17th Edition Seminar

Joined
18 Jul 2004
Messages
8,518
Reaction score
407
Location
Devon
Country
United Kingdom
I am going to a 17th edition seminar on Thursday.

Any questions you think need asking?
 
Sponsored Links
Why they decided to require RCD protection for cables concealed in the allowed zones - where is their accident data and their cost-benefit analysis and/or regulatory impact analysis that justifies it.

When is Amendment 1 coming out.

What is their view on the debate surrounding testing of existing circuits and EICs for replacement CUs given that EICs may no longer contain Fails or LIMs.
 
Why has it gone up to £65?

Why have they chosen red as the colour as it clashes with my corporate colours? :)
 
Why has it gone up to £65?
Because most people who buy it have no choice, so they have to pay whatever it costs.

Why have they chosen red as the colour as it clashes with my corporate colours? :)
It was next in line. The next reprint incorporating amendments to date should be green.
 
Sponsored Links
I am going to a 17th edition seminar on Thursday.

Any questions you think need asking?


How should you comply with the regs if a circuit is intended to supply one or more items of fixed equipmet, such that the total protective conductor current is likely to exceed 10mA (as per regulation 543.7), and incorporates a cable in a wall or partition at a depth of less than 50 mm from a surface of the wall or partition (as per regulations 522.6.6 / 522.6.7)

I am currently working on an installation where this situation has asrisen. It is an acceptable installation to the 16th edition, but not to the 17th.

The new regs call for the use of a 30mA RCD to protect the concealed wiring, but this would not be suitable due to the intended high leakage currents present on the installation.
 
Why not ask if, as it is a 17th Edition Seminar, the time allotted to the sales pitch of test equipment manufacturers etc. can instead be used to ask more questions on the 17th Edition :D
 
What is their view on the debate surrounding testing of existing circuits and EICs for replacement CUs given that EICs may no longer contain Fails or LIMs.

EIC's couldn't contain fails or LIMs under the 16th so no change there.
 
What is their view on the debate surrounding testing of existing circuits and EICs for replacement CUs given that EICs may no longer contain Fails or LIMs.

As far as I'm aware that's always been the case and the only difference is it's now highlighted on the cert.

An EIC is for new works only and existing circuits are just that, existing.

When it comes to changing a CU, a site survey is obviously carried out first to assess the existing installation as Regulation 130-07-01. After a visual inspection, if the contractor is worried and believes testing of the existing circuits needs to be done, they should do it before the CU is changed not after.

Once the CU is changed the only sub circuit testing that needs to be done is polarity and there’s a tick box on the EIC for that purpose.
 
I am going to a 17th edition seminar on Thursday.

Any questions you think need asking?


How should you comply with the regs if a circuit is intended to supply one or more items of fixed equipmet, such that the total protective conductor current is likely to exceed 10mA (as per regulation 543.7), and incorporates a cable in a wall or partition at a depth of less than 50 mm from a surface of the wall or partition (as per regulations 522.6.6 / 522.6.7)

I am currently working on an installation where this situation has asrisen. It is an acceptable installation to the 16th edition, but not to the 17th.

The new regs call for the use of a 30mA RCD to protect the concealed wiring, but this would not be suitable due to the intended high leakage currents present on the installation.

Regulation 522.6.6 gives the designer 5 options for concealed cables in “domestic properties” so why are so many sparks choosing 522.6.7 as a means of compliance? :confused:

The way 522.6.7 has been worded says fitting an RCD should be a last resort.
 
EIC's couldn't contain fails or LIMs under the 16th so no change there.
Fail's maybe, but not sure that 742-01-04 means that you can't have LIMs....

742-01-04 "Defects or omissions revealed during inspection and testing of the installation work covered by the certificate shall be made good before the certificate is issued"

That'll stop fails but LIMS on an EIC? If you're installing and certifying why would there be any limitations?
 
742-01-04 - Defects or omissions revealed during inspection & testing of the installation work covered by the Certificate shall be made good before the Certificate is issued.

That means ALL defects and omissions if it's a board change as an EIC is required.

Or ALL earthing and bonding if it's a new circuit as an EIC is required.

A Minor Works may allow some defects, but an EIC doesn't.
 
That'll stop fails but LIMS on an EIC? If you're installing and certifying why would there be any limitations?
Not talking about installing and certifying, but inspecting and testing an existing installations.

If an installed cable is not visible, then you can't say that it complies, so LIM is all you can put down.
 

DIYnot Local

Staff member

If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.

Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.


Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local

 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top