Some help with coding please for an EICR?

Post new thread

Discuss Some help with coding please for an EICR? in the UK Electrical Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net

HappyHippyDad

HappyHippyDad

-
Esteemed
Arms
Reaction score
5,607
Evening..

I have just carried out an EICR and I am a little unsure on which code to issue for the following 4 things:

1. The cover has been cut on the fuse box to make way for the plug in mcb's (see picture). I see this all the time. A consumer unit is perhaps the single most important electrical item in the house, surely it should not be tampered with by cutting the cover off? C2?

2. There are 2 x 6mm bonding cable leaving the board. The gas is bonded. The water has no visible bonding clamp. It tests 117ohms to earth where it enters the house, shortly after in the same room there is a plastic joint. After this plastic joint it, again in the same room, it is metal and tests as 0.009Mohms. Both are extraneous. C2?

3. A knockout has been taken out of the bottom of the fuse box, it has one cable going into it. The hole is large enough for a child to fit their small finger into. The board is under the stairs and easily reachable. C2?

4. There are 2 switched FCU's in the bathroom outside of the zones. It's instilled into you never to fit a plate switch in a bathroom but the OSG actually states a plate switch is ok outside of the zones. No code?

Cheers guys.

Ps.. I'll try and figure out how to put a picture on in a bit. It used to be so easy!
 
20171008_082311 - Copy.jpg
 
Last edited:
1. The cover has been cut on the fuse box to make way for the plug in mcb's (see picture). I see this all the time. A consumer unit is perhaps the single most important electrical item in the house, surely it should not be tampered with by cutting the cover off? C2? if no access to live terminals, no code.

2. There are 2 x 6mm bonding cable leaving the board. The gas is bonded. The water has no visible bonding clamp. It tests 117ohms to earth where it enters the house, shortly after in the same room there is a plastic joint. After this plastic joint it, again in the same room, it is metal and tests as 0.009Mohms. Both are extraneous. C2? futrher iv. req.

3. A knockout has been taken out of the bottom of the fuse box, it has one cable going into it. The hole is large enough for a child to fit their small finger into. The board is under the stairs and easily reachable. C2?can that finger rech live parts?

4. There are 2 switched FCU's in the bathroom outside of the zones. It's instilled into you never to fit a plate switch in a bathroom but the OSG actually states a plate switch is ok outside of the zones. No code? agree no code.
 
Those covers actually have an indented part to knock out for just such a case as fitting the MCBs' into the older fuseholders, it is very common practice. I think I might be worried or want to know more about the odd MCB white with a red button, mixing different manufacturers items possibly? Bottom of consumer unit should meet IP2x the great british finger!
 
Do you know what the fuse cover is for, if you do not how can you Code it. You do not base a Code on whether some bin lid can fit its finger through it.
 
Vortigern said:
Those covers actually have an indented part to knock out for just such a case as fitting the MCBs' into the older fuseholders, it is very common practice. I think I might be worried or want to know more about the odd MCB white with a red button, mixing different manufacturers items possibly? Bottom of consumer unit should meet IP2x the great british finger!
Click to expand...
That odd white one is an MEM QCB.
 
The fuse cover was to contain the possibility of the fuse wire being a fire hazard in certain conditions. But what to do now the others are in? Suggest another MCB fitted, wylex of course. Never seen those MEM ones though.
 
Vortigern said:
The fuse cover was to contain the possibility of the fuse wire being a fire hazard in certain conditions. But what to do now the others are in? Suggest another MCB fitted, wylex of course. Never seen those MEM ones though.
Click to expand...
I believe that Wylex gave some advice that if plug in breakers were to be fitted the cover could be cut out to create a barrier to give it some sort of IP rating even though that was never its intention in the first place, this adaption should only be done if there was no 3036 fuses still in situ. As you say it's original purpose was to contain melting fuse elements.
 
Last edited:
Vortigern said:
Those covers actually have an indented part to knock out for just such a case as fitting the MCBs' into the older fuseholders, it is very common practice. I think I might be worried or want to know more about the odd MCB white with a red button, mixing different manufacturers items possibly? Bottom of consumer unit should meet IP2x the great british finger!
Click to expand...
 
Vortigern said:
Those covers actually have an indented part to knock out for just such a case as fitting the MCBs' into the older fuseholders, it is very common practice. I think I might be worried or want to know more about the odd MCB white with a red button, mixing different manufacturers items possibly? Bottom of consumer unit should meet IP2x the great british finger!
Click to expand...

