falls under Minor works, then you only have to RCD protect the bit you have installed, so this would not necessarily be at the CU. Did this recently on a conservatory, broke into downstairs ring, and fit an RCD fused spur for 2 sockets and one light. Getting back to the CU was a no no.

Cheers..........Howard

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Excepting circuits of special locations. The latest Regs. BS7671 and Part P do not require RCD protection to be at the CU.
As such installing a CU that does not have RCDs for circuits that are not of a special location complies with the Regs. and Part P.
As I have already indicated, there are some who argue that with circuits of special locations, the RCD protection does not have to be at the CU.

 

[trickyb]

wasn,t the ring rcd protected?

 

[BillyTheSparks]

The latest Regs. BS7671 and Part P do not require RCD protection to be at the CU.
As such installing a CU that does not have RCDs complies with the Regs. and Part P.

But surely most cables in a domestic would be at a depth less than 50mm and would therefore need to be RCD protected?
So to cover your --- as previously said, I would just fit a duel split load board or a main switch board with RCBOs

 

[Deleted member 26818]

I'm not advocating installing a CU without RCD protection, just pointing out that BS7671 does not neccessarily require it.
The OP's question was in relation to what the client is willing to pay for, and what is acceptable in relation to BS7671.
BS3036 fuses are allowed by BS7671, but for many MCBs are considered a better and safer option.
If cost is really a matter of concern, would it be reasonable to deny someone the benefits of MCBs just because they can't afford RCDs/RCBOs?
Especially if there is nothing in BS7671 prohibiting such.

 

[ezzzekiel]

speaking of shed disconnection times..... oh sorry wrong thread