100ma RCDs

[Duncan P]

In an ideal world - money no object, in a TN-S system and a split oad board would it be best to have a 80A 100mA RCD in place of the incomer and the usual 30mA RCD for protected circuits.

I presume this would be safer, is it worth the expense?

 

[bernardgreen]

I presume this would be safer, is it worth the expense?

yes, what price safety ?

 

[dingbat]

In an ideal world every item of equipment would be Class II, all pipework would be plastic and circuits would automatically disconnect if an accessory was opened up!

Your proposal would only make a real difference if the existing circuits were not properly protected from indirect contact by EEBAD.

A better (and even more expensive) solution would be to have each circuit protected by a suitably rated double-pole RCBO!

 

[securespark]

I can hear John panting again!!

 

[festa]

Cant see it being long before its a necessity for ALL circuits in an installation to have some sort of RCD protection.

As is said by a few regulars on here RCBO`s are the way forward but price is a huge factor in this and lots of consumers out there who dont really grasp the concept of potential risk of electrocution (not their own fault though).

i've seen a good few T.T systems,that are years old, not even RCD protected ( bet im not the only one), yet the electricity board does nothing to raise awareness of just how much danger the consumer is in.

Its like periodic inspection and tests....
Im convinced if i went down the local high street and asked 100 people what one was and what part of the house its associated with MOST WOULDN`T HAVE A CLUE !

 

[Duncan P]

so do you need a 100mA RCD or a 100mA time delay RCD

 

[davy_owen_88]

Time delayed would be more suitable to prevent both RCD's tripping at the same time.

Davy

 

[Spark123]

Or I think it's hager that do a CU with a main switch separately feeding two RCDs.

oops, spelt hager wrong!

 

[JohnD]

And MEM!

 

[securespark]

I'm still having a blonde moment on this type of board John...

Can you enlighten me once more?

 

[JohnD]

I think you're pulling my leg...

 

[securespark]

Well, it's more for the guys who are not sparks. Can you explain to them why your board is an acceptable alternative to the more usual split-load arrangement with a 100mA S type incomer in place of the DP incomer?

 

[JohnD]

I was thinking more of

Or I think it's hagger that do a CU with a main switch separately feeding two RCDs.

and one of these http://i113.photobucket.com/albums/n228/JohnD_UK/POL_0125.jpg
which you could use to put (say) all the sockets on a 30mA RCD, and all the others on a something else. The main switch feeds the top rail, and the bottom rail, with fixed links, and you can choose to put a 30mA, or a 100mA, or a 100mA Time Delayed, or no RCD, on eithee or both of these rails, to protect only the circuits on the relevant rail.

But, if you needed (or wanted) a 100mA Time delay and considered that some of your circuits needed 30mA protection and some didn't, my preference is, rather than grouping together those circuits in a split-load and protecting them all by one RCD, to use the more elegant solution of an RCBO for easch circuit needing 30mA protection. the advantage being that a fault on one of those circuits will not cut power to the other circuits that do not have a fault on them.

I don't know if I've answered the question you had in mind

 

[Pensdown]

In reality far more people are killed/injured as a result of electrical fires than by electrocution.

If in the ideal world a 100A/300mA RCBO was fitted in place of the cutout on all domestic supplies this would probably be a thing of the past.

 

[securespark]

In reality far more people are killed/injured as a result of electrical fires than by electrocution.

In reality, all the people electrocuted are killed!