There is Emg lighting yes, will note the boards in the covering report letter , was just wonering as the rcd trip tests would sudgest it needs replacing( never explained that sorry), so just change the main rcd up front and this will be fine then, its just many people say this is bad practise, but i assume the emg lighting would cover the total lost of light issue.
- Thread starter confused-fuse
- Start date
-
- Tags
- agree codes electricians' talk pir
There is Emg lighting yes, will note the boards in the covering report letter , was just wonering as the rcd trip tests would sudgest it needs replacing( never explained that sorry), so just change the main rcd up front and this will be fine then, its just many people say this is bad practise, but i assume the emg lighting would cover the total lost of light issue.
B
Bottletop
Has anyone else had problems opening this link. I can only view the first page.
No working fine for me Bottletop
- - - Updated - - -
No working fine for me Bottletop
B
Bottletop
Thanks Huntos
Well just tried it again and still no joy. Can view the first (cover) sheet) and the rest of the pages are blank. Even tried to print it and it came out the same. Then tried the home pc and still the same. Deeply puzzled now.
Well just tried it again and still no joy. Can view the first (cover) sheet) and the rest of the pages are blank. Even tried to print it and it came out the same. Then tried the home pc and still the same. Deeply puzzled now.
The first page shows one sheet of A4, scroll to the next page and from then onwards you get 2 pages shown side-by-side, which might have something to do with not being able to read it depending on what version of Acrobat reader you have? Also, the subsequent pages take a little while to load, they initially appear black.
B
Bottletop
Thanks SJD.
Just shut down and restarted lappy and can now view it.
.
Just shut down and restarted lappy and can now view it.
.
N
nickblake
so
sorry its a while after the post has been made , i have 3 house fires due to a fault within the board , also wood worm , lol yes i know and then if the board has plug in breakers or a mix of fuses and plug in breakers then there is a potential hazard with out the fuse cover as is often the case there is a small hole in the fuse carrier which exposes the main terminal , i have had a case where an elderly gentleman haning a pair of water proof trousers on a coat hanger stuck the end of the coat hanger into the hole and burnt his hand and gave him self a sever electric shock
so if you come across these boards with out the fuse cover then the coding should be a C1 if these terminals are exposed
sorry its a while after the post has been made , i have 3 house fires due to a fault within the board , also wood worm , lol yes i know and then if the board has plug in breakers or a mix of fuses and plug in breakers then there is a potential hazard with out the fuse cover as is often the case there is a small hole in the fuse carrier which exposes the main terminal , i have had a case where an elderly gentleman haning a pair of water proof trousers on a coat hanger stuck the end of the coat hanger into the hole and burnt his hand and gave him self a sever electric shock
so if you come across these boards with out the fuse cover then the coding should be a C1 if these terminals are exposed
B
Bottletop
Thats not a wooden consumer unit/back box. guess the woodworm are getting tougher. on a serious note, the chances of someone coming into contact with these exposed fuse carriers are miniscule, however still a risk so indeed i would also give it C1. Guess a lot of people would also say " been like that for 30 years and never had a problem.
V
virgil
hi.i didn't read all the messages but anyone mentioned anything for the codes for the new condition reportes?
I do code missing fuseshields as a C1, wooden, open backs I don't code unless mounted on combustiable material. However, being resourceful I have a stash of wylex fuse covers from 1w to 8w for this eventuality. Saves failing an installation.
Hi Virgil, have a read of this: http://www.esc.org.uk/fileadmin/use...y/best_practice/BestPracticeGuide4-Locked.pdf
V
virgil
thank you so much for your help iq electrical.
N
nickblake
G
GaryM
That's the underside so yes, IPXXB (IP2X) and it's compliant with that as you wouldn't get a 12.5mm object into there.
I can't remember if the top of the carriers also show the same amount of exposed fuse wire, if so then I'd be looking for a minimum of IP4X which it would obviously fail if the cover isn't in place.
Last edited by a moderator:
V
virgil
can someone help me please,electrical instalation condition report how do you clasifie fan in the bathroom without window?but in the batroom with window?
T
trev
So it's in a bathroom with no window but the bathroom has a window?
You might want to explain that a bit better mate
You might want to explain that a bit better mate
V
virgil
sorry you are right.how do you clasify in the new condition report missing fan in the bathroom without window?but missing fan in the bathroom with window?
T
trev
Both bathrooms have no fan but one bathroom has a window and one does not.
Is that the situation?