Are you sure about that Vortigern? On the inside of the covers are the numbers and space to write circuit identifications so it seems unlikely these would be classed as knockouts? Also, were plug in mcb's around when these 3036 boards were made? I wouldn't have thought so.
 
Plus, if you look in the middle of the picture you can clearly see bright shiny copper? I realise it meets IP2X, but?
 
The cover is there to prevent access to live parts when withdrawing a fuse or mcb . It was designed so that the middle is a K/O if mcb's are fitted. If the correct mcb's and fuses are fitted they cannot be withdrawn with the cover in place even with the middle out. With the cover missing the devices can be pulled forward with the fingers and live parts accessed. Without the cover in place I would code 1 if the board was accessible, 2 if it was out of reach, no code if the cover is in place but with a note stating the importance of the cover, and the importance of switching off the main switch before withdrawing any device.
 
wirepuller said:
The cover is there to prevent access to live parts when withdrawing a fuse or mcb . It was designed so that the middle is a K/O if mcb's are fitted. If the correct mcb's and fuses are fitted they cannot be withdrawn with the cover in place even with the middle out. With the cover missing the devices can be pulled forward with the fingers and live parts accessed. Without the cover in place I would code 1 if the board was accessible, 2 if it was out of reach, no code if the cover is in place but with a note stating the importance of the cover, and the importance of switching off the main switch before withdrawing any device.
Click to expand...
That is totally incorrect its original purpose was to prevent molten fuse elements being blown out. The centre part was never a section to be knocked out.
 
So how did wylex intend plug in mcb's to be installed? The cover will not fit with mcb's! Without a cover live parts can be accessed by simply pulling out a device with the fingers. If the cover is used as intended by the manufacturer then when the K/O is removed there wont be any fuses FFS , so there's no requirement to contain molten copper!!!
 
They are not knockouts they are where you enter the circuit details. As I stated in #11 Wylex did give some afterthought guidance that if you want to fit plug- in mcbs you leave no 3036 fuses in place as cutting the cover removes the value of its original purpose, this is fact. These covers were about long before plug in mcbs were even on the drawing board.
 
Primary use of the cover was to prevent molten copper being sprayed outward when a fuse failed.
The circuits where indicated inside the cover.
I fail to see how it ever was a knock out in its original design.
 
westward10 said:
They are not knockouts they are where you enter the circuit details. As I stated in #11 Wylex did give some afterthought guidance that if you want to fit plug- in mcbs you leave no 3036 fuses in place as cutting the cover removes the value of its original purpose, this is fact. These covers were about long before plug in mcbs were even on the drawing board.
Click to expand...
Westward I'm struggling to understand what you are saying about leaving a 3036 in when the cover has been cut off. I can't see how this is dangerous? They are wider than the plug in mcb's so actually make it harder to stick anything through. They cover up any gaps better than the mcb's.
 
but there are small holes in the ends of the fuse carrier.once was a case where an elderly guy picked up a fallen wire coat hanger and as he lifted it up, the hook end caught in the bottom hole of a fuse carrier and he received a shock.
 
There is also the potential for molten bits of fuse wire to be expelled in the case of a fault. If there's lots of dust, this could be enough to start a fire. The cover is designed to prevent this from happening.
 
Even with the cover totally absent, the front of the CU will comply with IP ratings for live parts in enclosures and should not be worthy of a code surely ?
 
@happyhippydad I think the first wylex boxes that came out the cover was as you say for writing the circuit designation/number on and had no knock out. Later when the MCB push fits came out you could change the cover and that had knock outs. Unless of course I am imagining it all but I do remember when these boxes were about doing that. Imagine trying to cut a whole in a normal wylex fuse cover with no knock out, think about it.
 
happyhippydad said:
Westward I'm struggling to understand what you are saying about leaving a 3036 in when the cover has been cut off. I can't see how this is dangerous? They are wider than the plug in mcb's so actually make it harder to stick anything through. They cover up any gaps better than the mcb's.
Click to expand...
The original purpose of the cover was to contain molten metal from a 3036 fuse rupturing. Your board still has a 3036 fuse carrier fitted and were the element to rupture there is a remote possibility molten metal could be ejected because the cover has been cut away. I will never find evidence but I recall some guidance from Wylex that if you cut the cover to fit mcbs, leave no 3036 carriers in place.
 
