BS3871 on EICR classifiaction code?

[NellyManjaro]

I have searched for an answer to this question but to no prevail.

BS3871's.... should these be changed? I have just done an EICR on a board with these and no RCD for lights serving bathroom but it has an RCD protecting all sockets, shower and the cooker circuit... now I have given 2 x C2 codes because 1 the RCD doesn't trip in the allowed time and 2 for no RCD protection or supplementary bonding etc for the lights in bathroom

BUT hypothetically... if it was all protected by a fully working RCD would I be ok in saying BS3871's are ok still? Or does it need to comply with regards to disconnection times? If so where do I find these disconnection times?

Thanks in advance

 

[brianmoooore]

If all of this was installed to the regs. in place at that time, and it all still works as it should, there are no C2s here. C3.

 

[westward10]

Providing disconnection times are met 3871 devices are fine for continued use.

 

[richy3333]

No RCD protection and no supplementry bonding - C2 for me. No RCD for lighting in bathroom, C3 for me

 

[Mike Johnson]

Surely if the lighting in the Bathroom is above 2.25m no RCD protection, CPC in place, its no code?

 

[buzzlightyear]

No RCD protection and no supplementry bonding - C2 for me. No RCD for lighting in bathroom, C3 for me

SECTION 6.4 no sub bonding 701.415.2 / section 6.1 701.411.3.3 .

 

[richy3333]

SECTION 6.4 no sub bonding 701.415.2 / section 6.1 701.411.3.3 .

Yeah, I looked at that for guidance in my judgement

 

[Pretty Mouth]

I have searched for an answer to this question but to no prevail.

BS3871's.... should these be changed? I have just done an EICR on a board with these and no RCD for lights serving bathroom but it has an RCD protecting all sockets, shower and the cooker circuit... now I have given 2 x C2 codes because 1 the RCD doesn't trip in the allowed time and 2 for no RCD protection or supplementary bonding etc for the lights in bathroom

BUT hypothetically... if it was all protected by a fully working RCD would I be ok in saying BS3871's are ok still? Or does it need to comply with regards to disconnection times? If so where do I find these disconnection times?

Thanks in advance

I believe BS3871s are still considered compliant. You'll find max Zs and other info for these in the current on site guide.

 

[brianmoooore]

Surely if the lighting in the Bathroom is above 2.25m no RCD protection, CPC in place, its no code?

True, but irrelevant. If no RCD was required when it was installed, then it's a C3.
You test to the current regs. Anything that doesn't meet the current regs, but met the regs. in force when it was installed is a C3*. Anything that doesn't meet the current regs, and didn't meet the regs in force when it was installed is a C2.

* I'm referring to 'modern' wiring, not stuff installed pre '50's, so please don't bring up fused neutrals.

 

[Deleted account]

So are you saying if it’s above 2.25M in bathroom and has no RCD protection and no supplementary bonding that is a no code?

obviously C3 for no RCD on lighting in general, but the bathroom requirement I would have put at C2.

this is a question not a disagreement.

 

[Mike Johnson]

Surely if the lighting in the Bathroom is above 2.25m no RCD protection, CPC in place, its no code?

My post above was a question also.

 

[Deleted account]

My post above was a question also.

Anyone out there wish to hazard an answer to this?

i genuinely though it would be a C2, but I live and learn. So it anyone agrees or disagrees with this let us know?

 

[Mike Johnson]

It seems its a C3 = Improvement recommended, as it does not conform to the latest regulations (which are deemed to be an improvement), but not a C2 or C1 as it does not present a hazard.

 

[westward10]

Surely if the lighting in the Bathroom is above 2.25m no RCD protection, CPC in place, its no code?

The location of the luminaire is not relevant it serves a location containing a bath or a shower, zones in this case are irrelevant.

 

[Mike Johnson]

That would be 701.415.2, and 411.3.2.2, 701.411.3.3, 411.3.1.2, if this was a downlighter only accessible with a tool, how would you code that then?

I suppose in truth the sensible thing to do is to protect anything in a shower or bathroom with an RCD which in essence everything in a modern two RCD board is.

 

[Pretty Mouth]

The location of the luminaire is not relevant it serves a location containing a bath or a shower, zones in this case are irrelevant.

IMO the location of the luminaire is relevant in some cases, from a coding point of view rather than compliance. If it could only be reached by climbing a ladder, then a C3 for no RCD and no supp bonding. If within reach, then C2 for the same

 

[westward10]

That would be 701.415.2, and 411.3.2.2, 701.411.3.3, 411.3.1.2, if this was a downlighter only accessible with a tool, how would you code that then?

I suppose in truth the sensible thing to do is to protect anything in a shower or bathroom with an RCD which in essence everything in a modern two RCD board is.

It is serving the location so whether a tool is required or not is neither here nor there.

 

[richy3333]

True, but irrelevant. If no RCD was required when it was installed, then it's a C3.
You test to the current regs. Anything that doesn't meet the current regs, but met the regs. in force when it was installed is a C3*. Anything that doesn't meet the current regs, and didn't meet the regs in force when it was installed is a C2.

* I'm referring to 'modern' wiring, not stuff installed pre '50's, so please don't bring up fused neutrals.

Not really. A socket installed to an earlier edition which could reasonably be used to power equipment outside would be a C2 if no RCD protection.

I think you meant 'you inspect to the current regs' testing hasn't changed over the years (part for maybe AFDD's). ???

 

[NellyManjaro]

C2

Absence of supplementary bonding where
required, such as in a location containing a
bath or shower, where any of the following
three conditions are not satisfied:
❍ All final circuits of the location comply with
the requirements of Regulation 411.3.2 for
automatic disconnection, and
❍ All final circuits of the location have
additional protection by means of a 30 mA
RCD, and
❍ All extraneous-conductive-parts of the
location are effectively connected to the
protective equipotential bonding (main
earthing terminal).

So just because it was compliant 50 years ago doesn't mean it isn't a C2 on an 18th edition EICR

 

[newfutile]

The latest best practise guide suggest that :
for class 2 fittings

Absence of supplementary bonding for installed Class II equipment where required (such as in a location containing a bath or shower), in case the equipment is replaced with Class I equipment in the future

this does not require reporting or any code