EICR Codes

[bigbaddave]

Hi Guys, What codes would you give to the following

No Rcd
No Rcd on sockets that can be reasonably be expected to supply mobile equipment
No Supplementary Bonding
no Earth to backboxes with metel switches
Global IR 0.609
Individual IR 1.0 Mo
No Rcd on lights in bathroom

 

[D80]

If a TT system then no RCD would be a code 1. Hard to generalise everything as installations can be so different.

 

[Des 56]

Hi Guys, What codes would you give to the following

No Rcd
No Rcd on sockets that can be reasonably be expected to supply mobile equipment
No Supplementary Bonding
no Earth to backboxes with metel switches
Global IR 0.609
Individual IR 1.0 Mo
No Rcd on lights in bathroom

If you were to post your own opinion,other opinions could be offered

 

[bigbaddave]

No Rcd - code 3
No Rcd on sockets that can be reasonably be expected to supply mobile equipment - code 2
No Supplementary Bonding - code 2 due to no rcd
no Earth to backboxes with metel switches code 2, code 3 to plastic
Global IR 0.609 code 2
Individual IR 1.0 Mo - it's 1.1 so no Code or maybe 3. Either way I'd be recommending next inspection was 6m - year
No Rcd on lights in bathroom code 3

The system is TNS

 

[Octopus]

No Rcd - code 3
No Rcd on sockets that can be reasonably be expected to supply mobile equipment - code 2
No Supplementary Bonding - code 2 due to no rcd
no Earth to backboxes with metel switches code 2, code 3 to plastic
Global IR 0.609 code 2
Individual IR 1.0 Mo - it's 1.1 so no Code or maybe 3. Either way I'd be recommending next inspection was 6m - year
No Rcd on lights in bathroom code 3

The system is TNS

Code 3 IMHO

 

[kingeri]

No Rcd - code 3
No Rcd on sockets that can be reasonably be expected to supply mobile equipment - code 2
No Supplementary Bonding - code 2 due to no rcd
no Earth to backboxes with metel switches code 2, code 3 to plastic
Global IR 0.609 code 2
Individual IR 1.0 Mo - it's 1.1 so no Code or maybe 3. Either way I'd be recommending next inspection was 6m - year
No Rcd on lights in bathroom code 3

The system is TNS

No code necessary - you don't have to earth metal backboxes as long as one of the lugs is fixed, and as long as the box is effectively earthed through the fixing screws. The metal accessory should, of course, be earthed. Saying that, I still do it. And why would you earth a plastic box? Or do you mean that the CPCs are just not terminated at all?

 

[Deleted member 26818]

There is no requirement in BS7671 for every installation to have an RCD.
BS7671 has requrements for RCD protection in specific circumstances.
Each of those specific circumstance where RCD protection is not provided, should be recorded individually.
As such your first obsevation should not be an observation and no code shoud be applied.
Your second observation is worded incorrectly, the wording 'reasonably be expected' is no longer used.
What you should have is something like :
Lack of RCD protection for socket-outlets for use by ordinary persons and intended for general use. Code C3.
Lack of RCD protection for socket-outlets used to supply mobile equipment outdoors. Code C2.
Lack of additional protection for cables concealed in walls. Code C3. (RCD protection is just one method of providing additional protection for cables concealed in walls.)
Lack of RCD protection for circuits of a location containing a bath or shower. Code C3.
Lack of supplementary bonding in a location containing a bath or shower. Code C2. (Supplementary bonding is still required in the current Regulations, but can be omitted in certain circumstances.)
No observation should be recorded for the lack of fly leads to the back boxes.
The poor IR value can be recorded, but no code applied, as it is within the specifications in BS7671.
Yes an annual check on the IR would be advisable.

 

[SirKit Breaker]

Hi Guys, What codes would you give to the following

No Rcd
No Rcd on sockets that can be reasonably be expected to supply mobile equipment
No Supplementary Bonding
no Earth to backboxes with metel switches
Global IR 0.609
Individual IR 1.0 Mo
No Rcd on lights in bathroom

Hey up mate,

You are assessing the installation against current standards so,

You need to know or have a good idea about the standard that was in force at the time the installation was first designed etc etc.

If the installation still meets those requirements, then it is fine, there is nothing wrong with it. However, because you are assessing it against BS7671 2008 (2011), then you have to point out where it falls short and advise improvements. These improvements are just that "Adviseable" and should be coded 3. The wiring regs are not retrospective.

You have to satisfy yourself "Is It safe for continued use". Just because it doesn't have RCD's doesn't mean it is unsafe.The supp bonding may not be needed, only you can tell us, cos you have seen the install.

The interval to the next Insp and Test is down to you based on your findings, and i would say with IR of 1 meg, then it will be sooner rather than later.

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

 

[Tidy Max]

Hey up mate,

You are assessing the installation against current standards so,

You need to know or have a good idea about the standard that was in force at the time the installation was first designed etc etc.

If the installation still meets those requirements, then it is fine, there is nothing wrong with it. However, because you are assessing it against BS7671 2008 (2011), then you have to point out where it falls short and advise improvements. These improvements are just that "Adviseable" and should be coded 3. The wiring regs are not retrospective.

You have to satisfy yourself "Is It safe for continued use". Just because it doesn't have RCD's doesn't mean it is unsafe.The supp bonding may not be needed, only you can tell us, cos you have seen the install.

The interval to the next Insp and Test is down to you based on your findings, and i would say with IR of 1 meg, then it will be sooner rather than later.

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

Still trying to get my head around EICR's completely, but if you were in a installation Howard and the lighting circuit had no CPC and had class 1 fittings, would you give that a c3 because it complied at the time it was installed? I would be more inclined to give it a c2 in which case the installation should be deemed unsatisfactory?

Cheers,

Max

 

[rattlehead85]

This situation warrants a C2 departure on a EICR. The reason for this is because the metalwork may become live under fault conditions leading to shock risk from indirect contact. A C3 would only be applicable if you find the circuit lacks a cpc and class 2 equipment is present.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

A lighting circuit without a CPC and with class 1 fittings has never complied.