On a Lighter Note - There are Two literal meanings of "Full-Din-rail" here!!

[RF Lighting]

I'm still curious why the op keeps buying all this over priced tat

 

[Iggifer]

I'm still curious why the op keeps buying all this over priced tat

Like I said somewhere else, I think he works for B&Q (or maybe wickes or electrium) or has shares in them

 

[stillp]

B & Q pensioners' discount card perhaps?

 

[EFLImpudence]

Not pensioners - over 60s.

 

[stillp]

Not pensioners - over 60s.

Now who's being pedantic?

 

[EFLImpudence]

That's not pedantic.

What age will you get your pension?

Edit - state pension, that is.

 

[JohnW2]

'They' wouyld certainly say that it ceased to be 'type tested' (hence ceased to be a BS7671-compliant 'CU' for domestic use) if you did that!

I certainly would!

You were definitely in my mind when I wrote that

... but if such a CU (and padlock) were used in an installation without an upstream switch-fuse or other isolator it would then (when padlocked) be potentially diabolically dangerous (and non-compliant), wouldn't it?

I agree.

Glad you agree!

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I'm still curious why the op keeps buying all this over priced tat

He does seem to have an obsession about them...

 

[ban-all-sheds]

[The more pedantic amongst us might argue that once a user has taken a hacksaw to one of the components, the product ceases to be 'type tested', and therefore would not qualify as a 'CU'!!

Surely if user-customising of the busbar length(s) is supported, i.e. the maker expects/allows it to be cut or snapped at score lines, and has instructions relating to this, it must retain its type-tested status?

 

[JohnW2]

[The more pedantic amongst us might argue that once a user has taken a hacksaw to one of the components, the product ceases to be 'type tested', and therefore would not qualify as a 'CU'!!

Surely if user-customising of the busbar length(s) is supported, i.e. the maker expects/allows it to be cut or snapped at score lines, and has instructions relating to this, it must retain its type-tested status?

That's certainly what common sense would say, but, judging by some things I hear, I wouldn't/couldn't guarantee that everyone would agree. If, say, (as have been suggested) replacing the Main Switch with one of a different manufacturer (which is compatible mechanically) is thought by some to invalidate the 'type tested' status, then I reckon that anything is possible in their eyes!

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

That scenario is materially different from a maker supplying a busbar which he fully intends or allows to be cut. And if cutting is to be regarded as invalidating type approval then so would swapping a supplied MCB in a fully populated CU for a different value of the same make and range.

 

[JohnW2]

That scenario is materially different from a maker supplying a busbar which he fully intends or allows to be cut.

Maybe, but do you seriously believe that installing a different-make Main Switch (which 'fits' satisfactorily) could conceivably have any bearing on the safety of the CU?

And if cutting is to be regarded as invalidating type approval then so would swapping a supplied MCB in a fully populated CU for a different value of the same make and range.

As I've said, you are preaching to the converted. If you want an argument, you'll have to find someone 'on the other side' to have it with!

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Maybe, but do you seriously believe that installing a different-make Main Switch (which 'fits' satisfactorily) could conceivably have any bearing on the safety of the CU?

Yes, I do, because it is abundantly clear from a lot of the posts we get here that the world is full of idiots who would be unable to tell if a different-make switch did fit satisfactorily.

Given the indeterminate possibilities which would arise from fitting other-make items, I am in complete agreement with the idea that any change like that invalidates the approval testing done by the maker.

 

[JohnW2]

Maybe, but do you seriously believe that installing a different-make Main Switch (which 'fits' satisfactorily) could conceivably have any bearing on the safety of the CU?

Yes, I do, because it is abundantly clear from a lot of the posts we get here that the world is full of idiots who would be unable to tell if a different-make switch did fit satisfactorily.

Maybe, but that's not an answer to the question which I "actually asked".

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Well, given the context of modifying CUs and thereby losing type-approval....