EICR 3036 board - coding - meter tails

[Lumie]

How would you code the following?

No RCD protection. I coded c2

Not amendment 3 compliant. I coded C3

Meter tails 16mm. I coded C3

Tested the installation and the test results were all compliant with BS7671.

 

[polo1]

Need more info mate, but for starters a plastic CU doesn't necessarily attract any code, though there are situations where it might.
So, type of supply, main fuse type/size, type of property viz sockets being used to supply equipment outside etc?

 

[westward10]

Sure you should be doing EICRs.

 

[Bob Geldoff1234]

C3 for the lack of rcd protection.
No code for the consumer unit.
C3 for the tails.

 

[Lumie]

Im not doing the actual EICR, Ive just done it for practise.

But am I sure whether I should be doing EICRs, with enough experience, yes. But I didn't come here to discuss my competency with yourself, I came here for advice.

type of supply TN-S
Fuse type BS88 GG 100A
small two bed cottage
No sockets to supply outside equipment

Any thoughts would be appreciated.

 

[Lumie]

Thanks Bob

 

[Ian1981]

If your maximum demand/load profile doesn't exceed the CCC of the 16mm tails and there's no signs of thermal damage I wouldn't even code the tails.

 

[Leesparkykent]

Thanks Bob

No offence to Bob but if I was you I wouldn't take what he's said as gospel, especially the C3 for the tails.

You cant just code something for lack of RCD protection there has to be a reason behind it like installation methods, location etc.

 

[westward10]

Im not doing the actual EICR, Ive just done it for practise.

But am I sure whether I should be doing EICRs, with enough experience, yes. But I didn't come here to discuss my competency with yourself, I came here for advice.

type of supply TN-S
Fuse type BS88 GG 100A
small two bed cottage
No sockets to supply outside equipment

Any thoughts would be appreciated.

Maybe you should have supplied more information initially. The amount of people who come on here asking what side to butter their bread on is unbelievable.
One question, how have you decided none of the sockets will supply equipment out of doors, check in the shed for a lawnmower

 

[davesparks]

How would you code the following?

No RCD protection. I coded c2

Not amendment 3 compliant. I coded C3

Meter tails 16mm. I coded C3

Tested the installation and the test results were all compliant with BS7671.

RCD protection for what? There are multiple things which require RCD protection, which would be coded differently depending on the exact situation.

What do you mean by not amendment 3 compliant? You can't just write down that the installation doesn't comply with regs and give it a code, you need to be specific with reference to a particular regulation.

What's wrong with 16mm meter tails? Are they showing any sign of overloading, thermal damage etc?

 

[Lumie]

Maybe you should have supplied more information initially. The amount of people who come on here asking what side to butter their bread on is unbelievable.

I will bear that in mind for future posts.

The reason I coded it as a C2, is can all sockets supply outdoor equipment with an extension lead? Or is this the wrong way of looking at it?

 

[Lumie]

RCD protection for what? There are multiple things which require RCD protection, which would be coded differently depending on the exact situation.

What do you mean by not amendment 3 compliant? You can't just write down that the installation doesn't comply with regs and give it a code, you need to be specific with reference to a particular regulation.

What's wrong with 16mm meter tails? Are they showing any sign of overloading, thermal damage etc?

Not amendment 3 compliant as the board is made from a combustable material.

My thinking behind the rating for the tails is, the supply cut out fuse is a higher rating than the 16mm tails. No sign of overloading or thermal damage.

 

[westward10]

Not necessarily, you could C2 that any socket outlets liable to supply equipment for use out of doors require 30ma rcd protection which covers you. Additional rcd protection also covers other aspects.

 

[westward10]

Not amendment 3 compliant as the board is made from a combustable material.

My thinking behind the rating for the tails is, the supply cut out fuse is a higher rating than the 16mm tails. No sign of overloading or thermal damage.

Using "ammendment 3 compliant" is poor terminology and you should be referring to the enclosure construction which is as you say is of combustible material but I personally wouldn't Code this at all but some people may.

 

[Ian1981]

Not amendment 3 compliant as the board is made from a combustable material.

My thinking behind the rating for the tails is, the supply cut out fuse is a higher rating than the 16mm tails. No sign of overloading or thermal damage.

You are assessing the continued safety of the installation and as such if the tails show no signs of overload and the CCC of the tails isnt exceeded then you have no code.

 

[davesparks]

Not amendment 3 compliant as the board is made from a combustable material.

My thinking behind the rating for the tails is, the supply cut out fuse is a higher rating than the 16mm tails. No sign of overloading or thermal damage.

