Spur off a Spur

[claret73]

Hi Guys
Went into College today to do some Practical for my impending Periodic L3...

Testing a ring and found 4 sockets all similar, 1 slightly higher and the last even higher. This got pointed out to be a spur off a spur, which I understand. I wasn't sure & haven't yet asked what code I would give this as not complying with current Regs?

Code 2?

Would the potential of this being left as is, be no more serious than overload on the circuit causing tripping of MCB?

Cheers

 

[scotsparky]

it depends how its wired.
if it is a direct spur of a spur fed by 2.5 off a ring on a 32A circuit i would code 1 as ther is a risk of overloading the cable without diswconnecting the overcurrent device.
However if the specond spur has been fused down to 13A then i would thing of code 2ing it.

 

[bugsy]

The total number of spurs is unlimiteed howerver the number of spurs should exceed the number of sockets , howerver one spur should not feed more than one sigle or double socket

 

[Jason Smith]

Te he would of snipped it to make it safe !!- They probably wouldnt of appreciated that though.

Its one spur off a double socket on a ring main. If a 13 amp fuse is put in the line between the supply and new socket, you can have as many sockets leading off as you like. If you take a 2.5 from the board on a 20 amp you can have as many sockets as you like on this radial, however must be designed to allow for diversity etc. This one will get you out of all sorts of difficult situations when you come to be doing re wires in olds cottages etc .
Common fault to find out there is for todays example, six bathroom towel rails, all beautifully installed on fused spurs, (out of zone ). I could not find the supply to them whilst rewiring the ring main. Eventually found it off the bak of a socket. All are I suspect off JBS in the roof space. Fuses in them rated from 5 amp to 13. 2.5 kw rating per unit. The fused units the heaters are connected d into will blow if a fault develops in the heater or 2 foot length of wire leading to it. However, of course there is nothing protecting the mother wire back to the socket they are spurred from. This place must be extremly greatful for diversity, and the fact people usually go on hols when its warm (its a hotel ) There is the potential here for about 12 kw to be drawn down the 2.5, about 50 amps. It was afire waiting to happen. Snippers today and remedial work tomorrow.

 

[GrannySmiff]

I belive you can have as many fused spurs as you want coming from another fused spur but they must be be fused at 13a and the load must not exced that.

Am I right?.

 

[ab1978]

yes, if its got a 13a fcu at the start you can run more than one socket as its limited to 13a

 

[roukel01]

it depends how its wired.
if it is a direct spur of a spur fed by 2.5 off a ring on a 32A circuit i would code 1 as ther is a risk of overloading the cable without diswconnecting the overcurrent device.
However if the specond spur has been fused down to 13A then i would thing of code 2ing it.

I don't think this situation deserves a code 1. Remember code 1 is that the installation poses an immediate risk, which a spur off a spur doesn't really, it could be used for years without it ever causing problems.
Code 2, indicates that the deficiency requires action to remove a possible danger. Which I think, this situation is.

 

[scotsparky]

My understanding is
Code 1 = Requieres immediate attention
Code 2 = Requieres Improvement.
Code 3 = Further investigation
Code 4 = Not to regs but still possibly safe.

With a spur of a spur where circuit has not been derated it is a fault that reuieres repair ASAP to prevent any possible danger in future therefore a code 1.
Remember that you test as seen and the fact "its been like that for years and is fine" should not affect your judgment as a tester.

 

[roukel01]

My understanding is
Code 1 = Requieres immediate attention
Code 2 = Requieres Improvement.
Code 3 = Further investigation
Code 4 = Not to regs but still possibly safe.

With a spur of a spur where circuit has not been derated it is a fault that reuieres repair ASAP to prevent any possible danger in future therefore a code 1.
Remember that you test as seen and the fact "its been like that for years and is fine" should not affect your judgment as a tester.

Code 1 is Immediate Danger, code 2 is possible risk.

Have a look at the Electrical Safety Council "Best Practice Guides No 4" periodic codes, you will be surprised (I was) at how few faults require a Code 1.

Usually code 1's are for things like, live exposed conductors, no earth in a socket, absence of an RCD on a TT system, absence of main bonding conductors.

Code 2's for things like a broken ring circuit (Which in a way is similar to a spur from a spur), water service pipe being used as the means of earthing, risk of fire where equipment is incorrectly installed.

 

[simonspark]

Code 1 is Immediate Danger, code 2 is possible risk.

Have a look at the Electrical Safety Council "Best Practice Guides No 4" periodic codes, you will be surprised (I was) at how few faults require a Code 1.

Usually code 1's are for things like, live exposed conductors, no earth in a socket, absence of an RCD on a TT system, absence of main bonding conductors.

Code 2's for things like a broken ring circuit (Which in a way is similar to a spur from a spur), water service pipe being used as the means of earthing, risk of fire where equipment is incorrectly installed.

The NIC inspector told me last year that any potential danger was a code 2. That includes no earth at a socket. I dont know if I believe him!

 

[roukel01]

The NIC inspector told me last year that any potential danger was a code 2. That includes no earth at a socket. I dont know if I believe him!

You better send him a best practice guide for his future inspections!!

 

[scotsparky]

Code 1 is Immediate Danger, code 2 is possible risk.

Have a look at the Electrical Safety Council "Best Practice Guides No 4" periodic codes, you will be surprised (I was) at how few faults require a Code 1.

Usually code 1's are for things like, live exposed conductors, no earth in a socket, absence of an RCD on a TT system, absence of main bonding conductors.

Code 2's for things like a broken ring circuit (Which in a way is similar to a spur from a spur), water service pipe being used as the means of earthing, risk of fire where equipment is incorrectly installed.

Have a look at the IEE periodic test sheets and the NIC test sheets.I would code 1 water pipes being used as earth and incorrectly installed equipment.

Testing is a lot to do with the personal understanding and interpritation of the regs as personal judgement.

 

[Scott F]

Remember that you test as seen and the fact "its been like that for years and is fine" should not affect your judgment as a tester.[/QUOTE]

Good point I get this from customers all the time . Then made to feel like I am some Blagger salesman

 

[roukel01]

Have a look at the IEE periodic test sheets and the NIC test sheets.I would code 1 water pipes being used as earth and incorrectly installed equipment.

Testing is a lot to do with the personal understanding and interpritation of the regs as personal judgement.

going back to the original post, for me, its still a code 2 at best. I certainly feel code 1 is a little over the top. As scott F said, customers turn around and say, 'well its been ok for years' which a spur from a spur could well be, and could continue to be for a long time after, this is hardly immediate danger.

 

[TPES]

I agree, code 2