EICR - Unsatisfactory on new build

[JohnW2]

I don't have an issue with metal CU's per se, one only has to look at the larger (commercial) units to se they have pretty much been since the year dot.

They have (and my house had a few when I moved in), but it is pretty rare for them to have been installed in domestic premises in recent decades.

The big difference between "larger commercial units" and what one expects to find in domestic installations in the 21st century is that DIYers do not generally "fiddle about injudiciously" inside the former, which have live things within them, surrounded by lots of earthed metal.

Kind Regards, John

 

[Murdochcat]

I'm a little confused. You appeared to be (like me) sceptical/cynical about 'latest expensive fads' and, indeed, the ever-increasing requirements of the regs in general, but you now seem to be supporting, almost 'promoting' the idea that the regs should force people to make provision for future fads.

Even for those who believe RCD protection to be 'worthwhile', dual RCD boards, or even single up-front RCD ones, pose no electrical hazard, and what 'inconvenience' they may result in (once in a blue moon for most people) is no worse than the 'inconvenience' caused by a power cut - something against which BS7671 does not require any 'protection' in domestic premises.

You must operate in a very different world to me. Over the last decade I have encountered so many people suffering from huge inconvenience when they loose their entire installation when a single RCD trips or half their home when 1 of the RCD's trip.

That is why I changed to full RCBO boards a few years back and it IS the best design / installation for years to come and offers the best flexibility for future , possibly unknown changes to the regs.

Its also the best approach to deal with 531.3.2 (i)

For the relatively small amount extra the benefits are there for customers

 

[ebee]

I must admit that in a domestic setting I would usually have a preference for an all insulated CU (plastic) . A few short years back it was discovered that only a few passed the intention of the relevant heat/flame testing required so rather than taking the manufacturers to task about it the spec changed and the answer "became favouring metal" (not strictly true but the easy way to view the requirement). Metal ,being conductive, can bring about it`s own problems especially on a TT system with no RCD before the tails enter the CU enclosure.

 

[JohnW2]

You must operate in a very different world to me. Over the last decade I have encountered so many people suffering from huge inconvenience when they loose their entire installation when a single RCD trips or half their home when 1 of the RCD's trip.

Fair enough. I can only speak of my own experiences and that of my circle of family and friends.

For the about 25 years, I have lived with several dual-RCD CUs (plus a couple of single-RCD ones), and for about a decade prior to that had just a single up-front RCD covering each phase of my 3-phase supply.

During that ~35 years, unlike some I have suffered almost no 'nuisance trips' - i.e. virtually all trips (other than those when I have allowed N & E to touch whilst working ) have been 'for good reason' (usually related to water ingress, occasionally the death of an appliance).

Similarly, during that ~35 years, I have never suffered a loss of power for any significant period of time which has affected any circuit other than the one with the problem. Although we hear, and talk, a lot about N-E faults, I cannot recall an occasion on which the fault resulting in an RCD trip could not be cleared (as far as all other circuits were concerned, by switching off the circuit's SP MCB. Particular in relation to gradually-developing water ingress, the L-E leak will reach the level at which it trips an RCD lomng before there is any chance of the N-E leakage current getting high enough to trip an RCD.

Its also the best approach to deal with 531.3.2 (i)

As above, that's not really relevant in my installation, since I have never, or virtually never, suffered from any 'unwanted' ('nuisance') RCD trips.

For the relatively small amount extra the benefits are there for customers

Sort-of true, but "a small amount extra" becomes somewhat more significant when multiplied by the ~30million (I think) households in UK, not to mention the 'global' situation!

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

I must admit that in a domestic setting I would usually have a preference for an all insulated CU (plastic) .

As I've said, I'm personally most comfortable with that, and intend to stick with it for as long as I can.

A few short years back it was discovered that only a few passed the intention of the relevant heat/flame testing required so rather than taking the manufacturers to task about it the spec changed and the answer "became favouring metal" (not strictly true but the easy way to view the requirement).

Yes, and it seems that we have the London Fire Brigade to thank for that - which I personally regard as 'twisted thinking'.

For a start, as you say, if the problem was that the material of the plastic enclosures was not up to spec, then that should have been addessed. However, I think that the whole concept was flawed. If, for example, it were found that a certain model of mobile phone was prone to 'bursting into flames', I don't think any sane person would think that a satisfactory solution would be to require that they were kept in mental enclosures

In any event, the regulation, as written, is, at least to my mind, silly, because there is no requirement for fire containment. Provided only that what little material is left is metal, a CU would be 'compliant' if its front, sides and bottom was covered in 12mm diameter holes!

