New C U Certification

[Tucosweep]

Hi,
Need the help of the pro's please.

I'm unsure to what I need to fill out on the test schedules for a new consumer change,
Do I input all test results of existing circuits which are not new?

I will be greatfull for any advice please

 

[malcolmsanford]

You put the tests that are relevant to your work that was carried out, there is no nothing in the regulations that tells you that when you change a CU you must test the entire installation

 

[trev]

Yeah, nothing in the regs to say you test everything, but I would just in case

 

[Tucosweep]

So I should just test all existing circuits and enter the results on the schedule? But just state that it was a CU change in the description of works,
Will it make me responsible for the existing circuits?

 

[micknew]

But you should have tested the installation before carrying out the works.

 

[trev]

If you test it you should record the results

 

[micknew]

So a CU change does not require a full installation test before or after the works?

 

[malcolmsanford]

But you should have tested the installation before carrying out the works.

And what would you say those tests should be

 

[tonycoysh]

As I understand it (I will probably be corrected - happy to be if so)

The extent installation covered by this certificate would be: Consumer Unit change only and tick the 'alteration box'

I personally then test every circuit so I can prove that by me changing the consumer unit has not effected the electrical safety of the rest of the installation.

 

[micknew]

Tests to verify the integrity of the installation so that the client can be advised of the works required to satisfy regs. following the cu change.

 

[Tucosweep]

Thanks Tonycoysh

 

[malcolmsanford]

What have you changed by replacing the new Cu ................have you installed extra circuits, so there is no additions apart from the CU itself

You have altered the protection device characteristics yes, so you need to ensure that the existing circuit will now activate the new protection devices .................. so Zs will be 1667.

You will do a global IR and as long as it is over 2 Mohm that is all you need to do.

Do you do R1 + R2 no ............I wouldn't unless I felt a need to do it.

I would certainly do all 7 RCD tests, that is a must ............

Would I do continuity of ring circuits ..........doubtful

 

[trev]

Maybe I'm a fusspot but I'd still do the whole range of tests just for my own peace of mind.
Maybe that's why I'm not getting many CU changes

 

[kamkam]

'Would I do continuity of ring circuits ..........doubtful'

so would you just put that ring final circuit on a 32a mcb and assume its ok

 

[Octopus]

"New consumer unit and upgrade (or) installation of bonding to water and gas" is what 90% of my CU installation certificates state.

Don't forget its notificable too.

 

[leespeed]

notifiable,what a joke 150 quid to building control if your not part p ..scam of the century

 

[malcolmsanford]

'Would I do continuity of ring circuits ..........doubtful'

so would you just put that ring final circuit on a 32a mcb and assume its ok

You don't assume it's ok, I would do Zs tests around it to make sure it 1 as EFLI path and 2 continuity.

If I found a spur off a spur off a spur off a spur ............... or I found a cross connected ring.........would I do anything, yes I'd tell the customer that according to my bible it needs fixing, but according to his bible, it's worked like that for 30 yrs, and I'm not paying for it to be changed by you.

So what do I do as the electric police, I refuse to to connect it back up ..............and very soon I would get very little work.

You advise that is all you can do, you have fitted a modern, safer CU and so you are leaving the installation safer and you have proven by your tests that the reason you have changed the CU to add the additional protection works .............so unless they are willing to pay me for a full EICR, then what I test is what I listed in post 14

I fully appreciate if you guys want to test everything and do a free full testing regime, then great hats off to you. But the regs are guides, as I always said, I can walk into an installation, and within 15-20 minutes I know what to expect, ok sometimes it still throws me a curve ball, but not often.

I will carry out the tests that I are needed. If I'm changing a CU in a house that the installation is 40 yrs old, looks to have been installed by a DIY'er. I will advise on my quote accordingly that there could be a lot more work involved and testing, and walk into another that is 10 yrs old and looks like it as never been touched I tailor the quote to that.

This is why I see on here CU change .................250-300 pounds ......what the .......... you should quote to the job, if it's half a day and easy then you may quote 150-175 and win it, but don't quote well I'm going to be there all day because I'm going to test this, and this and this and this, and so it's 250-300, you will be undercut by perhaps a lad like me.