Andy78 said:
Even with the cover totally absent, the front of the CU will comply with IP ratings for live parts in enclosures and should not be worthy of a code surely ?
Click to expand...
I would comment on the MEM QCB device and the fact the 3036 carrier is exposed.
 
I agree with Vortigern. In the 80s we used to fit wylex boards, then when the pop out MCBs were introduced they put the indent in the cover for this reason. The middle came out with a tap from a pair of pliers then you'd clean the edges with the pliers. If you did not knock out the middle you could not fit the cover.
The reason that you can see what looks to be a live part is because someone has fitted an incorrect base.
 
Andy78 said:
Even with the cover totally absent, the front of the CU will comply with IP ratings for live parts in enclosures and should not be worthy of a code surely ?
Click to expand...
No it wont. without the cover, intact or with the KO removed , it is easily possible to access the live prongs of a plug in fuse or MCB by simply pulling it forward without the use of a tool, a child could do it. These boards without the cover are either a code 1 or code 2 depending on accessibility.
 
wirepuller said:
No it wont. without the cover, intact or with the KO removed , it is easily possible to access the live prongs of a plug in fuse or MCB by simply pulling it forward without the use of a tool, a child could do it. These boards without the cover are either a code 1 or code 2 depending on accessibility.
Click to expand...
From memory I'm fairly sure that with the modified cover on you can't pull the MCBs out or the fuse holders. But as Ian says IP2X is the reg.

Talking about accessible live parts, I'm amazed that basic lampholders are still allowed on wall lights and table lamps.
 
andyb said:
From memory I'm fairly sure that with the modified cover on you can't pull the MCBs out or the fuse holders. But as Ian says IP2X is the reg.

Talking about accessible live parts, I'm amazed that basic lampholders are still allowed on wall lights and table lamps.
Click to expand...

You are correct, with the KO out the cover will still prevent access to live parts. However Andy78 stated that even with the cover 'totally absent' the CU will comply with IP ratings and requirements over access to live parts. That is clearly wrong, with the cover missing (intact or modified) these boards allow simple access to live parts and are an immediate danger.
 
wirepuller said:
You are correct, with the KO out the cover will still prevent access to live parts. However Andy78 stated that even with the cover 'totally absent' the CU will comply with IP ratings and requirements over access to live parts. That is clearly wrong, with the cover missing (intact or modified) these boards allow simple access to live parts and are an immediate danger.
Click to expand...

As quoted by others, the requirement on the front of an enclosure to shield from live parts is IP2X. This rating is not compromised even with the cover removed and all devices removed as long as all bases are intact and in place.
I'm not sure how you can say I was clearly wrong in asserting this. There are no gaps bigger than 12.5mm that allow access to live parts.
 
On both the fuses and MCB's it is while withdrawing a device that the two brass prongs on the device are exposed to touch and live if the main switch is on, try it if you don't believe me. It's possible to tilt a fuse carrier leaving the bottom prong connected to the busbar and exposing even more of the top prong. Without the cover in place this can be done without the use of a tool so therefore the enclosure does not meet the requirements. The same applies to the older covers which had a knurled head screw to retain it instead of a screw requiring the use of a tool.
Once the devices are removed you are correct in saying it meets the requirements.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
wirepuller said:
On both the fuses and MCB's it is while withdrawing a device that the two brass prongs on the device are exposed to touch and live if the main switch is on, try it if you don't believe me. It's possible to tilt a fuse carrier leaving the bottom prong connected to the busbar and exposing even more of the top prong. Without the cover in place this can be done without the use of a tool so therefore the enclosure does not meet the requirements. The same applies to the older covers which had a knurled head screw to retain it instead of a screw requiring the use of a tool.
Once the devices are removed you are correct in saying it meets the requirements.
Click to expand...

Ah right, I'm with you now. Yes I would agree that it is possible to be in danger of contact whilst handling a device with the main switch closed. Never thought of it that way round to be honest. Sometimes difficult to think of the possible actions of the end user when it is things you would not do yourself.
 
In the distant past something changed,previously to these boards,a fuse would not be accessible until the switch was turned off,they had interlocks,switch off then remove fuse
Along came the traditional Wylex and the fuses could be removed only if the cover was removed
It seems it was a backward step but the Iee must have decided it was fine to do so
The cover was a barrier to access of the fuses rather than just a protection against molten metal
 
That's why a missing cover is either a code 1 or 2 for me. That said you can still remove the cover with a tool, not switch off and withdraw the fuses, but at least you'd hope a screwed cover in place will prevent children or elderly or 'those not competent' from electric shock.
 
