maximum Zs

[Spudnik]

Which is what i said (or thereabouts) in my first reply.

 

[dazza69]

Hi Guys, according to the NIC the 1667 value should be entered into the maximum Zs box, not the values in table 41.3. So if your filling in NIC certs i would use 1667 ohms. I got pulled for NOT using 1667 on my last inspection. I;m not saying it's right just sayimg what the NIC want to see in that box.

 

[Guest123]

I've always used the values from the appropriate table never just 1667 for all, as if the circuit is without RCD, anything over these values doesn't comply and the device wont operate.

Been an NIC contractor for a few years now, never said anything like that to me.

 

[dazza69]

I totally agree lenny, up to my last visit i have never used 1667 as a maximum value, just letting you know what tis gut said. His name is Warren Clarke. If any one else has come across him on an assessment i would be interested to know what he said to them.

 

[Guest123]

Got to be honest I'm becoming more and more disillusioned with the NIC, one inspector says one thing and another says another. They're getting a lot of bad press lately and it seems they'll take your nan on board as long as she can breathe!!!

 

[dazza69]

Same here, the ONLY reason i'm still with them is that i do a lot of kitchen work for the John Lewis Partnership and they insist on NIC enrollment. If it wasn't for them i'd be off elsewhere!

 

[Spudnik]

As far as im concerned the ONLY time 1667 Mx Zs is entered on my EIC is if its a TT install.

The NIC seem to have their own rules, and its not only about this.

 

[spark1]

I think in General were all agreed on this one then !



regards,,,,,,,,spark 1.

 

[Guest123]

You can't just bang a 30 mA Rcd in and forget about maximum Zs

Couldn't agree more Wayne, a lot of people seem to think that this is the answer, but not in my book. Also on a new installation I have never failed to meet the max Zs values, if consideration is given at the design stage then there is no reason not to meet it.