Discuss EICR 3036 board - coding - meter tails in the UK Electrical Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net
Thanks Bob
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.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.
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.
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.
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?
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.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.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.
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.
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.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.
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?
It would be a limitation on the eicr if the fuse size is unknown.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
Whichever side you do decide it still ends up butter side down when you drop it.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
Have you verified the characteristics of the protective device? If not, how can you code the tails.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.
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
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.
Comes form the NICEIC examples of codes.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.
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 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.
It will contain it longer than plastic.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
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!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!
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.
I don't think this at all but I have an issue with people undertaking a task that they are not competent to do.You seem to think that your way is the only way that's called ignorance!
It is an excellent way to gain knowledge working alongside more experienced people whilst referring to relevant Regulations. Who thinks this isn't the case?Be nice if people weren't so ignorant to think, that reading and listening to people to gain knowledge wasn't a waste of time.
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 finished your 25 piece Easter jigsaw puzzle already?Hum... Like kettle calling black ... From the man that doesn't understand the bs 7671 definition of a "circuit"
Wasn't the old Wylex C.U. 's 60,80 & 100AI 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?
OP wishes he kept his mouth shut now This is the exact reason i hate EICRs, they are for the astute spark who loves picking holes in other peoples work and has a deep understanding of BS7671. I will try anything to get out of periodic's as they have to be the most boring aspect of the trade, most blokes who do them solely are usually rubbish at install work or spend all day arranging their tools.
Reply to EICR 3036 board - coding - meter tails in the UK Electrical Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net
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.