fuseboard change

[Sintra]

So what exactly are you supposed to test if you can't isolate circuits.

 

[dynamite2000]

well obvouisly i havent done that my original qiestion has been blown all out of proprtion FORGET IT u all seem to act like politicians ,

 

[Octopus]

If the customer believes they can get a new CU fitted, along with all the testing and certification for £140.00 I'd simply provide an estimate of at least double (if not a bit more) and let them make their minds up.

Don't try and do a proper CU change for £140.00 - it won't make any sense nor do anything for your professionalism!

 

[WayneL]

sound thanx for tht pal i didn,t no if you had to join a group or not . while i,m here have you done 2391 yet are or you upto testing standards yet cheers mate..if yes or no , my question is can you do a R1 + R2 test while the board is live at the board itself. ??

Okay, Dynamite, the answer to your original question:

NO, you can't. You can't do a R1 + R2 test anywhere while the board is live.

You shouldn't even take the cover off a board while it's live.

Then again, you don't need to do an R1 + R2 test on a PIR anyway - and you don't have to fill in one of the columns - that's b******s.

So, there's the answer - but it's not the answer that you want, is it??

 

[dynamite2000]

so why does it say you must fill in at least one column on niceic if you cnnott isolate the supply..!! how can we do this.either the customer must have it isolated MUST or the sheets should say if possible NICEIEC,,

 

[malcolmsanford]

well obvouisly i havent done that my original qiestion has been blown all out of proprtion FORGET IT u all seem to act like politicians ,

Son settle down. Do you want to hear this as I think this is what you want us to say.

If you can't isolate the circuit then look at a previous PIR, see what is written down and write someting similar, perhpas a couple of points different. If there isn't a previous PIR, then you make one up and put that on the Certifiacate.

Well I hope that no one on here is going to tell you that! as that is negligence, but in the same breath I will not say that this sort of thing does not happen, it does, the same as PAT is normally a farce with companies making operatives test 300+ items a day, it's a sticker putting on operation.

If you can't isolate the circuit, if you can't arrange to do the test out of hours, then you have to mark it a limitation, as said before the more limitations the less value the document is, but if you can't test the circuit then you can't. If your company are telling you that you can't set this type of limitations, then your between a rock and a hard place. You and only you can decide what you have to do. Sign a sheet that you know is negligent, or do what is morally right and stand your ground. No one on here can decide for you.

 

[telectrix]

very well put , malcolm

 

[WayneL]

Hi,

In addition to what Malcolm has said.

If you are doing a PIR, there is no requirement for a measurement of R1 + R2. There is a requirement to confirm continuity of protective conductors - which you can do using the wander lead method.

I would only measure R1 + R2 if I needed this measurement to determine my Zs (rather than measuring Zs), by adding it to my measured Ze.
If you can't isolate the installation, then you can't measure Ze, so this method of determining Zs wouldn't be possible to you either.

No point in trying to measure R1 + R2 on a 'live' installation - what do you need the measurement for.....what does the measurement tell you??

Better to measure Zs at extremity of radials and at socket outlets - this confirms the earth path and gives you your Zs figure to compare with the Regs/OSG.

Bottom line, mate, according to the EAWR you have to have a pretty good reason for poking around in a live CU, and measuring R1 + R2 wouldn't be one. IMO

The reason I said you don't have to fill one of the columns is because, on a PIR, you have the option of 'limitations' - if a particular test isn't possible for whatever reason, and you have the option of N/A - if a particular test isn't applicable to what you are doing.

 

[malcolmsanford]

I honesty thought that in the amendment that is coming out they would have changed this on a PIR to exclude either the R1 + R2 or R2 requirements.

Most modern meters will give you your Zs at a socket and you can get the adaptors for BC lights. Ok other forms of lights, such as Hi bay will need to be Method 2, Even then you can find yourself 20 or 30 metres from the DB with a lead running everywhere. As well as having to open the DB cover to croc onto the earth bar.

As Wayne says on a PIR the R1 + R2 test is pretty poiintless if your meter is confirming a EFLI path.

I think it is time that the PIR tests where revamped, in what way I suppose is open to argument but putting the onus onto the sparks is an IET cop out

 

[dynamite2000]

well ive been in this game 25 years and i do agree with wot you say but int it a bit much when it has to come to this,,its all money and figures numbers ect now..cheers anyway pal and sorry if i woz abrupt..but i aint gunna turn down 150 qid a test for 4 hours work, so i think i will go down that avenue,,

 

[IQ Electrical]

..but i aint gunna turn down 150 qid a test for 4 hours work

So you're inspecting & testing an occupied Monsoon shop in 4 hours?

You worry me more with each post......

 

[eggyboy]

ARITE MATE get your testing inspection suckup some usefull stuff haha

 

[eggyboy]

hi,new member here. when changing a fuseboard should i test and issue a test certificate when doing this job or only if the customer asks for one? and should i price the changing of the fuseboard and testing/certificate seperately?

arite mate realy nead ur test & inspection youl learn wot our colleges r worried about

 

[dynamite2000]

yep coz thats how long firm say they take, so they only get paid for 4 hours labour so wot can i do. i no its a joke but this is how things are these dys time money time money time money. numbers and figures..wot can i say i have a dog to feed.