Is that the situation?
You don't need to mention this, BS7671 makes no
mention of ventilation requirements and that's what your report is based on.
V
virgil
ok so if you don't have fan is ok is not our bussiness.thank you.but do yoy know if you have a fan and no isolator for it?(three poll isolator)
G
GaryM
That's how I read it.
BS7671 doesn't mention a requirement for a fan in a bathroom nor if windows (or lack of) are relevant. It's a Building Regulations issue.
EDIT - didn't see IQ's reply before posting!
G
GaryM
If there's a fan installed then it should be to Manufacturers Instructions.
T
trev
Was just trying to get the exact picture Gary as his explanation was as clear as mud. I thought that was what it was but wantedto make sure, then IQ hit the nail on the head
G
GaryM
Yeah, I was just agreeing with your interpretation, as you said, it wasn't too clear.
V
virgil
anyway i got what i want it from IQ.they helped me a lot without funny comments.i think this is the ideia of this forum to help eachother not to get clever.thank you anyway
T
trev
No one was trying to be funny mate, just the explanations weren't too clear. Never mind though we got there in the end
these are old codes for pir, they have now been updated there are only 3 codes now for the eicr
1 is danger present unsatisfactory
2 is potentially dangerous unsatisfactory
3 is improvement recommended satisfactory
1 is danger present unsatisfactory
2 is potentially dangerous unsatisfactory
3 is improvement recommended satisfactory
N
Niceguy0584
Hi All
I am new to this site, and was wondering if you can guide us to the right direction, I am doing EICR's and I have come across falts which are wired from submains with 16mm2 TW&E and the cable run is about 12 meters protected by kfm 60amp switch, my question is this installation is over 20 years old and the earth from from submains 16mm TW&E is used, which is 6mm and is non compliance to current reg, my question is which code would this be classified as? C1 C2 or C3
Thanks
Adam
I am new to this site, and was wondering if you can guide us to the right direction, I am doing EICR's and I have come across falts which are wired from submains with 16mm2 TW&E and the cable run is about 12 meters protected by kfm 60amp switch, my question is this installation is over 20 years old and the earth from from submains 16mm TW&E is used, which is 6mm and is non compliance to current reg, my question is which code would this be classified as? C1 C2 or C3
Thanks
Adam
M
monkeyelectric
What is the earthing arrangment? If you do eicr's for a living i assume you know the definition of each code?
Have you used the adiabatic equation (if permissable) to determine the minimum cpc size that would comply?
M
monkeyelectric
I think he's done a runner after posting the same question 3 times
K
kobie1978
Pme vs TT
Hello all first post so go easy. I am presently carrying out condition reports on a chain of pubs my company started doing them 5 years ago when I joined my firm last year I was made aware I would be doing most of testing. I was quite happy about this got me outta the filth same money but rewarding in my eyes. Anyway what's your take on this Pub has Pme but was lacking power for domestic/commercial kitchen. Well there's a caravan plot next door owned by pub where a nic company took a supply including staked earth and run a sub main to pub Pme origin. This to me is **** but hey a few stickers and I would be of with it. But to take 2 x10mm earth's from switch fuse in pub straight into Pme met block! And here is my problem it's been bugging me I graded this with c2 potential danger should it be a c1 immediate danger due to what is essentially a high risk situation waiting for a fault to occur and kill someone.
I appreciate any and all responses
Hello all first post so go easy. I am presently carrying out condition reports on a chain of pubs my company started doing them 5 years ago when I joined my firm last year I was made aware I would be doing most of testing. I was quite happy about this got me outta the filth same money but rewarding in my eyes. Anyway what's your take on this Pub has Pme but was lacking power for domestic/commercial kitchen. Well there's a caravan plot next door owned by pub where a nic company took a supply including staked earth and run a sub main to pub Pme origin. This to me is **** but hey a few stickers and I would be of with it. But to take 2 x10mm earth's from switch fuse in pub straight into Pme met block! And here is my problem it's been bugging me I graded this with c2 potential danger should it be a c1 immediate danger due to what is essentially a high risk situation waiting for a fault to occur and kill someone.
I appreciate any and all responses
I think that this is an inappropriate situation but as you have said it is "waiting for a fault to occur and kill someone" therefore it is a C2 as there is no immediate danger unless a fault occurs.
I am pretty sure that connecting an existing supply to the DNOs PME earthing is not legal might be interesting to put that in comments (but check legality first!)
