Search results

I was being light-hearted following on the ‘not unusual’ theme. Forgot this is a serious site for serious people. I posted the first three lines of the second verse in the song. Being serious, seeing a 3-core in a 3-plate installation is becoming more common as more people are fitting home...

EFLI. Running a 3 core to a switch, using one core for neutral is not unusual. It happens every day. No matter what you say. You'll find it happens all the time.

Just read through this thread and have some observations 1. There are 3 types of SPD. (1 is used for lightning protection, 2 is used to protect sensitive electrical and electronic equipment, 3 is used to protect safety critical equipment). They all provide a route to earth when a transient...

You are missing the point. A job starting today is designed to 2018:amendment 1. We are due an amendment next year. If the job is in progress, the contractor can continue as is or redesign to amendment 2. It doesn’t mean you can install to an old edition of the regs.

Given the regs point at the relevant regs, it would not take much to add the recommended code. However, that does seem to be a bit of dumbing down. Another approach would be to set a minimum standard for inspectors. I’ve never understood why there are no restrictions on who can issue an EICR...

It's personal choice. My main point was that we apply the regs in effect today (so missing RCD would result in a code. Eric seems to believe we use the regs from the date of original installation.

To clarify, I was referring to 411.3.3 when I said I would code as C2.

For a new installation the document produced is an Electrical Installation Certificate (or Minor Works EIC). The codes do not apply to the EIC/MWEIC. This makes no sense. The inspector folows the version of BS7671 in effect on the day of the inspection The EICR applies the regs in effect...

You post this frequently and you are mistaken. The inspector will inspect and test against BS7671. Using the first non-compliance to illustrate. 4.19 RCD(s) provided for additional protection/requirements - includes RCBOs (411.3.3; 415.1) is in a potentially dangerous condition. Urgent...

Hi John. All well here and I hope all is well with you and yours. I wasn't referring to you, rather that when a query is raised regarding FCU, the diy response tends to be that 'I changed an FCU for something else and it's fine.' I would just say it's always best to establish what is there...

Sunray's posts leave me bemused. They invariably start with some edge-case issue and end with 'Sunray saved the day' I just googled sunset/sunrise time in Kent. It showed 06:20 and 19:40. I would expect that outside these times there would be light from other rooms to give some level of...

Mottie The socket now behind the radiator is more of a concern. The regs have zones where it is permitted to run cables and these run horizontal or vertical from the socket. The risk is that somebody could drill into any buried cable, as the socket is hidden. There is also a requirement that...

I was quoting Rob as he has proposed a C2. I'm just querying, not challenging his decision. I think personal views matter, as an EICR is largely based on personal views.

Why did you not just replace the contactor? If you had done that you would not be in your current position. There were and are better solutions open to you.

@SUNRAY Moot point, but back in 09 why did you decide to change the layout of the circuit? What was wrong with the original ring final circuit?

I don't dismiss your posts. You are obviously knowledgeable. I am with you with this thread. I would agree that a lack of RCD would be a C3 (if all other tests are satisfied). As BS7671 is not retrospective, coding a lack of RCD as C2 doesn't seem right. As you say, there are millions of...

Just out of curiosity, which reg would you quote to warrant an unsatisfactory rating for the ELCB? I assume you would code this as a C2.

As the circuit was working before they disturbed my guess would be they missed something. An MCB has a number on the front which is the maximum breaking capacity In amps. In domestic this is normally 6000. Up to 6000 amps should trip the breaker leaving it functional. A current greater than...

I don't know why you have pulled me into this thread. In another thread, Eric posted that he would omit RCD protection after a Risk Assessment. All I said in reply was that would be inappropriate. You queried whether I meant risk assessments are never appropriate in a domestic...

I was referring specifically to Eric posting that a Risk Assessment in a domestic setting led him to believe no RCD was required. I pointed out that the regs did not allow for a Risk Assessment in a dwelling. We all assess risks every day, whether or not it is formal.