Des 56 said:
In the distant past something changed,previously to these boards,a fuse would not be accessible until the switch was turned off,they had interlocks,switch off then remove fuse
Along came the traditional Wylex and the fuses could be removed only if the cover was removed
It seems it was a backward step but the Iee must have decided it was fine to do so
The cover was a barrier to access of the fuses rather than just a protection against molten metal
Click to expand...

You had me captivated then, it was like the beginning to a classic sci-fi film:)
 
Does anyone have any ideas about point number 2?
The best practice guides make it very clear that no main bonding is a C2 which makes sense to me as the incoming metal work is extraneous and requires bonding to limit touch voltage in the case of a fault.

I also think I should bond the copper pipes after the plastic joint in the same room as they are extraneous? Its a wet room (toilet and sink).
 
Tel has covered it all really, but if the incoming water pipe is metal and tests at 117Ω to earth then it is extraneous and is not bonded and so it requires bonding, this absence will attract a C2 code as it is dangerous in case of a fault.
The copper pipes after the plastic joint should not be able to introduce an earth potential into the installation unless they are firmly fixed against another conductive surface which is connected to true earth (in which case that part also should have been bonded) however they may be casually connected to other earthed parts in the installation, though a reading of 9000Ω is very high for any sort of electrical contact to the earthing system, perhaps they go underground or are buried in the walls below the DPC at some point?
Generally they should not require bonding in most cases but your test results indicate that it should be bonded so based on this it would also attract a C2 and a link over the plastic join may be required to maintain the bonding, or more precisely another bonding cable should be run to this pipe work, whether looped from the first bonding point or from the MET.
 
Thanks for the through explanation Richard... and thanks to all the others who replied as well. I've learnt quite a bit about the old covers for the 3036 boards.
 
The 3036 replacement circuit mcb 3871, or later 60898, is designed, via shape, so that it can not be removed when the original fuse cover is re fitted...after being cut out appropriately, of course. They also have their own base which isn't as deep as the 3036 original. That mem mcb can obviously be removed with the fuse cover in place.
Wylex did the cartridge fuse variety but that can be removed in such a situation.
As regards coding....it's make your mind up time.

ps. On board changes, if any of those mcb's are being removed, keep them, could be useful.
 

Reply to Some help with coding please for an EICR? in the UK Electrical Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net

Similar Threads

S
EICR code re conduit
Have been asked to do remedials on an EICR that was carried out a year or so ago by another electrician. Curious to know what code you would give...
Replies
12
Views
1K
cliffed
cliffed
L
EICR - Help on my Request for Electrical Safety Alternatives and Quotes
Good morning, We have a two-bedroom flat that my wife and I rent out to supplement our income. Following the recent EICR, several issues...
Replies
42
Views
2K
mainline
mainline
I
After a New Consumer Unit, now I need EICR & 100A DP Isolation Switch
Trying to organise a CU replacement at home. It's a 1930s property. It's got a 10way CU but with no RCD protection. Was after a larger unit with...
2
Replies
65
Views
4K
i3_happy
I
S
EICR in Flat - cross-connected circuits, T&E tails, composite earth
I'm practising EICRs on friendly locations as I'm still in training - technically done my 2391-52 but frankly need loads more practise. I've just...
Replies
11
Views
935
7029 dave
7029 dave
1
Help Understanding EICR
I would greatly appreciate if someone could help me understand the following outcomes on an EICR. I am being advised it needs a total rewire but I...
Replies
29
Views
4K
Lucien Nunes
Lucien Nunes

OFFICIAL SPONSORS

Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Electrician Courses Green Electrical Goods PCB Way Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Pushfit Wire Connectors Electric Underfloor Heating Electrician Courses
These Official Forum Sponsors May Provide Discounts to Regular Forum Members - If you would like to sponsor us then CLICK HERE and post a thread with who you are, and we'll send you some stats etc

YOUR Unread Posts

Tags

advice aus cable circuit course earth electric electrical electrician hello led light lighting lights looking new please question rcd socket supply switch testing training wiring
This website was designed, optimised and is hosted by untold.media Operating under the name Untold Media since 2001.
Back
Top
AdBlock Detected

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.

I've Disabled AdBlock