On a domestic periodic inspection today we discovered a cooker control unit serving a gas range cooker (igniter only) wired onto the kitchen final ring circuit (60898 Ty B 32A). The cabling is 2.5 T&E embedded in wall. The switched output side of the cooker control unit is also wired in 2.5 T&E but with two cables in parallel down to a cooker connection plate at low level behind the oven. I have been asked to justify my reasoning for marking this as a defect and giving a code accordingly. Before I give my code my reason is as follows:
In appearances this unit is a genuine cooker circuit and Mr DIY possibly wouldn’t recognise an issue if he possibly changed the oven in the future for a full electric type. This would now put possibly 6Kw additional load onto the kitchen ring circuit serving sockets and kitchen appliances. Reg 433.1 requires circuits to be designed so a small overload of a long duration is unlikely to occur. This being the regulation I have quoted in my PI report.
I have recommended removing the cooker control unit from the final ring circuit and rewiring a dedicated cooker circuit.
Has anyone any opinions or suggestions regarding this?
On a domestic periodic inspection today we discovered a cooker control unit serving a gas range cooker (igniter only) wired onto the kitchen final ring circuit (60898 Ty B 32A). The cabling is 2.5 T&E embedded in wall. The switched output side of the cooker control unit is also wired in 2.5 T&E but with two cables in parallel down to a cooker connection plate at low level behind the oven. I have been asked to justify my reasoning for marking this as a defect and giving a code accordingly. Before I give my code my reason is as follows:
In appearances this unit is a genuine cooker circuit and Mr DIY possibly wouldn’t recognise an issue if he possibly changed the oven in the future for a full electric type. This would now put possibly 6Kw additional load onto the kitchen ring circuit serving sockets and kitchen appliances. Reg 433.1 requires circuits to be designed so a small overload of a long duration is unlikely to occur. This being the regulation I have quoted in my PI report.
I have recommended removing the cooker control unit from the final ring circuit and rewiring a dedicated cooker circuit.
Has anyone any opinions or suggestions regarding this?
Could you not fit a 13A FCU at the point where it connects to the ring. That way, 2.5mm protected throughout and no chance of future overloading.
Think maybe a code 2 is a bit harsh as you're actually failing the installation, although it's not breaking any regulations at the moment and it's not immediately dangerous. The spur off the ring to a fixed item of equipment is fine and we can't base PIRs on what people might do in the future
A ring final circuit must not supply an immersion heater, storage heaters or a cooker rated more than 2kw. p362, 433.1.5 So my way of looking at this ist at present with the cooker switch connected a 6000 watt appliance could easily be connected and therfore breaching above reg. If a FCU was installed in place of the cooker switch then no breach of regs.
You could, I suppose, note the wrong switchgear/accesories and, as Sintra says, recommend replacing with a SFCU, but I don't think it warrants a code 2......and the spur off the ring and what it is feeding isn't breaking any Regs.
I agree there is not imminent danger as it stands at this time BUT I do believe it warrants improvement hence the code 2. It’s not the only code 2 in the property and the PI was our first stage for future works anyway.
It’s my opinion that the cooker control point was original on ring and never a twin socket. The one point that concerned me more being the pair of 2.5’s going to the outlet via the switched side of the unit implying a high load was intended to be connected. My though was that if (and I accept we can’t be responsible for future activates) say a appliance store supplied and installed a electric oven of said 6Kw and only removed the cooker connection plate and not the control unit then would they think what’s the reason for 2 x 2.5’s. Cable capable to take load so OK or give it no thought at all and just connect it anyway. It wouldn’t be until the CCU is removed the ring issue would become apparent. Also no circuit for cooker on CU granted. We are going to remove the cooker control and replace with twin socket. The outlet at low level will be rewired with 6mm and a new circuit added to the consumer unit and isolation DP switch above.
Client is happy so all is good. I think I will ask Mr NIC when we see him in a few weeks just to get his spin on it. Also gives us something to talk about in the van between visits.
Well the proposed modifications sound OJK, but just for the record 433.1.5 actually states that Accessories to BS1363 may be connected through a final ring circuit. The original design did not comply with that. Was it potentially dangerious? In my opnion Yes. The cable of the ring circuit was not properly protected as it was not properly fused.
Incidently 433.1.5 and page 362 do not say you cannot connect an imersion heater, etc only that this is a way of meeting the requirement that the "load on any part of the circuit shoud be unlikely to exceed for long periods the current carring capacity of the cable" {excuse the grammer but that is a quote from p362}
In practice you would need an immersion heater plus somthing like a 2Kw heater to cause an overload, and even then it would depend on the disposition of the equipment.
No, the problem would arrise if a short circuit developed in the igniter circuit. Not being protected by the required BS1361 fuse the next level of protection woould be the 32A MCB. The wireing in the igniter would almost certainly not be suitable to take this and would potentially burn out or even start a small fire... Yes, fuses are there for a reason. I re-quote a saying is saw on this site... Anybody can install and electrical system and get it working. It takes a qualified electrician to install it safely.
oops! misread the original post as this was connected via a plug top
This does need some attention as the flex and as the previous post says the connected equipment is not protected by an appropriatly sized fuse or circuit breaker
On a domestic periodic inspection today we discovered a cooker control unit serving a gas range cooker (igniter only) wired onto the kitchen final ring circuit (60898 Ty B 32A). The cabling is 2.5 T&E embedded in wall. The switched output side of the cooker control unit is also wired in 2.5 T&E but with two cables in parallel down to a cooker connection plate at low level behind the oven. I have been asked to justify my reasoning for marking this as a defect and giving a code accordingly. Before I give my code my reason is as follows:
In appearances this unit is a genuine cooker circuit and Mr DIY possibly wouldn’t recognise an issue if he possibly changed the oven in the future for a full electric type. This would now put possibly 6Kw additional load onto the kitchen ring circuit serving sockets and kitchen appliances. Reg 433.1 requires circuits to be designed so a small overload of a long duration is unlikely to occur. This being the regulation I have quoted in my PI report.
I have recommended removing the cooker control unit from the final ring circuit and rewiring a dedicated cooker circuit.
Has anyone any opinions or suggestions regarding this?
is the circuit only proteted by a 60898...??? would you not also be failing it with a code 2 for lack of RCD (61008) protction of circuits in a special location and cables embeded in wall's..??
is the circuit only proteted by a 60898...??? would you not also be failing it with a code 2 for lack of RCD (61008) protction of circuits in a special location and cables embeded in wall's..??
alot of people are saying niceic and the like are giving it a failed code 2...?? i plan on getting niced soon and this sounds like a grey area, tryin to get any sense out nic is rediculas, after being passed around like a rag doll, i give up..??
Reply to Cooker on the ring in the Electrical Wiring, Theories and Regulations area at ElectriciansForums.net
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
