EICR Code for working RCD with non-functioning test button | Page 2 | on ElectriciansForums

Discuss EICR Code for working RCD with non-functioning test button in the UK Electrical Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net

Dartlec

Arms
Joined
Jun 29, 2020
Messages
1,751
Reaction score
2,504
Location
Kent
Doing one more of the flood of EICR today on a rented property before a tenant change, but ran into a slightly interesting case so would appreciate other people's views.

About 6.5 years ago I partially rewired the small kitchen at this property - and since the main fuseboard was a skeleton wylex cupboard job and a pain to replace, I added a small Garage CU with 80A RCD to supply the 32A MCB for the kitchen ring to comply with RCD requirements (The main fuseboard has a 100ma RCD).

Today during the EICR, the newer RCD tested perfectly using the megger, but the test button is non functional - doesn't seem to have any resistance behind it so I'm guessing has mechanically failed.

The issue then becomes what code this is noted on the EICR.

Common sense may say it's best to change it since it could be a sign of failure. However, it passed the tests with no problem and therefore functions correctly as an RCD.

A previous thread discussed a similar topic 6 years ago and most people agreed this should be a C2.

However, the ESC best practise guide states that C2 codes are for situations that aren't dangerous at the time, but "would become an immediate danger if a fault or other foreseeable event was to occur"

This is a TN-S system, and the circuit in question has a low Zs so the RCD is not required to meet tripping limits for the MCB - it is there for additional protection as required by Regs.

If this was an EICR on an older board the absence of an RCD would be no more than a C3, so it seems slightly overkill to list this as a C2 and therefore grade the whole EICR as "unsatisfactory"

My own view is somewhere around a C2.5 for cases like this, or perhaps a C2 but a "satisfactory" rating, both of which are not options based on the guidelines.

Given that we know exactly 0.05% of people press the test button, whether quarterly or bi-annually, and given that an inspection will occur after 5 years, does the non-functioning test button actually have an outcome on the "electrical safety" of the installation, which is what the EICR is for after all?

I have no idea how frequently the test buttons fail in comparison to the rest of the device, or whether one it is always indicative of a developing fault.

EICR aside, assuming that the RCD should be replaced, the further wrinkle is that it was a LAP branded board, RCD and MCB, which I believe are no longer produced, (At the time the customer wanted to save money so a LAP garage unit was the chepest option.) so replacnig just the RCD would either mean mixing and matching (which is itself usually a C3 in my book) or entirely replacing the unit.

How would other electricians deal with that part, given that it's long past supplier's warranty periods? Bite some of the cost themselves as a goodwill gesture? (Obviously not installing LAP brand goes without saying, but given MK and the current situation who knows which brands will be around in 6 years?

Final note - any one know who made LAP stuff - and whether it is still made under a different brand?
 
I've slightly amended my view on this, I cant see it as potentially dangerous but it's a faulty device and needs changing, so I think a code 2 is probably justified to make sure it is changed
[automerge]1595581464[/automerge]
but if it doesn't say LAP on the tin, who's to know? you could say it's akin to fitting wago connectors in a wiska box.
I get what you are saying but all the other devices in the board will be LAP, however you look at it there will be two brands in the DB.
Daft just for a technicality though, we both know if it fits right it'll be fine!
 
Would be in a lap enclosure though, still mix and match!
I think the "mix and match" issue applies (technically at least) when you have a busbar arrangement as in a typical CU. There you have to make sure the busbar is properly entering and being clamped by the MCB, and you get a lot of variations on that.

If it is simply a RCD enclosure on a circuit already fed by a MCB from the main CU it would have no need for a busbar, just wires in and out, so I see no technical reason to complain.

But given the low cost of a pre-populated garage CU it would be worth just replacing the whole thing (assuming wires are not stretched out to limits and difficult to accommodate the slightly different new one).
 
