PIR codes

[AllertonEPS]

With respect "IQ Electrical" - I think you have missed the point of the question - I am not familiar with the 16th Edition regulations ( before my time ) - but I imagine bonding of sinks etc in kitchens to be necessary.... I think this is more a question of whether you should still be testing to the 16th edition at all. I would strongly advocate putting in an RCD ( whether that be a new consumer board - or how-ever ) - and then testing to the 17th edition.

The customer would reasonably expect a SATISFACTORY on a report to mean that he could extend the circuits - and testing it to the 16th edition would mean that a SATISFACTORY wouldn't indicate that extension of the circuits were possible.

So to answer the question - MY ANSWER would be a FAIL with the recommendation to get the consumer board up to the 17th Edition - before doing anything else....

 

[trev]

With respect "IQ Electrical" - I think you have missed the point of the question - I am not familiar with the 16th Edition regulations ( before my time ) - but I imagine bonding of sinks etc in kitchens to be necessary.... I think this is more a question of whether you should still be testing to the 16th edition at all. I would strongly advocate putting in an RCD ( whether that be a new consumer board - or how-ever ) - and then testing to the 17th edition.

The customer would reasonably expect a SATISFACTORY on a report to mean that he could extend the circuits - and testing it to the 16th edition would mean that a SATISFACTORY wouldn't indicate that extension of the circuits were possible.

So to answer the question - MY ANSWER would be a FAIL with the recommendation to get the consumer board up to the 17th Edition - before doing anything else....

Interesting post, what code would you give to a 16th split load board then?

 

[IQ Electrical]

With respect "IQ Electrical" - I think you have missed the point of the question - I am not familiar with the 16th Edition regulations ( before my time ) - but I imagine bonding of sinks etc in kitchens to be necessary.... I think this is more a question of whether you should still be testing to the 16th edition at all. I would strongly advocate putting in an RCD ( whether that be a new consumer board - or how-ever ) - and then testing to the 17th edition.

The customer would reasonably expect a SATISFACTORY on a report to mean that he could extend the circuits - and testing it to the 16th edition would mean that a SATISFACTORY wouldn't indicate that extension of the circuits were possible.

So to answer the question - MY ANSWER would be a FAIL with the recommendation to get the consumer board up to the 17th Edition - before doing anything else....

Missing the point?
You only test against the requirements of the current edition of BS7671 so how can you 'fail' an installation with missing 'cross bonding' when that requirement was withdrawn years ago?

I'm certainly not missing the point, it's crystal clear to me as is Guidance Note 3!

 

[AllertonEPS]

To IQ Electrical > We are both saying the same thing ... Just re-read my message as 'UNSATISFACTORY' instead of 'FAIL' and you'll feel a good deal better. Instead you ( correctly ) challenge the questioner's 'Competency' without clearing up his confusion - it seems to be standard fair for replies to posts. People have questions and the response here is to question their competency - instead of just delivering the keys words which clear up the confusion. Their competency for carrying out inspections is down to their chosen registration body to either assign or decline - the purpose of these threads is to help people.

 

[IQ Electrical]

To IQ Electrical > We are both saying the same thing ... Just re-read my message as 'UNSATISFACTORY' instead of 'FAIL' and you'll feel a good deal better. Instead you ( correctly ) challenge the questioner's 'Competency' without clearing up his confusion - it seems to be standard fair for replies to posts. People have questions and the response here is to question their competency - instead of just delivering the keys words which clear up the confusion. Their competency for carrying out inspections is down to their chosen registration body to either assign or decline - the purpose of these threads is to help people.

Did you miss the link that I posted in post 104?
Also, there is no requirement to be registered with a scheme provider to undertake periodic inspections.

 

[AllertonEPS]

That's right - the trouble is that you don't need qualifications to be on this forum - so responders are constantly challenging people's qualifications - rather than just answering questions. :rockon:

 

[trev]

That's right - the trouble is that you don't need qualifications to be on this forum - so responders are constantly challenging people's qualifications - rather than just answering questions. :rockon:

You're right you don't need quals to be on here however if you come on spouting wrong info and claiming to be something you;re not you're going to be found out fairly soon

 

[IQ Electrical]

That's right - the trouble is that you don't need qualifications to be on this forum - so responders are constantly challenging people's qualifications - rather than just answering questions. :rockon:

I take your point and always try to offer help/advice but there's a tipping point where you have to be honest with people regarding competence.
The PIRs I see day after day are completed to an appalling standard as I'm sure many here have also found.

We are being paid for our expertise/experience and have a duty to at least be familiar with the regulations that we are being asked to compare installations to before we accept such work.

 

[huntos33]

1mm Cables on a 16amp 60898 code C2 or C1 thinking a C2 myself What do you guys think

 

[HandySparks]

What's the cable type, installation method and load?

 

[huntos33]

What's the cable type, installation method and load?

6242Y Ref 100 , 2 cables in 16amp pulling around 7 amps in total, Running some lights in a hall , thing is the boards full so they cant be split on to 2 6amps.

 

[HandySparks]

So the cable's good for 13A, currently loaded to less than 7A on each leg and, I guess, unlikely to be overloaded unless the circuit is extended. I'd be inclined to give it a C2 and recommend changing the MCB to a 10A.

 

[IQ Electrical]

So the cable's good for 13A, currently loaded to less than 7A on each leg and, I guess, unlikely to be overloaded unless the circuit is extended. I'd be inclined to give it a C2 and recommend changing the MCB to a 10A.

Agreed

 

[huntos33]

One more ! 2 No 6 way wylex old style wooden backed boards with 60898 plug in mcbs covered by a main 30ma trip upfront on a tt system , but i feel as this is in a village hall this is not ideal ie total power loss if the main rcd trips. So i think a code 3 with an explaination in the eicr explaining this sound fair to you guys ?

 

[IQ Electrical]

One more ! 2 No 6 way wylex old style wooden backed boards with 60898 plug in mcbs covered by a main 30ma trip upfront on a tt system , but i feel as this is in a village hall this is not ideal ie total power loss if the main rcd trips. So i think a code 3 with an explaination in the eicr explaining this sound fair to you guys ?

Is there any emergency lighting? If so, I'd be happy to leave the RCD uncoded.
You can make mention of the wooden-backed Wylex in a covering letter but in the (literally) hundreds that I've encountered, I've never seen a problem yet!