PIR 16th Vs 17th please clarify

[Spudnik]

There are many code 2`s that I could not, in all honesty, use to classify an installation as unsatisfactory.

Any examples?

Would be interested to hear your views

 

[baldsparkies]

Not wishing to throw a spanner into the works scott, but have you ever considered typical disconnection times on a socket circuit ie 0.4 seconds in relation to safe operation of the protective device.
Lets say a type b 20A radial gives a Zs reading that complies with safe disconnection time then the circuit we have tested should be seen as satisfactory,not any more,because the circuit now needs suplementery protection in the form of an rcd. Not because the circuit itself doesn't comply,but because someone could plug an appliance into the circuit that has conductive parts and insufficient earthing.
What I am trying to say is that its not the socket circuit thats unsafe its the appliance that may or may not be plugged into it. and you the tester now have to code 2 a circuit to cover something that is not technically part of the install.
Taking it further a novice could take a Zs of say 22 ohms on a circuit thats connected to a pme tncs system and because its protected by an rcd,deem this as a satisfactory reading because the tables give 1667 ohms as the max permissable. Ok with experiance you would know that something was not quite right but according to the book all is fine.
Its food for thought would you not agree.

 

[scotsparky]

Bald i agree in what your saying.as for the 20a type c cinario i would class 3/4 that and put in a recomendation for rcds/rcbos to be installed on the report.
As for the 22ohm Zs that is an odd one and any expiriance tester would pick it up. Yes theoretically ok but what about the Zs x In <50v rule? and other things that have to be taken into account as well as proving diconnetion times.

 

[baldsparkies]

Thats the point scott even at 20 ohms the disconnection time is there and the potential wont rise above 50v as a result. But the integrity of the R1+R2 is suspect and could break down. My answer would be to base maximum Zs on the mcb values and not rcd values (much safer) TT systems accepted of course.
Its all very interesting stuff though, makes for good dicussions

 

[scotsparky]

yes i agree its where expiriance and good training comes in. But what my main point was th PASS FAIL idea. my point was it Satisfactory or unsatisfactory.

 

[baldsparkies]

Ok regardless of code 2s and what they should be classed as between unsatisfactory or satisfactory, why not go for.

Generally Satisfactory other than items as listed under observations and recomendations for 2,3 and 4.

Code 1 is clear cut as unsatisfactory (Do you reckon that would cover us)

 

[Spudnik]

But what my main point was th PASS FAIL idea. my point was it Satisfactory or unsatisfactory.

Ok lets look at it another way.

If you were discussing the subject of a recent PIR that came back unsatisfactory, would you say, "That property unsatisfactoried a PIR"?

It would be "That property failed a PIR".

Thats how is see it, but indeed, they are either satisfactory or unsatisfactory.

 

[martquin]

Hi everybody newbie here. Just had niceic inspection. All code 1 must be accompanied with a danger notice.

 

[scotsparky]

I think we are gettin down to personal views and arguing out own corner on interpritation.

 

[martquin]

This is not my personal view but straight from niceic inspector.

 

[scotsparky]

No Martquin my comment was about something else.

 

[slocm3105]

I "personally" think that as long as we can identify dagerous or at risk situations, and the differences between them and not to current standards situations we will be fine. The regs are there to be interpreted by us .

Cheers

 

[isitintheregs]

Ok lets look at it another way.

If you were discussing the subject of a recent PIR that came back unsatisfactory, would you say, "That property unsatisfactoried a PIR"?

It would be "That property failed a PIR".

Thats how is see it, but indeed, they are either satisfactory or unsatisfactory.

Why not "The PIR on property X deemed the electrical installation to be unsatisfactory." ?

 

[scotsparky]

I "personally" think that as long as we can identify dagerous or at risk situations, and the differences between them and not to current standards situations we will be fine. The regs are there to be interpreted by us .

Cheers

There is a lot in the regs that isnt up to interpritation. and once you understand the regs most of it is pritty clear.

 

[baldsparkies]

I agree with you Scot most of what is written in the regs is clear, It's what is NOT written that causes confusion, and or reading between the lines scenarios. I suppose if enough of the same questions are getting back to the iee from in the field electricians,then clarification comes to us through ammendmants.The 16th had more than it's fair share of those over the years.