I've slightly amended my view on this, I cant see it as potentially dangerous but it's a faulty device and needs changing, so I think a code 2 is probably justified to make sure it is changed
[automerge]1595581464[/automerge]

I get what you are saying but all the other devices in the board will be LAP, however you look at it there will be two brands in the DB.
Daft just for a technicality though, we both know if it fits right it'll be fine!
how can there be 2 brands when both RCD and MCB are replaced? the remaining is just an enclosure.
 
how can there be 2 brands when both RCD and MCB are replaced? the remaining is just an enclosure.
Indeed, sorry I'd forgotten it was a 1 way DB and not a dual RCD main board or whatever.
However it could be argued that it's still non compliant with the enclosure.
That said the cost of a small DB is minimal so just change the whole thing and you know it's right.
 
Indeed, sorry I'd forgotten it was a 1 way DB and not a dual RCD main board or whatever.
However it could be argued that it's still non compliant with the enclosure.
That said the cost of a small DB is minimal so just change the whole thing and you know it's right.
but if it doesn't say LAP on the tin, who's to know? you could say it's akin to fitting wago connectors in a wiska box.

The enclosure does actually say LAP, so if you were being exact putting another brand in there would be mix and match. As I understand it, the main reason for using all the same brand is to maintain the 16kA capacity rating based on the type testing by the manufacturer. Whether LAP or whoever made this actually did that is another matter of course...

However, replacing the entire unit would presumably require an 18th edition installation (Not just a 'direct replacement' as if effects the source of the installation), so metal box, new EIC, new testing of the circuit, Part P notification etc - i.e. not a 10 minute job, though not a huge PITA in this case.

I can probably say safely that the cost of a SPD is not justified, let alone an AFDD :)

Any experience of the small dbs for ease of use with cabling etc? Wylex or Crabtree are most likely to be around in 5 years I guess.

Thanks for all the replies. Replacing it is the correct option of course, though that's still in my mind a separate issue from the EICR.

When others have failed an EICR and then carried out remedial work, have you re-issued the EICR? Technically the recent landlord law allows the unsatisfactory cert + confirmation of the required work (MWC or EIC included presumably) to be taken together as proof of electrical safety. However, explaining that to anyone who ever looks at the certificicate is likely to be a pain, especially when it's potential tenants.
 

Attachments

  • [ElectriciansForums.net] EICR Code for working RCD with non-functioning test button
    2020-07-23 15.24.27.jpg
    82.1 KB · Views: 47
Shouldn't you be testing the test button first before using a tester??

I was taught in my 2391 that if it doesn't trip on the test button its a c2
Some might say, yes.
But there needs to be an application of common sense. I already made the point that where an RCD is in place but not actually required as additional protection it would be very difficult to justify it being potentially dangerous
 
Lap is the screwfix brand, It looks like they have stopped making consumer units and the accessories.
Here is one on ebay Lap 63A 30mA Rcd | eBay - https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Lap-63A-30mA-Rcd/174101048101?hash=item28893b2b25:g:LmQAAOSwjyJd1CbC,
although if it's just a normal din rail inside the enclosure then I would be fitting another brand of RCD along with the same brand MCB rather than buying a second hand RCD from ebay.
Not sure what's going on with the top of your CU, is that some kind of sealant?
Also, it looks like the Main switch is designed to be on the left hand side of the board, is it? if so, how did you get the bus bar to fit?
 
As an eBay Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Lap is the screwfix brand, It looks like they have stopped making consumer units and the accessories.
Here is one on ebay Lap 63A 30mA Rcd | eBay - https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Lap-63A-30mA-Rcd/174101048101?hash=item28893b2b25:g:LmQAAOSwjyJd1CbC,
although if it's just a normal din rail inside the enclosure then I would be fitting another brand of RCD along with the same brand MCB rather than buying a second hand RCD from ebay.
Not sure what's going on with the top of your CU, is that some kind of sealant?
Also, it looks like the Main switch is designed to be on the left hand side of the board, is it? if so, how did you get the bus bar to fit?

I almost always avoid buying a used item, though there have been occasions when there is not much option. I assume LAP were rebranded, I do have a document somewhere that lists the original maker so may chase them down - they may well end up being one of the makes that wholesalers often rebrand.

The busbar is installed as normal right to left (no pic sorry) - just shows the quality of their product that they printed the ON/OFF on the wrong side of the enclosure :rolleyes:.

