Yes, I can. Lack of RCD protection in some instances where it is now required (though not all) will almost certainly warrant a C2 recommendation.
That's not to say that it is the only example either.
Code 2 or 3
- Thread starter awaitcall
- Start date
That's not to say that it is the only example either.
Sponsored Links
Mmmm.
So - that which was 'safe' when installed (within reason) is 'potentially dangerous' now.
Are you talking about ancient things or one or two editions ago?
So - that which was 'safe' when installed (within reason) is 'potentially dangerous' now.
Are you talking about ancient things or one or two editions ago?
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2010
- Messages
- 2,741
- Reaction score
- 453
- Country
Oh, give it a rest BAS - you are beginning to sound like my son!
As I said, it depends on an objective assessment of the potential hazard. It's not about how long ago it was OK (if ever).
Sponsored Links
Yes, and we know that in the past you've indicated that your view is that that applies to pretty much every change, i.e. that as soon as a new version of B7671 appears anything to the previous version is now to be considered "not safe enough." But as I've pointed out in the past, if that were really the intention of those drafting amendments to BS7671, why is there a provision for a C3, or for a code 4 under the previous scheme? If the writers of BS7671 really think that anything which does not conform in every detail to the current edition is now to be considered unsafe, there would be no need for anything except C1 and C2, would there?
And that's the problem with the EICR (and the previous PIR) - Different people have varying opinions about so many of the more minor issues.
To take the RCD example, we have at least one member here who has stated an opinion that in his view any general-purpose 13A socket not now provided with 30mA protection is not safe (and would, presumably, give it a C2 at best or even a C1). We have others who take the "likely to be used for equipment outdoors" angle and would code C2 for outdoor use or just C3 otherwise. And we have others who while recognizing that adding an RCD protection might be beneficial for providing added protection, aren't going to distinguish between outdoor vs. indoor and will C3 for either.
Just what real use are many of these coded assessments when judgments vary so much? Under the PIR system I even saw some people wanting to code 1 certain things while others would code 4.
Perhaps it might be a good idea if BS7671 actually specified a code against each regulation to be used? It might make for many disagreements with the writers of the standard, but at least for any inspection carried out to that standard it would make the coding results consistent.
Perhaps to put it in context a bit many other jurisdictions would be horrified at the thought of non-RCD protected socket outlets.
In fact my RECI Inspector has indicated that socket outlets without RCD protection (or with a non-functioning RCD) should be subject to a Notice of Potential Hazard (which is the equivalent to an Electrical Danger Notification in the south of Ireland).
Obviously that's not relevant to BS7671 but it does demonstrate how serious an issue it is elsewhere.
Out of curiosity, what is the brief history of RCD requirements in the R.o.I? (When sockets for specific purposes required 100 or 30mA protection, when all required it, etc.).
That would be too prescriptive, the same defect might deserve to be coded differently depending on where it is. Take for example a missing cover from a flourescent batten fitting (so as to expose the choke, connector blocks and internal wiring). I might code that as a C2 the vast majority of times in an office in a commercial building. If it was in a factory and 10m up, it would be a C3, its almost "placing out of reach" but its not really been intended that way, its just occurred. Now if it was in a high school on a 6' ceiling. It would get a C1 and danger notice as some kid is likely to do something silly with it!
Its down to judgement call, and needs to be, unfortunatly that means the system is not entirely consistent.
The coding system isn't ideal either, facilities managers order repairs for C1 and C2 issues as they do not want an unsatisfactory installation, but C3 issues are ignored and not considered
He is not on the ROI. He is in Northern Ireland.
Fair point. But perhaps something a little more definite could be provided? Not sure how it would be done though.
He works both sides of the border.
Well off the top of my head I couldn't give an exact date, but suffice to say that RCD protection for socket outlets has been required for a very long time indeed. Also all water heating appliances require RCD protection and some other things.
Local supplementary bonding to sinks etc. is also required. A suspended ceiling must have a connection to earth in each room. So there are a few quirks from the perspective of the IET/IEE Wiring Regulations.
You have to connect to the ceiling grid in every room which is certainly a pain (and arguably completely pointless).
Normally we just take a green/yellow conductor attached to the earthed containment.
LOL. No just connected to the grid once in each room. You don't have to do each of them.
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