The quote the reg number you feel it doesn't comply with, not just the whole damn book! What combustible material is the board made of? You said it's a 3036 board and the vast majority of them were pretty damned incombustible, especially the wooden backed ones.

what I said the actual loading on the tails? For a two bed cottage you're unlikely to see more than 20A so 16mm tails really shouldn't have an issue. Have you confirmed that the fuse is 100A?

 

[Ian1981]

Using "ammendment 3 compliant" is poor terminology and you should be referring to the enclosure construction which is as you say is of combustible material but I personally wouldn't Code this at all but some people may.

I would code 3 it if the db was under the stairs or in an escape route to the property, hallway next to the front door for example.

 

[westward10]

I wouldn't say it is a site specific requirement.

 

[Lumie]

The quote the reg number you feel it doesn't comply with, not just the whole damn book! What combustible material is the board made of? You said it's a 3036 board and the vast majority of them were pretty damned incombustible, especially the wooden backed ones.

what I said the actual loading on the tails? For a two bed cottage you're unlikely to see more than 20A so 16mm tails really shouldn't have an issue. Have you confirmed that the fuse is 100A?

Fair comment on the reg number, do you do that for every code?

Its a plastic board. Not quite sure what you mean by the wooden boards being damn near incombustible, when wood is very combustable?

The loading on the tails is minimal.

Just from the sticker on the cut out fuse. How else can you prove it? Im not contacting the DNO as this is just for practise.

Thanks for the help

 

[Ian1981]

Fair comment on the reg number, do you do that for every code?

Its a plastic board. Not quite sure what you mean by the wooden boards being damn near incombustible, when wood is very combustable?

The loading on the tails is minimal.

Just from the sticker on the cut out fuse. How else can you prove it? Im not contacting the DNO as this is just for practise.

Thanks for the help

It would be a limitation on the eicr if the fuse size is unknown.

 

[westward10]

I always put the DNO fuse as "Not Verified" on an EICR. What make is the board some of the Wylex boards are of wood frame construction. So where and why are you practising this on?

 

[D00DY_T00DY]

Maybe you should have supplied more information initially. The amount of people who come on here asking what side to butter their bread on is unbelievable.
One question, how have you decided none of the sockets will supply equipment out of doors, check in the shed for a lawnmower

Whichever side you do decide it still ends up butter side down when you drop it.
Sods law

 

[Dave the spark]

Im not doing the actual EICR, Ive just done it for practise.

But am I sure whether I should be doing EICRs, with enough experience, yes. But I didn't come here to discuss my competency with yourself, I came here for advice.

type of supply TN-S
Fuse type BS88 GG 100A
small two bed cottage
No sockets to supply outside equipment

Any thoughts would be appreciated.

Have you verified the characteristics of the protective device? If not, how can you code the tails.

I wouldn't code the CU.

Why are you coding the lack of RCD protection as C2?

 

[D00DY_T00DY]

Since when it was installed it was up code unless the install has become dangerous since then would it be c3 with an advisory? Or no code?
Still an apprentice so don't do eicrs just curious.

 

[polo1]

Ok Lumie, you have ( unintentionally ) poked a hornet's nest with a big stick.
It would have been helpful if, as part of your OP, you had explained this was a hypothetical question, that you don't carry out EICRs and that you are just trying to get your head round how certain things might be coded....then some of the responses might have been more moderate.

No harm in asking questions, that's hopefully one of the ways we all learn, but you must explain the context of your question.
Now, you probably have the answers you were looking for..
- a CU with rewireable fuses will not necessarily attract any code ( hardwood or plastic), but it may do.
- no rcd protection may not attract any code, but it could also be a 3 or 2 depending upon the particular situation.
- 16mm tails on a 100A BS88/1361 may only receive a comment if the max demand is lower that the ccc of the tails.

What you will have learned is that coding will depend on several/many specific factors and you need to be aware of them all, as well as the specific regs you believe are being broken, before you start allocating codes. And to do EICRs professionally, you must have an above average understanding of BS7671!

 

[Midwest]

I don't do EICR's.

However, from what I've learnt and read on this forum, you guys that do, can not agree on whether it was night or day. Just saying

 

[ruston]

Lol, it is not the night or day that is the problem , it is the dusk.

 

[davesparks]

Fair comment on the reg number, do you do that for every code?

Its a plastic board. Not quite sure what you mean by the wooden boards being damn near incombustible, when wood is very combustable?

The loading on the tails is minimal.

Just from the sticker on the cut out fuse. How else can you prove it? Im not contacting the DNO as this is just for practise.

Thanks for the help

Yes of course you quote regs, you can't code things that aren't in the regs.

The wood is treated to be fire retardent, just try getting it to burn!
The plastic used in those days wasn't particularly combustible.

