AFDD in 18th 2nd Amendment

[nicebutdim]

Sure thing

If you wish to consider a combination of dish washer, fridge, freezer, washing machine, tumble dryer etc on one circuit to be good design, then I see no point in further discussion.

You have access to BS7671:2022 and if you believe the outlined installation (you also state is suitable for a semi-detached property, with the addition of an extra lighting circuit) is compliant, then that's your business and I'll leave you to it.

 

[John-SJW]

Table 4D5 might explain the issue a 4mm² cable on a 40A RCBO and 6mm² is pushing it

4mm cable can take at best around 41A. I meant to write 32A protecting the 4mm cable. A 3kW tumble dryer, washing machine 2.2kW and dishwasher at 1.5kW. All well under 32A when all full on. Depending on cost, it may be cheaper to replace the 4mm cable with a ring supplying the three heavy appliance FCUs.

You have not a clue invenet all sort of future scearios. I am suprosed you [never mention wiring for a nuckear shelter in cae Putin sent over nukes. Read back on what I wrote. The design is all sound and to regs with ultmate protection inc AFDDs. Put 32A RCBO on the 4mm cable (my mistake).

 

[John-SJW]

Sure thing

If you wish to consider a combination of dish washer, fridge, freezer, washing machine, tumble dryer etc on one circuit to be good design, then I see no point in further discussion.

You have access to BS7671:2022 and if you believe the outlined installation (you also state is suitable for a semi-detached property, with the addition of an extra lighting circuit) is compliant, then that's your business and I'll leave you to it.

I said it was for a flat that needed AFDD. Sharpen up. Dishwasher (1.5kW), w/machine (2.2 kW), tumble dryer (3 KW), are all together under 32A, so fine on a radial. Fridge/freezer can go on the ring - they consume 150 watts, even the American style fridges it is only around 250 watts. They do not continuously run as the thermostats cut them out.

The design I outlined, giving full protection to the 18th and amendments is 100% within regs. Sharpen up.

I feel like I am conversing with a confused apprentice still grappling with matters.

 

[westward10]

4mm cable can take at best around 41A. I meant to write 32A protecting the 4mm cable. A 3kW tumble dryer, washing machine 2.2kW and dishwasher at 1.5kW. All well under 32A when all full on. DEpending on cost, it may be cheaper to replace the 4mm cable with a ring supply the three FCUs.

You have not a clue invenet all sort of future scearios. I am suprosed you [never mention wiring for a nuckear shelter in cae Putin sent over nukes. Read back on what I wrote. The design is all sound and to regs with ultmate protection inc AFDDs. Put 32A RCBO on the 4mm cable (my mistake).

And this circuit will satisfy Regulation 531.3.2 (iii).

 

[UNG]

4mm cable can take at best around 41A. I meant to write 32A protecting the 4mm cable. A 3kW tumble dryer, washing machine 2.2kW and dishwasher at 1.5kW. All well under 32A when all full on. DEpending on cost, it may be cheaper to replace the 4mm cable with a ring supply the three FCUs.

Please tell me what regs book and table gives 4mm² T&E as able to carry at best 41A

You have not a clue invenet all sort of future scearios. I am suprosed you [never mention wiring for a nuckear shelter in cae Putin sent over nukes. Read back on what I wrote. The design is all sound and to regs with ultmate protection inc AFDDs. Put 32A RCBO on the 4mm cable (my mistake).

I'm beginning to find your comments a bit condescending and very very stupid while you are trolling for a response and now you are backtracking because you are not even proof reading your replies before posting them

 

[westward10]

Well does it satisfy Regulation 531.3.2(iii).

 

[UNG]

I said it was for a flat that needed AFDD. Sharpen up. Dishwasher (1.5kW), w/machine (2.2 kW), tumble dryer (3 KW), are all together under 32A, so fine on a radial. Fridge/freezer can go on the ring - they consume 150 watts, even the American style fridges it is only around 250 watts. They do not continuously run as the thermostats cut them out.

The design I outlined, giving full protection to the 18th and amendments is 100% within regs. Sharpen up.

I feel like I am conversing with a confused apprentice still grappling with matters.

