How Best To Update....

[Octopus]

Went to look at a job with a builder mate today - took a look at the fuseboard.....

Interesting use of the RCD's - I'm no fan of having so many circuits on 1 RCD - especially if its all but the 2 showers.....

Leave as they are and just amend the circuits or rearrange to "improve"?

Thanks

 

[HandySparks]

Lose the RCD's fit RCBO's where needed and comply completely

With RCBO's as low as £20 you won't go to hundreds, fitting one for each socket circuit, bathroom circuits etc and breakers for the rest.

Are you suggesting removing the existing 30mA RCD protection from some of the circuits? (Since it's a house, I would expect most circuits to have cables buried in the walls for part of their length.)

 

[oracle]

I wasn't suggesting removal of RCD protection, simply advocating discrimination of the protection ie the loss of one circuit due to a fault not causing the loss of another.

This is achieved by using RCBO's for circuits needing fault protection like sockets, cables less than 50mm below the surface, bathroom and circuits outside the equipotential zone

Each circuit should be considered, for instance some lighting might need RCD protection and some might not

 

[HandySparks]

This is achieved by using RCBO's for circuits needing fault protection like sockets, cables less than 50mm below the surface, bathroom and circuits outside the equipotential zone

I assume you mean additional protection?

Why would circuits outside the equipotential zone require RCD protection?

Each circuit should be considered, for instance some lighting might need RCD protection and some might not

So you would consider removing the RCD protection from those circuits that don't require it?

 

[Midwest]

Can't understand what a Coronary Care Unit has to do with a Consumer Unit

It would be interesting to see that CU with the lid off, not sure how those RCD's for the showers have been installed, internal busbar wise?

And being the bit more of a devil, how far do you go altering a CU before you start going into the realms of 421.1.201? Adding a new MCB or RCBO, but completely altering circuits, busbars, RCD etc. Just a thought.

If all (including lighting) the current circuits have additional protection by RCD, considered necessary by the previous installer , I can't see how you can consider the removal of said protection?

Think we are all agreed it's a bit of a mess, and perhaps Murdoch you can convince the customer to spend a small amount of money on a new CU to go with the huge amount of money being spent on the extension.

 

[richy3333]

Hi Murdoch. Could any of those OCPD be part of the recall?

 

[Andy78]

Not being pedantic, it's a marketing ploy. Calling it that doesn't make it so. Do you have a 17th Edition, Part P multi function tester? They call them that, but there's no such thing. They may be built to a British standard, but it won't be BS7671 (Amd 3) That is the only 17th Edition in town

There are certain requirements that BS7671 asks of test instruments used. The 17th edition tag added to MFTs usually refers to the data that is pre loaded into the tester should you be using it's auto pass/fail options and also download options.

 

[Octopus]

Just had a call from a client where I fitted as new CU about 2 years ago.

The spark working on their extension has said he HAS to replace the cu as its not metal clad.

Muppet

 

[Andy78]

Just had a call from a client where I fitted as new CU about 2 years ago.

The spark working on their extension has said he HAS to replace the cu as its not metal clad.

Muppet

I've already had a couple of sparks I know tell a customer that, not through badness, through misunderstanding.

 

[Midwest]

Just had a call from a client where I fitted as new CU about 2 years ago.

The spark working on their extension has said he HAS to replace the cu as its not metal clad.

Muppet

Probably heard about your workmanship Murdoch......only joking :mevilrun:
PS Like these new smilies.