 

[davesparks]

I would code 3 it if the db was under the stairs or in an escape route to the property, hallway next to the front door for example.

Which regulation mentions the location of the CU being a deciding factor?

 

[Ian1981]

Which regulation mentions the location of the CU being a deciding factor?

Comes form the NICEIC examples of codes.
I sought guidance as to what to code this if any from an area inspector.
If the db is in an area of sole means of escape but has no signs of thermal damage or loose connections c3.
Now you can argue with this statement all you like but I do see where it comes from.
As bs 7671 calls for non combustible materials to be used or a cu to be installed in a non combustible enclosure, I don't think it's unreasonable to c3 it in an escape route of a dwelling.
Final coding is down to the inspector as the buck will stop with him.
As you know a c3 is still a satisfactory outcome just an improvement of the overall safety and nothing more.

 

[davesparks]

Comes form the NICEIC examples of codes.
I sought guidance as to what to code this if any from an area inspector.
If the db is in an area of sole means of escape but has no signs of thermal damage or loose connections c3.
Now you can argue with this statement all you like but I do see where it comes from.
As bs 7671 calls for non combustible materials to be used or a cu to be installed in a non combustible enclosure, I don't think it's unreasonable to c3 it in an escape route of a dwelling.
Final coding is down to the inspector as the buck will stop with him.
As you know a c3 is still a satisfactory outcome just an improvement of the overall safety and nothing more.

the regulations make no mention of the location of the CU so the code, if any, must be the same regardless of location.

 

[Ian1981]

the regulations make no mention of the location of the CU so the code, if any, must be the same regardless of location.

No they don't , however if a fire is to start in a plastic consumer unit and is in the vicinity of the sole means of escape of the dwelling then it's a dangerous situation. Obviously the db should be checked for loose connections during the eicr for possible c1/ c2 codes.
The non combustible regulation came in to contain a possible fire if one was to occur.
Just my take on it Dave.

 

[davesparks]

No they don't , however if a fire is to start in a plastic consumer unit and is in the vicinity of the sole means of escape of the dwelling then it's a dangerous situation. Obviously the db should be checked for loose connections during the eicr for possible c1/ c2 codes.
The non combustible regulation came in to contain a possible fire if one was to occur.
Just my take on it Dave.

If fire starts in a consumer unit it is a dangerous situation wherever the CU is located. Especially considering the common habit of people to bury it under all manner of junk, coats etc.
If fire starts in a metal CU which has flammable materials touching it then you can pretty much guarantee that those materials will catch fire.

Not to contain a fire, just to not combust, very different things. CUs are not fire rated to withstand fire for any length of time, thin sheet steel is not suitable for such an application on its own

 

[Ian1981]

If fire starts in a consumer unit it is a dangerous situation wherever the CU is located. Especially considering the common habit of people to bury it under all manner of junk, coats etc.
If fire starts in a metal CU which has flammable materials touching it then you can pretty much guarantee that those materials will catch fire.

Not to contain a fire, just to not combust, very different things. CUs are not fire rated to withstand fire for any length of time, thin sheet steel is not suitable for such an application on its own

It will contain it longer than plastic.
That's why it's changed or you might as well leave it as plastic.

 

[Midwest]

To add to the debate. I was under the assumption, that the idea behind A3 non combustible materials, was to remove a potential fuel source from a potential ignition source. Nothing to do with containment.

 

[Octopus]

on the AMD3 fuse boards - we HAVE to remember that its a simply metal enclosure around the dodgy poor quality parts produced by BEAMA...

 

[Midwest]

Although when the reg 421.1.201 came into being, a lot was made of containment. This philosophy, quickly changed when everyone started bumping their gums about intumescent sealing and the fact that a standard A3 CU, has a huge flaw in containment, with a largely flappy poorly sealing lid.

So, as I've since heard and read, its about removing the rather doubtful inflammable plastic, with something else, mostly it seems ferrous metal.

 

[westward10]

Be nice if people could carry out EICRs using gained knowledge and competence as opposed to harping on about the Best Practice Guide and what the NICEIC make up, well we would certainly have less people doing them that is for sure.

 

[Midwest]

Be nice if people could carry out EICRs using gained knowledge and competence as opposed to harping on about the Best Practice Guide and what the NICEIC make up, well we would certainly have less people doing them that is for sure.

But then they would be all old farts like you and me westwood

 

[Ian1981]

Be nice if people could carry out EICRs using gained knowledge and competence as opposed to harping on about the Best Practice Guide and what the NICEIC make up, well we would certainly have less people doing them that is for sure.

You seem to think that your way is the only way that's called ignorance!