The stuff on top is sealant to maintain IP rating - these days I'd use a gland or a wiska fire proof connector - I think the hole may have been non-standard size at the time maybe...
 
As an eBay Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Oddly, the test button on that one is in a totally different place to my one. Did they change suppliers during their run? or maybe the 80A and 63A RCDs were from different suppliers....

This was a one off experiment at the time because they were on offer I think - and there was probably a reason I never installed any more LAP.

Some of their stuff isn't so bad - the sockets are basically rebadged BG - and their GU10 LEDs are my standard go to now, but it was probably wise for them to stop branding RCDs/MCBs.

Toolstation still do it with Axiom, but I'm fairly sure they are just another common make rebranded.
 
As an eBay Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Shouldn't you be testing the test button first before using a tester??

I was taught in my 2391 that if it doesn't trip on the test button its a c2

I can see why C2 is the 'easy' choice and maybe even the right one, but I find the discussion of why has been interesting - I always prefer to think things through rather than fill by rote, or because everyone else does it without knowing why.

The absence of a RCD where not needed to meet minimum Zs requirements doesn't seem to pose a 'potential immediate danger if a fault develops'.

However, if any device is potentially faulty in one aspect, can it be considered safe in other aspects.

Changing it is not really the issue for me, it's whether using C2 as a way to 'force' something to be changed that may not be dangerous is a valid use of the EICR (it may well be just to be sure)
[automerge]1595599743[/automerge]
Also, it looks like the Main switch is designed to be on the left hand side of the board, is it? if so, how did you get the bus bar to fit?

You know, you now have me doubting myself. The RCD you linked to doesn't have clear L or N markings on so my one is likely the same. If it was wired reverse to how it was designed, would it trip under a meter test, but not by the button?
 
I can see why C2 is the 'easy' choice and maybe even the right one, but I find the discussion of why has been interesting - I always prefer to think things through rather than fill by rote, or because everyone else does it without knowing why.

The absence of a RCD where not needed to meet minimum Zs requirements doesn't seem to pose a 'potential immediate danger if a fault develops'.

However, if any device is potentially faulty in one aspect, can it be considered safe in other aspects.

Changing it is not really the issue for me, it's whether using C2 as a way to 'force' something to be changed that may not be dangerous is a valid use of the EICR (it may well be just to be sure)
[automerge]1595599743[/automerge]


You know, you now have me doubting myself. The RCD you linked to doesn't have clear L or N markings on so my one is likely the same. If it was wired reverse to how it was designed, would it trip under a meter test, but not by the button?
Now that's an interesting point. @lucien will clear it up I'm sure :) .
I've read so many threads about swapping the line and neutral around on an RCD and I'm still not sure if it can or can't be done!
 
I've read so many threads about swapping the line and neutral around on an RCD and I'm still not sure if it can or can't be done!
For those with the white "functional earth" they should trip immediately on L & N swap as they would see a faulty neutral line. But not many have that feature and it is a bit of a pain to wire in.

For 2-pole RCDs otherwise the L&N swap should not make much of a difference and some have no indication of which should be used. However, for 3-phase it is a significant issue as potentially the RCD could be powered from 400V instead of 230V if N was swapped for L2/L3.

Quite probably @Lucien Nunes will have more to add!
 

Reply to EICR Code for working RCD with non-functioning test button in the UK Electrical Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net

News and Offers from Sponsors

  • Article
Join us at electronica 2024 in Munich! Since 1964, electronica has been the premier event for technology enthusiasts and industry professionals...
    • Like
Replies
0
Views
381
  • Sticky
  • Article
Good to know thanks, one can never have enough places to source parts from!
Replies
4
Views
959
  • Article
OFFICIAL SPONSORS These Official Forum Sponsors May Provide Discounts to Regular Forum Members - If you would like to sponsor us then...
Replies
0
Views
1K

Similar threads

I would C2 this, cable is not suitable for the environment its installed in, we would C2 a socket for equipment likely to be used outside , cable...
Replies
11
Views
957
  • Question
If they got a shock then something cannot have been isolated.
Replies
7
Views
1K

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