I am pretty sure that connecting an existing supply to the DNOs PME earthing is not legal might be interesting to put that in comments (but check legality first!)
Re: Pme vs TT
I don't think there is any danger here at all.
First make sure I understand the configuration: Switch fuse in Pub close to supply head with final earth consisting of 2x10mm cables. Sub main from pub to caravan with CU in caravan. Caravan CU earthed with local earth rod. I cannot make out if you imply the submain has an earth and if it is also connected to the earth in the caravan CU. I am assuming that the caravan is fixed and is being considered as an Mobile Home (or outbuilding) rather than a Caravan as described in Reg 721.
First the 2x10mm earths. My understanding is that it is permissable to use two thinner cores wired in parallel to form a cable so long as they are of equal length and will therefore share the load correctly. In this case 2x10 being 20mm total exceeds the requirement for a 16mm earth (assuming a 25mm supply).
Second the earthing of the caravan. There have been many discussions on this board re "exporting" the equpotential environment of the supply head, some beleiving that you should do this, some beleiving you should create a seperate equipotential environment by installing a TT system in the out building. I don't know if there is any recent edict on this, but look at it in these ways. If the earth of the sub main is connected in the caravan then the earth rod can be considered as an extranious item of mental connected to the caravan (even if only through its own cable) and must therefore be bonded with a minimum of 10mm. If the earth of the submain is not connected then it is a TT system, should be fitted with a 100mA RCD and earthed with a minimum of 2.5 or 4mm (according to mechanical protection). To me both approaches are valid and present no risk.... or have I misunderstood somthng?
A side issue would be the size and nature of the earth conductor in the sub main. If it is for example a 10mm T&E supply then the earth would be undersize to act as bonding, while a 10mm core of a SWA cable would be. Then again some supply companies will not accept the earth included in a SWA cable as a bonding cable and require a seperate bonding cable connected directly to the met, exactly as shown in the Regs. Note also though that if the caravan were considered to be within the scope of Reg 721 then the bonding of the caravan must be to the earth of the incomming supply.
I don't think there is any danger here at all.
First make sure I understand the configuration: Switch fuse in Pub close to supply head with final earth consisting of 2x10mm cables. Sub main from pub to caravan with CU in caravan. Caravan CU earthed with local earth rod. I cannot make out if you imply the submain has an earth and if it is also connected to the earth in the caravan CU. I am assuming that the caravan is fixed and is being considered as an Mobile Home (or outbuilding) rather than a Caravan as described in Reg 721.
First the 2x10mm earths. My understanding is that it is permissable to use two thinner cores wired in parallel to form a cable so long as they are of equal length and will therefore share the load correctly. In this case 2x10 being 20mm total exceeds the requirement for a 16mm earth (assuming a 25mm supply).
Second the earthing of the caravan. There have been many discussions on this board re "exporting" the equpotential environment of the supply head, some beleiving that you should do this, some beleiving you should create a seperate equipotential environment by installing a TT system in the out building. I don't know if there is any recent edict on this, but look at it in these ways. If the earth of the sub main is connected in the caravan then the earth rod can be considered as an extranious item of mental connected to the caravan (even if only through its own cable) and must therefore be bonded with a minimum of 10mm. If the earth of the submain is not connected then it is a TT system, should be fitted with a 100mA RCD and earthed with a minimum of 2.5 or 4mm (according to mechanical protection). To me both approaches are valid and present no risk.... or have I misunderstood somthng?
A side issue would be the size and nature of the earth conductor in the sub main. If it is for example a 10mm T&E supply then the earth would be undersize to act as bonding, while a 10mm core of a SWA cable would be. Then again some supply companies will not accept the earth included in a SWA cable as a bonding cable and require a seperate bonding cable connected directly to the met, exactly as shown in the Regs. Note also though that if the caravan were considered to be within the scope of Reg 721 then the bonding of the caravan must be to the earth of the incomming supply.
Last edited:
OFFICIAL SPONSORS
These Official Forum Sponsors May Provide Discounts to Regular Forum Members - If you would like to sponsor us then CLICK HERE and post a thread with who you are, and we'll send you some stats etc
Advert
Thread Information
- Prefix
- N/A
- Replies
- 155
Thread Tags
- Tags
- agree codes electricians' talk pir
Advert
Thread statistics
Advert
TrueNAS JBOD Storage Server
-
-
Understanding TrueNAS JBOD Servers: A Comprehensive Guide- Started by Dan
- Replies: 8
-
