Is the designer to blame? Should people claim? RCD trips.

... Description found in BS7671 18th Edition Regulation 543.7.1.203 ... "...The wiring of of every final circuit and distribution circuit intended to supply one or more items of equipment, such that the total protective current is likely to exceed 10mA ..." ....Which to me suggests that a ring final supply with 3 or more computers ( each 3.5 mA on to CPC from in line main filters ) should have a CPC that is 4mm² CSA .
Indeed - I made essentially that point back in post #12. In fact, it's a bit 'worse' than you suggest since, if there is only a single CPC (not a 'ring') then 4mm² is only adequate if 'enclosed' - otherwise it would have to be 10mm².

However, it gets more confusing (and this is what I was referring to in #12) when one realises that 531.3.2(ii) seems to say that a circuit protected by a 30mA RCD which is 'expected' to have a total leakage current of more than 9 mA is not actually 'allowed' - so the situation described in 543.7.1.203 (>10 mA leakage) should not really exist ...
(ii) in order to avoid unwanted tripping by protective conductor currents and/or earth leakage currents, the accumulation of such currents downstream of the RCD shall be not more than 30 % of the rated residual operating current

As you imply, none of this seems to be very realistic in the present day, even in domestic dwellings.

Kind Regards, John
 
Last edited:
Sponsored Links
And as you suggest, with 4 circuits on RCBO and two on RCD the only trips were due to a fault, not a random trip, so it complied with the division of circuits, my own house however did not, two RCD's were not enough, and we did get random trips without any good reason ...
It seems that experiences vary considerably.

As I've often observed, in 30+ years of living with RCDs I have very rarely (if ever) suffered from any 'random/nuisance' RCD trips (i.e. for no known 'good reason') - whereas others, like yourself, seem to have experienced a lot of that.

I can but presume that this considerable variation in experiences must relate to some people having many more 'significantly leaky' bits of equipment than others. On the face of it, I would have expected myself to be a 'victim' since at least a couple of my circuits serve multiple (mainly old) computers and other bits of IT equipment and often also a plethora of other (again, mainly fairly 'old') electronic equipment - but, as far as I can recall, I have never experienced 'random' trips of RCDs protecting those circuits.

In the fairly distant past, we suffered from RCDs tripping (by whatever mechanism!) whenever there was a flash of lightning anywhere near, but that seemed to stop several years ago - maybe due to installation of some sort of 'suppression' in the supply network?

Kind Regards, John
 
Firstly, I've just realised that what you quoted ("Every installation shall be divided into circuits, as necessary, to reduce the possibility of unwanted tripping of RCDs due to excessive protective conductor currents produced by equipment in normal operation.") is slightly different from the wording of 314.1 ("...Every installation shall be divided into circuits, as necessary, to: ..... (iv) reduce the possibility of unwanted tripping of RCDs due to excessive protective conductor (PE) currents not due to a fault"). What reg were you quoting?
I was merely quoting what Eric quoted - assuming it was correct.

In any event, one can but presume that the reason why eric felt that the designer would be 'at fault' in the situation he described (and therefore should rectify things at his/her own cost, if not sent to the gallows) was that he feels that the designer should have "expected excessive CPC currents", and designed accordingly?
If that were the case then he might be correct but I don't think anyone would expect that in a normal dwelling.
Installing in an office where it might be expected could be a different matter.

Even though essentially rhetorical, I'm happy to agree by answering "almost none". However, it was you who brought high-integrity earthing into the discussion, and I'm not yet sure what your point was.

I introduced high-integrity earthing because that would be required if excessive earth-leakage from equipment to the CPC might be expected.

I imagine that many would say that that is verging on the 'pedantic' :)It is obviously literally true that CPC current does not cause an RCD trip. It is also true that if piece(s) of equipment result in L-'E' leakage ("not due to a fault"), then some of that current could pass to earth via a 'parallel path' (if one existed - e.g. if a Class I item were used outdoors with its exposed-c-p in contact with wet soil), rather than all going through the CPC.
However, I think it's also true that if equipment were going to produce enough leakage current to trip an RCD ("not due to a fault"), that would remain true even if there were no parallel path to earth, with all the 'leakage' current then going through the CPC.

Either I am being pedantic or - if it is a regulation - the authors are being slap-dash.
It would have been just as easy to say due to excessive earth-leakage from equipment in normal use.
531.2.4 (BYB) appears slightly better.
 