Metal ,being conductive, can bring about it`s own problems especially on a TT system with no RCD before the tails enter the CU enclosure.

Exactly. As I always say, if it hasn't happened already, it's only a matter of time before we start hearing of deaths and injuries (most likely of "DIYers") resulting from CUs being made of earthed conductive material.

Kind Regards, John

 

[davelx]

As I've said, I'm personally most comfortable with that, and intend to stick with it for as long as I can.

Yes, and it seems that we have the London Fire Brigade to thank for that - which I personally regard as 'twisted thinking'.

For a start, as you say, if the problem was that the material of the plastic enclosures was not up to spec, then that should have been addessed. However, I think that the whole concept was flawed. If, for example, it were found that a certain model of mobile phone was prone to 'bursting into flames', I don't think any sane person would think that a satisfactory solution would be to require that they were kept in mental enclosures

In any event, the regulation, as written, is, at least to my mind, silly, because there is no requirement for fire containment. Provided only that what little material is left is metal, a CU would be 'compliant' if its front, sides and bottom was covered in 12mm diameter holes!

Exactly. As I always say, if it hasn't happened already, it's only a matter of time before we start hearing of deaths and injuries (most likely of "DIYers") resulting from CUs being made of earthed conductive material.

Kind Regards, John

At which point we'll probably go the way of Australia where just about all a DIYer can do is change a light bulb, I believe.

 

[JohnW2]

At which point we'll probably go the way of Australia where just about all a DIYer can do is change a light bulb, I believe.

That's certainly what's happened in Australia (although I believe that members of the public can go on a one-day training course in order to be 'allowed' to change plugs).

Do you think that the UK should go that way?

Mind you, even if we did, I don't think that would eliminate deaths/injuries due to metal enclosures - electricians are not necessarily 'immune'.

Kind Regards, John

 

[davelx]

I absolutely don't. I trust my own work much more than any domestic electrician's.

 

[Murdochcat]

I absolutely don't. I trust my own work much more than any domestic electrician's.

that’s a rather poor position you suggest. …

 

[ebee]

hoh dear , he don`t trust me then lol

 

[Murdochcat]

hoh dear , he don`t trust me then lol

me neither but hey ho, many years of all types of installations and proper test kit with the knowledge how to use it and interpret the results …

 

[davelx]

me neither but hey ho, many years of all types of installations and proper test kit with the knowledge how to use it and interpret the results …

Just because I don't work as an electrician, which makes me a DIYer, doesn't mean I don't have the knowledge, experience, equipment and qualifications to do the job.

 

[JohnW2]

I absolutely don't. I trust my own work much more than any domestic electrician's.

Essentially the same here, but with one big explanatory qualification ....

.... I have no doubt that the majority of electricians are perfectly competent and 'trustworthy'. However, a small minority aren't - and they are npot necessarily identifiable as such - which is why I trust myself more.

I am confident that I know at least as much about safety-related issues as does any electrician. I might not be as obsessed as electricians might have to be about 'the letter of the regs' but, in terms of my own installation, am very happy to trust my own common sense, backed up by a good understanding of the underlying principles (as well as a good understanding of what the regs actually 'require')..

It used to be the same for me with car maintenance (and quite a few other activities). In the days before cars became too technologically complex for much DIY work to be practical without a lot of specialised kit, I always did all of my car maintenance (everything from replacing and/or stripping engines and gearboxes downwards), because I really didn't want to put my trust in 'outsiders' - again, I'm sure that most of them would have been fine but a few (not necessarily 'identifiable') were not.

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

that’s a rather poor position you suggest. …

As I've just written, it's one of those many situations in which a small minority spoil things for (and cast doubts on) the great majority. If industries could somehow 'put their own houses in order', these problems would be very much reduced.

 

[JohnW2]

hoh dear , he don`t trust me then lol

As I've just written, the unfortunate problem is that we can't necessarily identify the (probably very small) number of people who spoil things for the rest.

However, there are several ways of skinning cats. Whilst I know nothing directly about your work, I have come to 'know and understand' you and your thinking from our exchanges, and what you write to others here, that i would be far more inclined to trust my electrical installation to you than I would be with a 'random electrician' (even one clutching lots of 'qualifications' and coming 'recommended').

Kind Regards, John