inspection and testing

[Silly Sausage]

Im not asking for your opinion on my competence , more of an opinion
Thanks

My opinion is...
You're thinking of condemning the whole DB because a few of it circuits have high Z esses?!?!
I think you need to have a re-think.

 

[Diddy]

Input - As stated you/they/someone MUST bring the installation up to standard to get a "satisfactory" EICR
What can you do ?
IF the conduit is not protected against its environment then that could lead to a possible c2/c3 just on containment (Eg if there is reat big rusty holes in it.) If its galv conduit then it should be fine.
What else could you do - Run in cpc's if there are none and run in an earth from the met at the supply. Run in all your usual main protective bonds and assess for the need for supplementary bonding.
As for RCD protection - does it need it in your opinion ? Would the area count as a special location ?
As an inspector you just have to deliver the report imho. Deliver the unsatisfactory report if the install is not up to scratch and quote for remedial works.
You say Zs is high....is it too high ? only you have seen the readings mate.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

An installation has one MET.
The initials stand for Main Earth Terminal.
An installation may have EMTs (Earth Marhshaling Terminals) as well as a MET, but there is no requirement to such.
All circuits of a location containing a swimming pool, are now (just as with locations containing baths or showers) required to be provided with 30mA RCD protection.
Depending upon where the board is situated, it may be that the circuit supplying the board would also require 30mA RCD protection.
However as the requirements are retrospective, it could be argued that a lack of RCD protection, would only warrent a code C3, if the installation complied at the time of it's design/construction.

 

[Diddy]

An installation has one MET.
The initials stand for Main Earth Terminal.
An installation may have EMTs (Earth Marhshaling Terminals) as well as an MET, but there is no requirement to have any.
All circuits of a location containing a swimming pool, are now (just as with locations containing baths or showers) required to be provided with 30mA RCD protection.
Depending upon where the board is situated, it may be that the circuit supplying the board would also require 30mA RCD protection.
However as the requirements are retrospective, it could be argued that a lack of RCD protection, would only Warrent a code C3, if the installation complied at the time of it's design/construction.

I know that mate I was just using the term loosely between sparks lol. This sounds like a sub board to me (so running in an earth from MET would still be "correct" lol). Maybe im just looking too deep into stuff lol.

 

[davesparks]

If the board is supplied by steel conduit then it does have an earth, its that steel conduit! There is absoloutely nothing wrong with this and is compliant with the current regulations as long as the connection at each end is electrically and mechanically sound. If it is suffering from a bit of corrosion then the most it might need is a bit of a clean up and some paint to cover the exposed metal.
The same goes for outgoing circuits wired in steel conduit.

 

[davesparks]

Sounds like it needs ripping out to be honest

Why on earth would it need that?

 

[Deleted member 26818]

I didn't reply to your post.
You posted while I was typing.
My comment regarding the MET was aimed at the OP.
He stated that the board doesn't have a MET.
I also suspected that it was a Sub board, which is why I asked for clarification.
Obviously, a Sub board would not have a MET, as the MEt would be at the origin of the installation.
I would expect that there would be a CPC run with the feed to the board, and would expect the CPCs of the circuits fed from this board to be connected to it.

 

[jdtae]

Considering it is a swiming fool I would consider RCD protection as a minimum.
and Take a Zs reading (highest reading point) without any touch on main conduits connection point then note it. Would try to make the main conduits connection points better as much it can be.
take a second reading of Zs on same point.
if the second reading comes out with lower reading... report it on EICR with the concerns.
if reading remains same then I would go for Ze.
There would be a better way with someone's opinion.

JD

 

[trev]

conduits connected to earthing in a corrosive environment is my concern - the board is earthed vi the conduits supplying maintails from isolator below it. I am see the lack on main earth cable as a C1 - and the db should be isolated until the necessary remedial work has been completed

Cheers

Please tell us what gives us the authority to do this. I'd love it if we had the clout but we don't.

 

[uksparks]

Why on earth would it need that?

I was just suggesting it's 40+ years old and updating it to something modern wouldn't go a miss. I'm sure it works perfectly well, but it would be nice to update it.

 

[ian.settle1]

I was just suggesting it's 40+ years old and updating it to something modern wouldn't go a miss. I'm sure it works perfectly well, but it would be nice to update it.

I'm 57 does that mean I need updating for something modern

 

[Tidy Max]

I'm 57 does that mean I need updating for something modern

Don't give your Mrs any ideas!

 

[Sparky 63]

Thanks for all your inputs gents

Cheers

 

[trev]

Thanks for all your inputs gents

Cheers

Nowts the botha hinny

 

[CockneyReject]

conduits connected to earthing in a corrosive environment is my concern - the board is earthed vi the conduits supplying maintails from isolator below it. I am see the lack on main earth cable as a C1 - and the db should be isolated until the necessary remedial work has been completed

Cheers

Absence of a suitable means of earthing for the installation is a C2 fella, seeing as there's only any real or immediate danger if a fault occurs

wheres the DB situated out of interest and is there any sign of corrosion to the DB and conduits already?