regs and rcbo,s

[wire the world]

hi all got a cracker for you to solve............. single phase board in cellar supplying 9 bedsits all bedsits have 4way board with rcd protection. question. client wants certificate but as regs state all cables in walls ov domestic installations insist on sum sort ov rcd or rcbo protection ????????????? how can this be achieved as if i put rcbo in the cellar the client will be called to reset the bedsit from cellar everytime it trips??? time delayd rcbos????? or what else do yous think cheers kev

 

[scotsparky]

First of all is it a PIR he is after?
If its a PIR you are doingn Record lack or RCDs o final circuits on page 2as a code 2 unless the sockets can be used outside equepotential zone then code 1 and double check your Zs reading at 80% so you know your disconnection times are ok.

As for the main D.B in the celler its Sub Mains and not final circuits so you can get away with no RCD protection as its a 5sec disconnection time. just ensure cables are run in corrrect zonings inthe houise.

 

[GT1]

all bedsits have 4way board with rcd protection

Does this mean each individual board has an RCD main switch..?

client wants certificate

What sort of certificate..? is it a PIR or have you done some work there.?
If its a PIR for change of occupancy then you can point out any shortcomings, then quote him for the work..!

 

[Guest123]

In this instance it's the installation method of the cable not the circuit that needs RCD protection, unless it's in earthed galv conduit or buried more than 50mm.

 

[electric-ian]

Assuming the cables are buried they need 30mA RCD so yes its a code 2.

If the landlord wants a 'clean sheet' and doesnt want the cellar hastle then you'll have to re-run the subs in surface trunking.... Nice

If hes got loadsa money, you could do the steel conduit thing......
Oh, landlord... surface trunking it is then.

 

[uksel]

are local authorities not accepting code 2's anymore for HMO's etc??

 

[Deleted member 9648]

Cables buried at a depth of less than 50mm and not RCD protected are a CODE 4 not a code 2 as stated. There is no requirement to rectify a code 4....just record on the PIR.

http://www.esc.org.uk/pdfs/business-and-community/electrical-industry/BPG4_08.pdf page 15

 

[electric-ian]

Arrrggg.. Thanks Wirepuller - - Of course its a 4..

Sorry all, I must have been on another planet when I wrote that . . . .

Will try to engage brain before typing next time...

If there was an embarrassed smilie I'd be using it right now..

 

[Guest123]

If there was an embarrassed smilie I'd be using it right now..

.....

 

[Risteard]

Cables buried at a depth of less than 50mm and not RCD protected are a CODE 4 not a code 2 as stated.

Depends whether you consider that it requires improvement or not. I don't think the ESC can set in stone what code an Inspector should attribute to it. Just use your own logic and reason.

 

[Deleted member 9648]

Depends whether you consider that it requires improvement or not. I don't think the ESC can set in stone what code an Inspector should attribute to it. Just use your own logic and reason.

Agreed....i'ts up to the inspector at the end of the day to attribute whatever code he/she feels appropriate. But I think in the case of buried cables not rcd protected but in a permitted zone it hardly warrants a code 2. After all just a couple of years ago it wasnt even a requirement........You also have to bear in mind that when you do a pir you are effectively committing the client to spend their hard earned as any code 2 will result in an unsatisfactory,you have to be able to justify that.

 

[uksel]

Agreed....i'ts up to the inspector at the end of the day to attribute whatever code he/she feels appropriate. But I think in the case of buried cables not rcd protected but in a permitted zone it hardly warrants a code 2. After all just a couple of years ago it wasnt even a requirement........You also have to bear in mind that when you do a pir you are effectively committing the client to spend their hard earned as any code 2 will result in an unsatisfactory,you have to be able to justify that.

it's a code 4, every day of the week

does not comply with BS7671, though it would have complied with the regs when it was installed.

when i was working on a massive commercial installation in cardiff, the 17th edition regs were in force, but the design was done to the 16th edition - the installation was made to comply with the 16th edition regs and was signed off by cardiff comissioning without a problem

so to 'fail' the installation or issue a code 2 deviation would be unreasonable in my view

 

[Risteard]

any code 2 will result in an unsatisfactory

So the NICEIC claim, but IEE Guidance Note 3 only stipulates that it would not be reasonable for anything coded "1" to result in the Installation being deemed "Satisfactory". Again, for other codes, it is a matter of judgement on the part of the Inspector.

it's a code 4, every day of the week

does not comply with BS7671, though it would have complied with the regs when it was installed.

I disagree. If I am inspecting an installation then I am being engaged to make my own judgement on that. Incidentally, code 4 does not mean that it complied when it was installed. It means that it does not comply with the Regulations, but MAY NOT NECESSARILLY be unsafe (not isn't unsafe). It is also irrelevant whether the violation ever complied with the Regulations.

Or an installation may be installed to a different standard than BS7671, and be perfectly safe, but clearly not comply with BS7671.

 

[electric-ian]

.....

 

[uksel]

So the NICEIC claim, but IEE Guidance Note 3 only stipulates that it would not be reasonable for anything coded "1" to result in the Installation being deemed "Satisfactory". Again, for other codes, it is a matter of judgement on the part of the Inspector.



I disagree. If I am inspecting an installation then I am being engaged to make my own judgement on that. Incidentally, code 4 does not mean that it complied when it was installed. It means that it does not comply with the Regulations, but MAY NOT NECESSARILLY be unsafe (not isn't unsafe). It is also irrelevant whether the violation ever complied with the Regulations.

Or an installation may be installed to a different standard than BS7671, and be perfectly safe, but clearly not comply with BS7671.

the purpose of a periodic inspection is to ascertain wether the installation is still fit and safe for use

read page 78 of GN3

installations including those constructed in accordance with earlier editions of BS7671 should be inspected and tested for compliance with the current edition of BS7671 and departures recorded. however reference should be made to the note by the health and safety executive following the preface to BS7671, that installations conforming to earlier editions, not complying with the current edition do not necessarily fail to achieve conformity with the electricity at work regulations 1989.

last time i checked - the EAWR didn't change in 2008

provided you are confident (as a competant person) that the supply will disconnect in the required time in the case of a fault you will be complying with EAWR

quote from EAWR, which is the statutory regulation that you must legally comply with

• Means for protecting from excess of current
  11. Efficient means, suitably located, shall be provided for protecting from excess of current every part of a system as may be necessary to prevent danger.