Will you drop the sharpen up there is absolutely no need for it in a civilised conversation and it really makes you sound like a bully

The point of this group is for discussion just because someone doesn't agree with you there is no need to belittle them when they present an alternative point of view

You are certainly living up to your profile of Manufacturer / Distributor / Supplier / Inventor - etc and in this thread you have met all four of the areas you operate in

 

[John-SJW]

And this circuit will satisfy Regulation 531.3.2 (iii).

Yep. 32A RCBO with 4mm cable radial serving three FCUs. Show me where any reg say it is illegal?

You could have it on a 2.5mm ring, but there may be a danger of the 2.5mm on one of the legs of the ring being over loaded. So 4mm is 100% safe.

I find it amazing that two guys here cannot figure out a simple design and not even know it conform to the 18th and amendments.

It you stop being a contentious know-it-all not knowing too much, with a wandering mind, I may treat you differently. You think flats have garages and EV chargers. You have not much a clue.

 

[westward10]

Yep. 32A RCBO with 4mm cable radial serving three FCUs. Show me where any reg say it is illegal?

You could have it on a 2.5mm ring, but there may be a danger of the 2.5mm on one of the legs of the ring being over loaded. So 4mm is 100% safe.

I find it amazing that two guys here cannot figure out a simple design and not even know it conform to the 18th and amendments.

It you stop being a contentious know-it-all not knowing too much, with a wandering mind, I may treat you differently. You think flats have garages and EV chargers. You have not much a clue.

Regulation 531.3.2(iii) makes no reference to cable sizing so I can only assume you have no access to the 18th Ed.

 

[John-SJW]

Will you drop the sharpen up there is absolutely no need for it in a civilised conversation

I have to get you to think and read. Your minds is all over the place.
Back to the point. The design conforms 100% to the 18th and its amendments, offering full AFDD protection to sockets. If you cannot see that why are doing the job you are in?

 

[nicebutdim]

The same could be for an average British semi. Maybe with two lighting circuits - but two are not required. This gives five circuits. Installation costs are then cut right down.

 

[westward10]

I have to get you to think and read. Your minds is all over the place.
Back to the point. The design conforms 100% to the 18th and its amendments, offering full AFDD protection to sockets. If you cannot see that why are doing the job you are in?

And it satisfies Regulation 531.3.2(iii). Why don't you tootle off and read it.

 

[UNG]

I have to get you to think and read. Your minds is all over the place.
Back to the point. The design conforms 100% to the 18th and its amendments, offering full AFDD protection to sockets. If you cannot see that why are doing the job you are in?

You can't even answer the question @westward10 posted so you clearly have no access to the regs and anyone who quotes the regs as legal clearly has no understanding of their legal status

As for your profile
Manufacturer Yes you have manufactured some scenario that you think meets the requirements of the regs
Distributor And you have distributed on here as an absolute solution with no other point of view allowed
Supplier You have kept on supplying condescending comments and insults because you and your knowledge has been challenged
Inventor As the invention normally comes before the manfacture I suspect you have them in the wrong order in your profile
etc Who knows what that is

So I would say you are working to your profile

 

[westward10]

@John-SJW you've gone quiet.

 

[John-SJW]

@John-SJW you've gone quiet.

Football on TV. First things first.

 

[westward10]

Football on TV. First things first.

So you are stumped then as your circuit design is flawed and you don't know why.

 

[John-SJW]

You can't even answer the question @westward10 posted

I the design does not conform to the 18th with amendments, then he can tell us where.
So far no has. All I have read is innane circular babble though. Now back to watching the football.

 

[westward10]

I the design does not conform to the 18th with amendments, then he can tell us where.
So far no has. All I have read is innane circular babble though. Now back to watching the football.

Your design is flawed and is not likely to 100% comply with the 18th Ed as you have stated multiple times.

 

[John-SJW]

531.3.2
(iii) 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 not be more than 30% of the rated residual operating current.

And?

 

[John-SJW]

So you are stumped then as your circuit design is flawed and you don't know why.

You cannot explain why you think this. A bit of a know-it-all eh!