other trades

[Geordie Spark]

Tel's way, If you spur of an existing ring final circuit for say a switched fused spur and the installation method of the addition doesn't require RCD protection.

You know ..... when you have a think about it Wor Tel's a canny bright bloke for a Scouser.

(He passed his 11 Plus & got a Degree in nickin' hub caps ye kna.)

 

[Andy78]

Extatic!:clap:

..........................

Don't just take our word for it though. Open up the regs and read the introduction to see it in black and white.

 

[telectrix]

You know ..... when you have a think about it Wor Tel's a canny bright bloke for a Scouser.

(He passed his 11 Plus & got a Degree in nickin' hub caps ye kna.)

i did pass 11 +, but only attained onc level in the hub-cap nicking department, as, when i was 12, the family left liverpool to move to staffy cher. there i was introduced to some pikeys and obtained my degree in copper theft by the age of 14.

 

[Deleted account]

Don't just take our word for it though. Open up the regs and read the introduction to see it in black and white.

Just read it " the regulations apply to the design, erection, verification of electrical installations, also additions and alterations to existing installations."

 

[Andy78]

Just read it " the regulations apply to the design, erection, verification of electrical installations, also additions and alterations to existing installations."

And the rest of the paragraph;

"Existing installations that have been installed in accordance with earlier editions of the regulations may not comply with this edition in every respect. This does not necessarily mean that they are unsafe for continued use or require upgrading"

This is the important part that Tel was referring to when stating that only your work has to comply with the regs, and the rest of the installation can stay as it is as long as it is safe. This sentence is also rather important when carrying out periodic inspection and testing.

 

[telectrix]

And the rest of the paragraph;

"Existing installations that have been installed in accordance with earlier editions of the regulations may not comply with this edition in every respect. This does not necessarily mean that they are unsafe for continued use or require upgrading"

This is the important part that Tel was referring to when stating that only your work has to comply with the regs, and the rest of the installation can stay as it is as long as it is safe. This sentence is also rather important when carrying out periodic inspection and testing.

.
spot on. it's ignorance of that which accounts for earlier CUs being condemned by some as being unsafe due to having no RCD protection etc.

 

[Deleted account]

And the rest of the paragraph;

"Existing installations that have been installed in accordance with earlier editions of the regulations may not comply with this edition in every respect. This does not necessarily mean that they are unsafe for continued use or require upgrading"

This is the important part that Tel was referring to when stating that only your work has to comply with the regs, and the rest of the installation can stay as it is as long as it is safe. This sentence is also rather important when carrying out periodic inspection and testing.

existing installations that have been installed in accordance with earlier editions. Yes I read it. But the way I read it is the existing are fine you don't need to do anything with them until you do additions or alterations to that circuit.

i find it amazing that different People can read the same thing and interpret it differently. It seems clear to me what it's saying.

on this point maybe we will have to agree to disagree.

 

[Deleted account]

.
spot on. it's ignorance of that which accounts for earlier CUs being condemned by some as being unsafe due to having no RCD protection etc.

I have never condemned a cu or indeed any installation for being unsafe due to changes in regs. There is no need. You can bring individual circuits up to latest regs without going to that extreme.

 

[Andy78]

existing installations that have been installed in accordance with earlier editions. Yes I read it. But the way I read it is the existing are fine you don't need to do anything with them until you do additions or alterations to that circuit.

i find it amazing that different People can read the same thing and interpret it differently. It seems clear to me what it's saying.

on this point maybe we will have to agree to disagree.

So by your way of reading it, if you carry out an alteration you must bring up every aspect of the whole installation to the current standards ? and you do that for every job ?

 

[Deleted account]

So by your way of reading it, if you carry out an alteration you must bring up every aspect of the whole installation to the current standards ? and you do that for every job ?

No not the whole installation just a circuit I am altering or adding to.

 

[Andy78]

No not the whole installation just a circuit I am altering or adding to.

Ah so you can pick and choose the scope of BS7671 ?

Look, in the example there is nothing wrong with adding RCD protection to a whole circuit to cover an additional spur, just as there is nothing wrong with providing local RCD protection for the work in the form of a RCD FCU.

You really do need to be clear on this one though that only the work you do need comply with the regs. You run the risk of misleading customers if not. I suggest a call to your scheme provider's technical help to clarify the scope of the regs as you are labouring under a misconception, not just a different interpretation.

 

[The Cavalry]

Having read the regs then had a cuppa then read them again I was not 100% sure on that. Next time I'm just going to this forum to get the answer!! Any chance Andy78 could write the next edition so I could grasp it quicker?

 

[Deleted account]

Ah so you can pick and choose the scope of BS7671 ?

Look, in the example there is nothing wrong with adding RCD protection to a whole circuit to cover an additional spur, just as there is nothing wrong with providing local RCD protection for the work in the form of a RCD FCU.

You really do need to be clear on this one though that only the work you do need comply with the regs. You run the risk of misleading customers if not. I suggest a call to your scheme provider's technical help to clarify the scope of the regs as you are labouring under a misconception, not just a different interpretation.

took your advice and contacted my scheme provider. it appears as far as they are concerned I am right. However the point I made about all power outlets up to 20A needs to be RCD protected was wrong, only socket outlets up to 20A. In my defence for this mistake on my behalf it was something I was told at a 17th edition 3rd amend seminar.
The point about spurring of a circuit whether it be an FSU or a socket some contractors beleive they can just keep that spur to the new regs and not update the whole circuit even though it clearly states in my eyes and my providers that any additions or alterations to a circuit. My scheme provider said I was right but if a contractor wanted to just bring up that spur to regs then technically they can but it is better to do it the way I suggest.
Personally I don't want to do things "technically" I want to do things right.

 

[Pete999]

i did pass 11 +, but only attained onc level in the hub-cap nicking department, as, when i was 12, the family left liverpool to move to staffy cher. there i was introduced to some pikeys and obtained my degree in copper theft by the age of 14.

Careful Tel Jezza Clarkson is in the brown stuff again reffering to our traveling friends as Pikeys

 

[Silly Sausage]

Careful Tel Jezza Clarkson is in the brown stuff again reffering to our traveling friends as Pikeys

Not any longer...
BBC News - Top Gear cleared over Pike's Peak pun

Unless they've done it again!

 

[Andy78]

took your advice and contacted my scheme provider. it appears as far as they are concerned I am right. However the point I made about all power outlets up to 20A needs to be RCD protected was wrong, only socket outlets up to 20A. In my defence for this mistake on my behalf it was something I was told at a 17th edition 3rd amend seminar.
The point about spurring of a circuit whether it be an FSU or a socket some contractors beleive they can just keep that spur to the new regs and not update the whole circuit even though it clearly states in my eyes and my providers that any additions or alterations to a circuit. My scheme provider said I was right but if a contractor wanted to just bring up that spur to regs then technically they can but it is better to do it the way I suggest.
Personally I don't want to do things "technically" I want to do things right.

Technically right is right, like it or not. The regs are but a minimum standard, and you can work to whichever standards you choose for yourself. Just don't go telling customers they need work doing that the regs don't require, because that would technically be wrong.

 

[andyb]

took your advice and contacted my scheme provider. it appears as far as they are concerned I am right.

So that's clear then, according to your scheme provider the person installing the new spur has to bring the whole circuit up to the current regs.

but if a contractor wanted to just bring up that spur to regs then technically they can but it is better to do it the way I suggest.
Personally I don't want to do things "technically" I want to do things right.

So that's clear then, according to your scheme provider the person installing the new spur does not have to bring the whole circuit up to the current regs.