periodics

[kfelec]

hello all

im just doing a periodic on a 3 bedroom house all good but one concern is some of the 2way lighting feeds have single double insullated lives with no earth, the fittings and switch gear the single cables are going to do have an earth off the other twin and earth cables

my question is i think this is a code 2 unsatisfactory

what do you guys think satisfactory or unsatisfactory

im unsure thanks

 

[Lectrician]

Nothing wrong if there is an earth present, this earth being incorporated in or bunched with the other lighting cables.

The thing to watch with this is that they would quite often take a DI from one switch to the light and another DI from an adjacent light for the neutral, leaving no earth at the light.

 

[kfelec]

thanks lectrician

so would you still code it and make a note?

and what code

 

[londonboy]

I dont quite follow your post, however:

DI cables are still satisfactory, no CPC at a switch or fitting is unsatisfactory - I would code it as 2, however you are the tester

 

[BSBS]

It sounds fine, as you say the switches and fittings do have earth's its only that DI singles are used as strappers between two way switching. I wouldnt even code it.

Just make a comment that parts of the installation are wired in Double Insulated singles.

 

[Wontdothatagain]

Just playing "devils advocate" here, but what if the strapper follows a different route than the T&E??????????????

 

[RF Lighting]

Are you really competent to be carrying out PIRs?

There is nothing wrong at all with what you describe. It doesn't need commenting on, it doesn't even need thinking about, and you were really going to code 2 it??

I think you need to get a lot more experience in the electrical industry before you try and do any more periodics.

 

[Adam_151]

As rob says, not an issue if all points have an earth*, you could if you really wanted (if you were as awkward as 'dontdothatagain' ) to argue that the earth should be running alongside the relevant line conductor at all points, but I wouldn't bring that one up unless there are fittings picking up earths off other circuits (or places unknown) with a bit of 6242Y (the other circuit may be removed at a later date leaving fitting without an earth/ or it might even be to a bonding clamp on a nearby water pipe )

Now if the cables did have cpcs in, but had been snipped off at the ends, then that would be coded


*You really want to be confirming that, on older installations things might be branched all over the place rather than being being a simple unbranched radial, so you could potentially have a disconnected earth on a branch but still have one at the furthest point of the circuit. Quick wander lead test with the continuity tester to exposed metalwork is about the quickest way to make sure everything that should be earthed is.... watch out for surface coatings, and parts which look like they are probably ECPs at first glance, but actually turn out to be parts of double insulated fittings when you look closer.

 

[1john]

Perhaps there should be a code 5 - I don't know.

 

[Adam_151]

Perhaps there should be a code 5

... as a side point, an extra symbol to indicate 'not coded' does prove usful, if you want to flag something up thats outside the scope of BS7671 but the client should be made aware of, or something you want to note down for infortmation purposes, but isnt a defect... something like NA or a dash should suffice

 

[1john]

Write it in the comments on existing installation box, but the op's issue doesn't need coding if there is a CPC at each accessory. This is the age of install to check for shared neutrals though.

 

[kfelec]

rf lighting listen

the only way 2 get exsperiance is sometimes by asking
why is there always someone has to pop state somthing that trys to belittle people

the reason being is if someone was to nock a nail in the wall ect and hit the di cable thats why

 

[1john]

rf lighting listen

the only way 2 get exsperiance is sometimes by asking
why is there always someone has to pop state somthing that trys to belittle people

the reason being is if someone was to nock a nail in the wall ect and hit the di cable thats why

That scenario is not really valid as you could quite easily knock a nail in the wall and hit either the line or neutral conductors only, also the bigger the t&e the more likely. DI is not an issue, it's an installation method, as stated, as long as there is a CPC at every accessory then all is fine, make sure there are no shared neutrals though.

 

[Adam_151]

rf lighting listen
the reason being is if someone was to nock a nail in the wall ect and hit the di cable thats why

Theres no guarentee that a nail hit into a cable containing an earth would hit line and earth together though!, you could quite easily just clip the side of the live and have a live nail, this is why we have permitted cabling zones for cables without metallic earthed sheaths, the 17th has added 30Ma RCD protection to this for the benifiet of those who are unaware that they should not nail above light switches

 

[RF Lighting]

rf lighting listen

the only way 2 get exsperiance is sometimes by asking
why is there always someone has to pop state somthing that trys to belittle people

the reason being is if someone was to nock a nail in the wall ect and hit the di cable thats why

Yes, the way to gain exprience is by asking and working with someone who can teach you how to correctly carry out perodic inspection reports.
You do not gain experience by blundering your way through. How many things are on your reports which you think definately ought to be there, or are coded incorrectly, or not on your reports at all for that matter as you were unaware they are non compliant with a regulation you don't know exists?

I'm not just out to belittle you, I am just sick of seeing customers ripped off by imcompetent people carring out PIRs, telling customers that they need wok doing to their installation when there is nothing wrong with it.

There are so so so many people out there carrying out periodic inspection reports who simply do not have a clue what they are doing.

I have seen periodics with all sorts of non faults, incorrect coding, and worst of all, saying what needs to be done to repair a fault without actually saying what the fault is in the first place.

Here's something for you to try. For every fault you have got written down, go through your regs book and find exactly which regulation(s) it does not comply with, and write them next to your fault.

I recently saw a periodic inspection carried out on a school which listed in the faults: "No cross bonding in toilets - code 1"

Have a read of this from the electrical safety council

http://www.esc.org.uk/pdfs/business-and-community/electrical-industry/BPG4_08.pdf