If that were the case then he might be correct but I don't think anyone would expect that in a normal dwelling.
I would agree, but that 'anyone' doesn't seem to include eric, who wrote:
... my house all RCBO, next door just two RCD's similar size house, and they trip on regular basis, mine don't, so should the guy who changed the consumer unit now replace it with a all RCBO version labour free ....
Either I am being pedantic or - if it is a regulation - the authors are being slap-dash. It would have been just as easy to say due to excessive earth-leakage from equipment in normal use.
I can't disagree with that but, perhaps because I am used to living with things (including rules, regulation and laws) which have not been worded in an ideal ('totally correct') fashion, I find it hard to get too excited about it!

Kind Regards, John
 
Sponsored Links
I fit 4 sockets in a room and one has a loose terminal. If the Socket burn out, it is my responsibility to sort it. If the circuit tests fine and the problem is due to the customer’s equipment, I am not responsible.
If the problem is RCD tripping, due to a fault I missed, it is my issue to sort. If it is due to accumulated earth leakage, I don’t see how I can be seen as responsible.

Even in a large house, most domestic design is fairly straightforward. I would be more cautious of earth leakage in an office or a school where it would be expected to have lots of IT equipment.
 
... If it is due to accumulated earth leakage, I don’t see how I can be seen as responsible. ... Even in a large house, most domestic design is fairly straightforward. I would be more cautious of earth leakage in an office or a school where it would be expected to have lots of IT equipment.
Exactly, on all counts.

I can but presume that eric not only lives in a very 'blame-apportioning' world, but also one which even apportions blame to people because they do not have sufficiently effective crystal balls.

Kind Regards, John
 
I made a mistake, it is no good saying it was what everyone did at that time, over the years it has been shown I made a mistake, my son will be correcting it for me, sons do that they look after their dads, but I thought 2 RCD's were enough, hind sight is easy, I should have fitted 100 mA RCD's with 40 mS tripping times not delayed which at the time fitted was within the regulations, I have had batches of RCD tripping now for 25 years, but to be fair when I fitted the RCD's you could not buy single width RCBO's they were all 2 pole and rather expensive, neither could I have bought a high integrity consumer unit, not even sure when I fitted them if you could by a consumer unit, think still called distribution units then don't think the type testing had come in, it was early 90's when working at building of Sizewell 'B' my son decided to become a radio ham and I wanted to protect him as he started to play with electricity.

Today things have changed, everyone fits 30 mA RCD's both stand alone and combined with the MCB and the availability of boards and the price of RCBO's is no longer a problem, even in 2001 when BS7671:2001 came out, still called residual current device the word RCD was not used in the regs then, and only required for "installations and locations of increased shock risk" listed in Part 6 as it was then. When I fitted the RCD's I could have taken a non protected supply to my freezer, that would have saved me a few hundred pounds when the power did trip while away from house, I had considered fitting an auto resetting type, before they were not permitted, but never got round to it.

I made an error of judgement, and have paid for it with loss of food and many walks into the garage to reset power over the years, but in my defence when I fitted them, very few houses had them fitted, and only internet like way to pass on info was the bulletin boards and Clive on packet radio, today the electrician knows the problems and should explain them to customer and as say if after that the customer wants only two RCD's then any trips is down to the customer, but so often I talk or read about where the owner had no idea of the problems, he had only had the safety aspects explained to him.

And for what ever reason, he is left with an installation which trips on a regular basis, and even then is told it is his faulty appliances which in some cases it is, but often it is simply a build up of many leaks which together cause the problem.

So to be fair son has moved from 2 up 2 down where 2 RCD's proved ample. But in this house with 13 rooms (including toilet/shower so some very small) 2 RCD's would not be enough, when I moved in there was one RCD, which covered 2 rooms, how did any electrician consider it was right to fit a new consumer unit when the RCD covered half the bottom floor of a three story house, when the next floor was also a ground floor at front of house and likely to have items used in the garden plugged in, in fact I have just recharged the battery in wife's car from a socket in her bedroom on top floor, house built on the side of a hill.

When I moved in most of the house was protected by re-wireable fuses in between the false ceiling and original ceiling with a 9 inch square hole in false ceiling you could just get your hand into to change them. But since we have no idea what the electrician said to owners when he did the job, can't really blame the electrician.

But with 14 circuits, it is to my mind plain that 2 RCD's are not enough, also no good way to split so lights in every room are on different RCD to sockets. Lights split up/down sockets front/back. So all sockets would need to be on one RCD and all lights on another, so 10 circuits on one RCD, there was to my mind no option but fit all RCBO, it also makes the CU 4 slots shorter.

So when I found next door on two RCD's you ask what was the electrician thinking. How can anyone sign to say they have designed a system for a house that size with just 2 RCD's?
 

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

 
Back
Top