Discuss 18th Regulation 411.3.4 in the Electrical Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net

Welcome to ElectriciansForums.net - The American Electrical Advice Forum
Head straight to the main forums to chat by click here:   American Electrical Advice Forum

The requirement is to provide RCD protection for the circuit.

Asked scheme this question and that's not the answer I was given.

"treat it as you would an addition to a socket circuit, if no RCD, provide additional protection for your addition."

An RCD FCU was suggested as suitable means of achieving additional protection.

Dontcha just love this game.
 
The standard that they are manufactured to is not listed as a means of providing additional protection. Can't recall if it used to list it, or if it just said 30ma, but now it just says a 30ma device to 61008 or 61009 i think
 
There’s 3 standards listed:
531.3.6 RCDs for additional protection
The use of RCDs with a rated residual operating current not exceeding 30 mA is recognized as additional protection in compliance with Regulation 415.1. These RCDs shall be provided to comply with the requirements of Regulation 411.3.3. RCDs for additional protection in AC installations shall comply with:
- BS EN 61008 series, or
- BS EN 61009 series, or
- BS EN 62423.
Where installed at the origin of a final circuit or a group of final circuits, an RCD with a rated residual current not exceeding 30 mA may provide fault protection and additional protection simultaneously.
NOTE: Consideration shall be given to the division of the installation (see Regulations 531.3.2 and 314.2).
 
Rcd FCU's are bs 4293 if memory serves, will they be updating these now then or are they now no longer fit for purpose?
i suppose all single and double rcd sockets are now obsolete too as they are also bs4293

This is wrong surely!

Or an exercise in phasing out BS no.s over BS EN no.s which seems pointless pretty soon


Anybody got any answers? what a crock!

Looks like an ammendment is due already!
 
Last edited:
Just found this from iet which i think we already knew

In fact, when we adopted current operated devices (RCDs) to BS 4293, the trip times were much quicker than modern devices, although they may not comply with BS EN standards. BS 4293 was withdrawn in 2000 and manufacturing of these devices should have ceased in 2005. The device was replaced by BS EN 61008.

One of the negatives in using the older mechanical devices were that they could seize up. Modern devices are either electronic or electromagnetic.



So when adding to an older installation, say an old wylex split load with an older bs4293 rcd in place, we now cannot use this to protect our circuits and must use an additional rcd to BS 60898?

Seems a little rediculous to me?

I think ive got to start a new thread on this
 
There’s 3 standards listed:
531.3.6 RCDs for additional protection
The use of RCDs with a rated residual operating current not exceeding 30 mA is recognized as additional protection in compliance with Regulation 415.1. These RCDs shall be provided to comply with the requirements of Regulation 411.3.3. RCDs for additional protection in AC installations shall comply with:
- BS EN 61008 series, or
- BS EN 61009 series, or
- BS EN 62423.
Where installed at the origin of a final circuit or a group of final circuits, an RCD with a rated residual current not exceeding 30 mA may provide fault protection and additional protection simultaneously.
NOTE: Consideration shall be given to the division of the installation (see Regulations 531.3.2 and 314.2).

So does that mean that in a metal containment system where no additional protection is required for the cables, the additional protection for sockets could not be provided by 13A RCD sockets ?
 
So does that mean that in a metal containment system where no additional protection is required for the cables, the additional protection for sockets could not be provided by 13A RCD sockets ?

Technically yes. I have received verbal advice from NAPIT that I can continue to use RCD spurs and sockets, but they wouldn't commit that in writing as, and I quote "that's just my (meaning the advisers) interpretation of the regulations".

I have used a few RCD spurs (which are manufactured to BS 7288 I believe) for providing additional protection since the introduction of the 18th but these have been listed as departures on the relevant certs.
 
Technically yes. I have received verbal advice from NAPIT that I can continue to use RCD spurs and sockets, but they wouldn't commit that in writing as, and I quote "that's just my (meaning the advisers) interpretation of the regulations".

I have used a few RCD spurs (which are manufactured to BS 7288 I believe) for providing additional protection since the introduction of the 18th but these have been listed as departures on the relevant certs.

I can see that this is a sensible and compliant use of a departure. It can be proved it offers the same level of protection.

Would like to know the reasons for the change in these regs though.
 

Reply to 18th Regulation 411.3.4 in the Electrical Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net

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

Electrical Forum

Welcome to the Electrical Forum at ElectriciansForums.net. The friendliest electrical forum online. General electrical questions and answers can be found in the electrical forum.
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