IR testing on new build | on ElectriciansForums

Discuss IR testing on new build in the UK Electrical Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net

Joined
Mar 27, 2014
Messages
197
Reaction score
38
Location
Stirling
Hi all testing of new build house. When carrying out IR testing on circuits unplugged all equipment and took down smoke alarms. As there was a lot of lights connected with lamps and installed in twin and earth. I put live and neutral together and tested to Earth. IR test was starting off low but eventually got above 200mega ohm. So recorded that but got me thinking will the fact that the surge protector was still connected that will make the readings go all over the place. Every circuit got above 200mega ohm which I was happy about but would this surge protector affect readings ? Also find a lot of sparks very rarely carry out IR tests just rely on RCBOs or RCDs ? Hope use can help
 
new build - possible damp. applying 500V IR test tends to dry the circuit and readings increase the longer you leave the 500V applied. surge protectors in the CU should not affect, as you circuit/s are not connected to it.
 
You should be carrying out L - N tests for initial verification, not just L+N - E
I assume this is initial verification as you say new build?

The slow rise in IR can be due to dampness from the plaster and/or capacitance of the cables.

If you have disconnected L and N to do the test then the SPD won't be in the test circuit.
 
Also find a lot of sparks very rarely carry out IR tests just rely on RCBOs or RCDs ?
You mean the "bang! test" approach?

You might want to read the fatal accident inquiry report that I quoted in 2nd part of this post:
 
Last edited:
Cheers lads, yeah that’s right called in afterwards when all lights have been fitted bollards lights, spot lights, fans. So thought a LN joined down to earth would be best option since they will be touching earth in a twin earth cable ?
 
If there are non-removable loads already fitted (e.g. LED lights) then L+N -> E is your only real option, and it is the most important safety aspect.

SPD tend to show a constant low IR value (well below 1M) at 500V, but if you re-test at 250V then they are in to the several-tens of M ohm region.

In fact quite a lot of SPD show that for L-N using a MOV type of protection, but N-E can be a GDT and sometimes they still look open at 500V (but would show M ohm or less, and sometimes a worrying squealing, if tested at 1000V)
 
Regulation 643.3.1 does allow the testing of the line and neutral conductors connected together and to the earthing arrangement where appropriate, this falls under chapter 64 which is initial verification and not periodic inspection and testing so it is applicable.
This is also echoed in GN3 for circuits vulnerable to this test.
So it’s down to your determination of what is and what is not appropriate.
 
Cheers lads for the replies. TBH i would prefer to do L-N , N-E,L-E IR testing but with all these loads connected would take more than half the day to disconnect everything. Then to put all together again, so tested at LN joined to earth getting over 200mega ohms. I have seen sparks just carry out R1+R2s and Then live testing. Where I like to carry out IR testing even though everything on RCDs these days.
 
Cheers lads for the replies. TBH i would prefer to do L-N , N-E,L-E IR testing but with all these loads connected would take more than half the day to disconnect everything. Then to put all together again, so tested at LN joined to earth getting over 200mega ohms. I have seen sparks just carry out R1+R2s and Then live testing. Where I like to carry out IR testing even though everything on RCDs these days.

Firstly test before loads are connected, connecting lights via plugs and sockets where possible helps this.

Then they are not complying with the regulations, RCDs do not negate the need for RCD testing.

There seems to be this attitude/opinion among a lot of 'sparks' that RCD are some kind of magical device that cure all problems and prevent electric shocks from occurring.
 
IR testing isn't an option its part of initial verification and should be done with no loads connected - as @davesparks said.

GN3 at 2.6.7 states that 'all lamps be removed and fluorescent and other discharge luminaries and other equipment disconnected. Where the removal of lamps and/or disconnection of current using equipment is impracticable, the local switches controlling such lamps and/or equipment should be open. An insulation resistance test of L&N connected to earth will ensure that all circuit protective conductors are tested'. In my mind that is a process to use sparingly and as a last result not a continuous get out to proper and complete IR testing?
 
In the real world, on site, it is often not practical for a L-N test to be carried out as part of the initial verification, it simply doesn't work that way and IMO a LN-E test is compliant and adequate. I don't expect everyone to agree but I am absolutely certain that many of those who claim to always do L-N tests on lighting circuits are talking out of their arsenals. In many cases it would be necessary to provide temporary joints at each lighting point, test and then disconnect the temps before connecting the fittings proper.
Where flat T/E is used the chance of a low IR between live conductors is miniscule....because there is a bare uninsulated cpc sandwiched between, any breakdown in insulation is invariably going to show on the cpc, not between live conductors.
 

Reply to IR testing on new build 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
303
  • Sticky
  • Article
Good to know thanks, one can never have enough places to source parts from!
Replies
4
Views
819
  • 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
894

Similar threads

Continuity of the suspect cable appears fine all cores, from this I could work out the length of it and it really doesn’t appear looking at the...
Replies
2
Views
333
  • Question
I may have been mistaken regarding TT I will look into that, thank you for the valued reply, but in general I stick to my post, a good topic for...
2
Replies
24
Views
3K

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