 

[telectrix]

think you might be a bit over that figure if you charge travelling time from saudi, malc.

 

[spark 68]

Sorry to disagree Malc,

.............so unless they are willing to pay me for a full EICR, then what I test is what I listed in post 14

I fully appreciate if you guys want to test everything and do a free full testing regime,

On my first assesment with Elecsa, I was advised to either do a full prior EICR (PIR as was) and then the EIC for the CU, or just do the full EIC in lieu of the EICR (full set of tests). I cannot say what other scheme providers advise their members.

Like you and others, there is no way Iam doing a free EICR, and then possibly not get the job, but as you say, you can get a 'feel' for the place on a visual, and then I do a quick (not recorded) pre-test to see if Iam likely to have any problems, such as borrowed Neutrals, unwanted tripping etc...

Another thing I was told was, the only thing defending you in a court of law should anything bad happen, is your records of the EIC, SoTR and SoI, so it is for your protection and in your interest to fill in as much information as accurately as you can on this paperwork.

As I say though each to their own.

 

[malcolmsanford]

No not at all sparks we all have opinions mate and if your advised that by your scheme then fair dos.

As you saw on my post #12 mate about the only thing I would not do rote fashion is the R1 +R2 and r1 rN r2 for a ring main.

I would prove continuity by Zs as most modern meters allow you to test between L-E and L-L and I do it with a plug adapter or lite mates so you get that.

If I got a strange result then yes you may have to bite the bullet and carry out further testing. I could also go around with just a wander lead and do the R2. So for me R1 + R2 for a CU change is not critical.

And that is the same for r1 rN and r2, as said I confirm a cpc and it's continuity at each point with the Zs, if you got a problem then yes you have to decide what you want to do and how you overcome it.

 

[telectrix]

personally, i always do r1,r2,rN, if only to 1. ensure the |RFC/s have not been split. and 2. to make sure i don't get my tiny mind confused and cross connect the legs in the CU.

 

[spark 68]

personally, i always do r1,r2,rN, if only to 1. ensure the |RFC/s have not been split. and 2. to make sure i don't get my tiny mind confused and cross connect the legs in the CU.

I also do this, but for another reason too, because on a couple of jobs I have had an r2 reading lower than one r1 or rN readings, the cause has always been a loose connection in one of the SO's,
a Zs reading would not show a loose N.

 

[brman]

I've got to admit I don't see why you wouldn't do r1, r2, rn when you change the CU. It is a 30 second job when you have all the wires out and means you can fill in the test schedule fully. Cross coupling and doing R1+R2 is a bit of pain and I can see that a quick check of r1, r2, rn against your Zs tests would do the job there.

 

[telectrix]

had one the other week. r1 = 0.45, r2 = 0.70. rN = open circuit. found it in a S/O, terminal loose.

 

[malcolmsanford]

lol looks like I've lost this one lads ......................but to all of you fair dos for doing the job to the nth degree

 

[brman]

had one the other week. r1 = 0.45, r2 = 0.70. rN = open circuit. found it in a S/O, terminal loose.

ditto, but to be fair Malc said he would test L-N as part of his Zs testing which should pick up the neutral fault.

I also had one the other week on a lighting radial where Zs looked ok (ish) along the circuit but a proper R1+R2 (with earth disconnected at the board) found a break in the cpc. For the 2nd half the circuit the cpc came from the other lighting circuit- connected at at a dual gang switch. You could argue that for a board change, who cares, there was still a cpc at each outlet but it is one that I would want to know about.

 

[spark 68]

Cross coupling and doing R1+R2 is a bit of pain and I can see that a quick check of r1, r2, rn against your Zs tests would do the job there

I have on the odd occasion had a fine r1,r2 and rN reading at the CU, but an iffy reading at a SO when doing the cross connected tests, and found the SO connection loose, but the wires twisted together in the slack terminal.

I tend to just do the full tests because it is my head on the block so to speak, when the assessor told me the only defence I have is my paperwork, I take it the scheme provider won't be in the dock defending me.

 

[telectrix]

the only thing scheme providers would defend is their fat fees.