Opinions please EICR code C1 or C2?

[Octopus]

Only in a dwelling.

Really .... Reg number?

 

[Deleted account]

I was under the impression rcd protection on lighting circuit in 18th edition is not just limited to dwellings only.

I've just C3 ed a whare house lighting circuit on an EICR that has no RCD protection as I am carrying out works to the 18th now. Client doesn't have to do anything as it won't give an unsatisfactory.

I will look up reg when get a chance.

 

[Andy78]

I was also under the impression from the draft that only dwellings would require RCD protection for lighting circuits regardless of installation method.

Not yet got my book though so can't check.

 

[westward10]

I was under the impression rcd protection on lighting circuit in 18th edition is not just limited to dwellings only.

I've just C3 ed a whare house lighting circuit on an EICR that has no RCD protection as I am carrying out works to the 18th now. Client doesn't have to do anything as it won't give an unsatisfactory.

I will look up reg when get a chance.

You are carrying out EICRs to the 18th Ed?

 

[Ian1981]

Really .... Reg number?

He’s correct it’s for dwellings

 

[Ian1981]

He’s correct it’s for dwellings

Any circuit supplying luminaries in a dwelling requires additional protection via 30mA rcd

To align with the base CLC Harmonised Document, the new Regulation 411.3.4requires the provision of additional protection by RCD for AC final circuits supplying luminaires within domestic (household) premises.

 

[westward10]

I was under the impression rcd protection on lighting circuit in 18th edition is not just limited to dwellings only.

I've just C3 ed a whare house lighting circuit on an EICR that has no RCD protection as I am carrying out works to the 18th now. Client doesn't have to do anything as it won't give an unsatisfactory.

I will look up reg when get a chance.

Very worrying.

 

[Deleted account]

You are carrying out EICRs to the 18th Ed?

Yes

 

[Deleted account]

Any circuit supplying luminaries in a dwelling requires additional protection via 30mA rcd

To align with the base CLC Harmonised Document, the new Regulation 411.3.4requires the provision of additional protection by RCD for AC final circuits supplying luminaires within domestic (household) premises.

B*gg*r! Yep your correct.
Pleased I haven't sent the EICR yet.
Also really pleased I'm part of forum. Could of been a changer there.
I don't like giving false information to clients, not good for my reputation.

Feel a bit embarrassed now. Why did I think this!

 

[Octopus]

Any circuit supplying luminaries in a dwelling requires additional protection via 30mA rcd

To align with the base CLC Harmonised Document, the new Regulation 411.3.4requires the provision of additional protection by RCD for AC final circuits supplying luminaires within domestic (household) premises.

Another stupid regulation.

Why not in commercial premises?

 

[Strima]

Yes

Why? Doesn't come into effect until 01/01/19.

 

[Deleted account]

Why? Doesn't come into effect until 01/01/19.

During transitional period we can use either. So I give the customer the option.
This customer chose 18th.

 

[Nigel]

During transitional period we can use either. So I give the customer the option.
This customer chose 18th.

Would have been bettet to have familierised yourself with it first then eh? ;-)

 

[Deleted account]

I cannot argue with that.

Tbh I feel a bit sheepish. Bahhhh.

 

[Lucien Nunes]

Why not in commercial premises?

Because lamps are more likely to be changed by maintenance teams than clumsy (or infirm) householders, who are at more risk poking around in ES fittings without knowledge of safe isolation etc.

And the original fault - C2 if the fittings aren't actually live. Otherwise there's no way to indicate a higher risk scenario of the fittings being live and ready to zap someone.

 

[Octopus]

Because lamps are more likely to be changed by maintenance teams than clumsy (or infirm) householders, who are at more risk poking around in ES fittings without knowledge of safe isolation etc.

And the original fault - C2 if the fittings aren't actually live. Otherwise there's no way to indicate a higher risk scenario of the fittings being live and ready to zap someone.

I've given you a disagree, because I simply see it as another example of clutching at straws to make enough changes to justify the 18th edition plus the vested interests of manufacturers on these committees who see increased revenues AND profits.