RCD splitting question

[High Tower]

yeah I know...but those posts originated before the earthing system came to light.

sorry mate diddnt realise

 

[tuckermot]

upgrade to new board (more ways)

extend original lighting circuit ( 10a mcb instead of 6a mcb in new board ) allowing that original cable is not 1mm and using watts divided by volts to get amp usage of lights old and new )

wire smoke alarms of original / new circuit using wire less smokes

run new ring back to new board

job done !!!

 

[tonys]

tuckermo

How did you get on with the interview for that electrical/mechanical apprenticeship ?

 

[tuckermot]

hi tony

did not get there mate my normal job came 1st ( pays the bills ) still looking to go full time but just doing bits and bobs at mo !!!! .I have let part p run out as i can not compete with other sparks who just do work any way !!! and are not botherd about certs and building controle

 

[tonys]

Bad ain't it mate, from my point of view, if loads said stuff part p, there's nothing the authorities could do about it. They do not have the time or money to chase people.

Keep at it, there's a load of decent homes work up your way.

 

[tuckermot]

thanks tony

 

[Engineer54]

.....If the property is as you describe I absolutely agree with you,final circuits should be run to a single DB...but as this info was not provided your all encompassing statement concerning additional DB's in a single property is misleading and incorrect.......you dont have to agree,but you are wrong.

I suggest you read the original OPs post, No where in that post, did it talk about granny flats, annexes, or flats, You did that!! I read the post as it was described, and i related to it, and that was as ....'A House Extension'' .

Now unless we are talking about a rather large sprawling house, there will never be a need for having 2 CUs in remote separate locations. 2 CUs Yes maybe, ...one for off peak heating tariff's, or as a means of increasing the number of circuits. But again both located at a common position.


So let me say this again, albeit a little modified to suit yourself, ''The use of 2 remotely separated CUs in a standard sized single dwelling house is a nonsense!!!'' And that is not misleading, nor is it wrong!!!

 

[tonys]

Engineer54

Your not putting with nonsense then, I reckon your part p qualified lol

 

[Engineer54]

Nope, ....i don't even live in the UK these days ...haha!!

 

[tonys]

I know, you drop the hint how many times a day lol

 

[Engineer54]

Haha!!... I don't normally ''Hint'' about anything!!... Well so i've been told ...lol!!

 

[Deleted member 9648]

I suggest you read the original OPs post, No where in that post, did it talk about granny flats, annexes, or flats, You did that!! I read the post as it was described, and i related to it, and that was as ....'A House Extension'' .

Now unless we are talking about a rather large sprawling house, there will never be a need for having 2 CUs in remote separate locations. 2 CUs Yes maybe, ...one for off peak heating tariff's, or as a means of increasing the number of circuits. But again both located at a common position.


So let me say this again, albeit a little modified to suit yourself, ''The use of 2 remotely separated CUs in a standard sized single dwelling house is a nonsense!!!'' And that is not misleading, nor is it wrong!!!

Your original posts at the start of this thread(before there was any notion of the extent of the extended property,or it's intended use) inferred that a second remote DB in a single dwelling is never acceptable and even a cowboy practice....that is absolute rubbish and it is that I took issue with.There are instances where a separate DB would be a better installation method than running multiple final circuits a long distance to a main DB,some of those instances have already been acknowledged,others come to mind.
In the part of your quote highlighted you have suddenly inserted "standard sized"....where was this when your original posts were stating that a second CU is never acceptable?.....you were as unaware as I was of all the facts,that is why my first post asked for more info before answers could be given....

 

[Engineer54]

Your original posts at the start of this thread(before there was any notion of the extent of the extended property,or it's intended use) inferred that a second remote DB in a single dwelling is never acceptable and even a cowboy practice....that is absolute rubbish and it is that I took issue with.There are instances where a separate DB would be a better installation method than running multiple final circuits a long distance to a main DB,some of those instances have already been acknowledged,others come to mind.
In the part of your quote highlighted you have suddenly inserted "standard sized"....where was this when your original posts were stating that a second CU is never acceptable?.....you were as unaware as I was of all the facts,that is why my first post asked for more info before answers could be given....

It's pointless going on and on about this, i think it's been thrashed out enough now....
All i as trying to point out in my last post was that i always understood, that the OPs original post was an extension and nothing more, and that is what i commented on, in my original post.
I didn't suddenly insert ''Standard'', ... as i stated that was to satisfy your side of the argument.

 

[Deleted member 9648]

ok....

 

[piggyitm]

The 16mm in question is a 30m run straight through joists 400m apart .SWA would have been a bit of a chew.
I can't see the problem,if its labeled up,how the distribution layout should be a concern.
Anyway if I change the CU for a dual RCD board and come from a way that's 80a 30ms protected and feed my new board that has 5 circuits,how do I allow for division of circuits at my new board?
For those who are thinking lack of competence,would I be ***** to sit here on a saturday night fishing for the answer with a missus pestering for some romance............?