- Reaction score
- 25,543
Are they definitely 1.5 cpcs and not 1.0.
Discuss Consumer Unit Change in the UK Electrical Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net
I think the cpc on imperial size cables weren't much different to the line size.Could even be imperial sized cable, bit before my time, cough, so don't know how they compare L/N to cpc?
7/029 Live =3/036 cpc I think will look for a comparison chart when the vino has worn off.Could even be imperial sized cable, bit before my time, cough, so don't know how they compare L/N to cpc?
Pierre or you on the **ss every evening?7/029 Live =3/036 cpc I think will look for a comparison chart when the vino has worn off.
Thursday offPierre or you on the **ss every evening?
Not on the ----, just like the odd glass, nothing serious, it's just people's take on my posts, aint really been on the razz for many a year or two, had my fill of that during my world tour, red wine is my tipple, now I'm retired, but er in doors has got me on a shed building course for OAPs, of course I will be asking advice on how to run a supply to the sheds I build. LOLPierre or you on the **ss every evening?
Now i'd like to expand on this. I too like the odd tipple, of an evening, well most evenings to be honest. Beer mostly but also appreciate a decent red. Seems to be a bit of an undercurrent of frowning upon this sort of thing, can't even turn on my favourite planet rock radio station now without somebody harping on about cutting down: "Do you really need that glass of wine while cooking the dinner". I enjoy a little livener around the 5 O'clock mark myself, bit like yourself by the sounds of it. Do you think it is becoming frowned upon?Not on the ****, just like the odd glass, nothing serious, it's just people's take on my posts, aint really been on the razz for many a year or two, had my fill of that during my world tour, red wine is my tipple, now I'm retired, but er in doors has got me on a shed building course for OAPs, of course I will be asking advice on how to run a supply to the sheds I build. LOL
Not wishing to defend anybody here, but that's none of your business. People make like hearted remarks on this forum, to scoff themselves. You shouldn't be judgemental.Pierre or you on the **ss every evening?
I'm fairly certain it's 1.5mm cpc. I can check tomorrow but pretty sure.
Its going to be quite a timely thing to solve where the roughly 0.2Ohm increase is coming from.
Would you guys invest the time to find the cause or would you say 1 ohm is close enough to calculated value and with all other results being good change board?
In your opinion, based on previous assessments, is this something that could fail an assessment?
Good luck Nick with your assessment, and you've have been given some good advice by members, especially fault finding!
As regards the fixings for the CU, I take NDG's point, but I do not think that relates to the fixing of CU's more to that of cable supports in escape routes. reg 421.1.201 was all to do with (so I'm told), remove a source of fuel (plastic CU) from the source of a fire. So sealing holes (intumescent), fixings etc don't relate.
As regards using a plastic enclosure above a CU to extend cables, I was advised by Elecsa Tech support a while back (wrongly IMO) that such an enclosure would not comply with the reg, and could not be used in such circumstance. Now that we've had some time, to allow for the dust to settle as it were, I have asked Elecsa for some clarification on the subject. Thought you should perhaps know this before your assessment, just in case. Having said that, when I had my recent assessment, the Elecsa Inspector raised his eyebrows when I told him of the advise given.
Personally, I would use MF joint boxes, in ceiling void above CU, if the cables weren't long enough to terminate in new CU or Ideal in-line splice connectors inside the CU. I would only do that for one or two circuits. Anymore, and I would consider part rewire.
What is 0.20 ohms between friends on a conductor that is usually only called upon when something goes wrong. Zs's are good and you have additional RCD protection. Personally I would not worry too much. And yes I would be tempted to record the L and N end to end's as being a little higher and the CPC as a little lower! The assessors are generally pen pushers that like to look at paperwork and not the nitty gritty side of things I have found. That's not having a go at them, it's just the way they are. So, if the paperwork looks about right they are generally happy, and as long as the install is safe. Which I think this one is by the sound of it.
Don't shout at me though if he ain't happy!!
Well done for finding it though mate. I am a little surprised that no one on here asked whether there was a possible long forgotten socket, as it is something a lot of members will have come across, especially on EICRs.
I know what you are saying Andy, and yeah OK it's a tiny bit naughty. But cheating L-L up by 0.02 ohms and the CPC down by the same is hardly likely to be picked up on. You will know how values can dance around a bit when testing low impedances.
This install sounds safe to me. It's not like doing a drive by EICR is it.
Why wooden it workMake sure you TT it. Wooden shed, so got to be a wooden earth spike. No, hold on a minute - that wooden work. OK, I'll get me coat. Daz
I just had a look at that BRE report and it does use yellow and red plugs to fix some of the supports up. And scan reading it some of these failed. I was responding to Westward originally in relation to the post saying that the plugs would likely hold firm. It was my belief also that they would hold firm, but maybe they won't. So perhaps concrete screws are the way forward.
It wood if it was wet.Why wooden it work
Think that's his 'working copy', well I hope so. I use to do that, until I lost a page of test results. Now use a desk diary, harder to loseI hope you are going to submit nice neat paperwork and that is your trial run. I believe if your paperwork is untidy this gives an immediate poor impression.
Are you in a scheme?As a slight deviation has anyone re-generated these forms to be easier to use?
The actual layout isn't great and many entry locations are just too small to enter details in a legible way.
Thanks for all the input. I recorded ir as >2 as that's what the electrician I used to work for did. I note your points and will re-record the actual measurements tomorrow (they were all greatly in excess of 2 - none were under 600).
I'll call elecsa first thing tomorrow morning and ask their view. If they want it coming through the back then I'll need to scramble in order to get it done tomorrow as assessment is Tuesday!
Those results are indeed just a working copy. I'll use an electronic system after assessment but that system isn't in place yet.
Nightmare scenario!
I also checked each individually murdoch (as did the electrician I worked for) I just put the >2 as that's what I believed should be entered.
I take notice of what's been said here and will remeasure and record them tomorrow.
Depending on what elecsa say I may need to remove the board to bring the main earth through the rear so taking ir again wont be much more effort.
I do hope they are happy for main earth to come through separately as to get all that work done the day before assessment is cutting way too close!
Reply to Consumer Unit Change in the UK Electrical Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net
We get it, advertisements are annoying!
Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website. For the best site experience please disable your AdBlocker.