Rcd Tripping On Dual Board

[Williamshoeste]

Hi,

ive added some outdoor led lights to the downstairs lighting circuit. there are a few 24v lights which are powered by 3 x led drivers (15w, 15w, 20w)

there's a few PIRs controlling the lights as well.

Ive protected them with their own rcd 30ma spur and a 1amp bs1362. the lighting circuit is off a b6 on the side of the board that's not protected by the rcd.

i connected at the board with live, neutral and earth into the same terminals as the existing circuit. neutral is definitely on the side not protected by the rcd.

but then last night at around 1am, the rcd for the socket side of the board tripped. i haven't a clue why this would happen.

are the led drivers playing havoc? the lights are split between front and back of the house so they wouldn't all come on at the same time and i've spent the morning trying to replicate the fault but to no avail.

it's weird because the rcd spur for the new lights didn't trip but the sockets did. ild have thought if there was a problem with my new lights the rcd spur would trip or tiny fuse blow.

any ideas? many thanks if you can help it's a bit of a puzzler.

 

[telectrix]

sounds coincidental and not a fault of the new lights.

 

[Mickeyb]

Not straight forward unfortunately. Split boards can be troublesome. The issue might be your drivers or it might be that your sensing device in your 30mA rcd, protecting the outside lights is activating the rcd protecting the sockets.
My question is, do you need 30mA rcd protection on your outside lights if they are fixed items and not supplying socket outlets outside. I would think you will be tortured with tripping for no/very little reason.

 

[Baddegg]

All new lights in domestic need 30ma rcd protection now....

 

[Strima]

All new lights in domestic need 30ma rcd protection now....

^^411.3.4 for those that are interested.^^

 

[DefyG]

411.3.4

Unfortunately 411.3.4 starts with 'Within' and it could be argued garden lighting is NOT 'within' domestic (household) premises and consequently doesn't need a RCD to satisfy the regs!
Did the lights come on at 1am (presumably they would have on on the non RCD protected side of the CU) or did the other RCD just trip?
As it seems a totally independent circuit, my thoughts are same as Telectrix #2 Coincidental!

 

[Baddegg]

Unfortunately 411.3.4 starts with 'Within' and it could be argued garden lighting is NOT 'within' domestic (household) premises and consequently doesn't need a RCD to satisfy the regs!
Did the lights come on at 1am (presumably they would have on on the non RCD protected side of the CU) or did the other RCD just trip?
As it seems a totally independent circuit, my thoughts are same as Telectrix #2 Coincidental!

A good argument @DefyG.....not sure I’d want to argue that interpretation of it in a court though should the worst happen?

 

[Andy78]

Unfortunately 411.3.4 starts with 'Within' and it could be argued garden lighting is NOT 'within' domestic (household) premises and consequently doesn't need a RCD to satisfy the regs!
Did the lights come on at 1am (presumably they would have on on the non RCD protected side of the CU) or did the other RCD just trip?
As it seems a totally independent circuit, my thoughts are same as Telectrix #2 Coincidental!

Surely then the special location for outside lighting would apply, which requires RCD protection ? ?

 

[DefyG]

You must have a different book to me, my regs book 714.411.3.3 (Additional Protection) doesn't mention 'gardens' in the list.

 

[Bob Geldoff1234]

The answer to the OP's problem is to IR test the RCD side that is tripping and see if there's any faults showing?

 

[Andy78]

You must have a different book to me, my regs book 714.411.3.3 (Additional Protection) doesn't mention 'gardens' in the list.

Well that's me educated for today. I thought RCD protection applied across section 714.

I would definitely argue that domestic premises would include gardens though.

 

[Strima]

Unfortunately 411.3.4 starts with 'Within' and it could be argued garden lighting is NOT 'within' domestic (household) premises and consequently doesn't need a RCD to satisfy the regs!

Try arguing that in court.

 

[DefyG]

Try arguing that in court.

Its in black and white but a good barrister would no doubt persuade others it wasn't!

 

[ipf]

You must have a different book to me, my regs book 714.411.3.3 (Additional Protection) doesn't mention 'gardens' in the list.

It doesn't mention air raid shelters either.
As regards your 'within' point, where are garden lights fed from?

 

[DefyG]

LED Driver I presume as the OP says they are 24v?

 

[Markyd]

So the car charger doesnt need a RCD...your hot tub doesnt need a RCD...Your sub main in the summerhouse needs no rcd....your external sockets need no RCD.....HAVE A WORD!

 

[radiohead]

So those of you who interpret the domestic lighting RCD requirement as not including gardens, would you be happy to wire garden lights without additional protection?
I wouldn't.

 

[DefyG]

I think the regs are too vague (but we've been there before)!!

Why in 714.1 (ii) the items listed separately from everything else later appear in 714.411.3.3 under 'Additional Protection'? Why not everything/everywhere?

I'm not necessarily agreeing or disagreeing with it but that is what I see written in the regs!
As far as this thread goes, I believe the OP's lights are 24v and wouldn't warrant a RCD, however the PIR's probably would (assuming 230v PIR's).

 

[richy3333]

Is anyone else confused about the op original post? Goes on about an RCD spur for outside lights but also talks about wiring into the consumer unit?

a drawing, photos or better description would help?

 

[Williamshoeste]

hi, sorry if my post was vague.

ive connected into the current downstairs lighting mcb at the consumer unit. it goes from the unit into surface mounted, mini trunking for about 300mm then into a double pole switched fused spur (fused at 1 amp.) Because i couldn't find a switched rcd spur, it then goes into an unswitched 30ma rcd spur.

it then goes into a wifi enabled switch wired in parallel with the pirs so we can turn the lights on and off via mobile phones and alexa. lots of boxes i know but it's out of the way so we don't care.

it then goes into some more mini trunking for about 750mm into a box. behind the box is the hole to the outside.

 

[radiohead]

hi, sorry if my post was vague.

ive connected into the current downstairs lighting mcb at the consumer unit. it goes from the unit into surface mounted, mini trunking for about 300mm then into a double pole switched fused spur (fused at 1 amp.) Because i couldn't find a switched rcd spur, it then goes into an unswitched 30ma rcd spur.

it then goes into a wifi enabled switch wired in parallel with the pirs so we can turn the lights on and off via mobile phones and alexa. lots of boxes i know but it's out of the way so we don't care.

it then goes into some more mini trunking for about 750mm into a box. behind the box is the hole to the outside.

I dont think it was vague, it was clear to me that you had wired from a non RCD protected 6a MCB in the DB to an RCD FCU....and from there to your lighting system. Sounds perfectly reasonable and safe.
As has already been stated it would appear the trip on the RCD side of the board is unrelated, occasional random tripping of RCD's is common and does not always indicate a fault. But if it is a regular thing clearly it will need investigating, firstly by carrying out an insulation resistance test on the entire installation. A quick and simple test.

 

[richy3333]

@radiohead Apologies, maybe the description for me got lost in translation or scrambled at the border ?

So from what’s been said a new circuit has been created and is run in part of the house before going outside serving garden lights? But this new circuit as it exits the CU is not RCD protected at source contrary to the new requirement? It’s the fused down and RCD protected for the bit that goes outside?

The OPs bio says he is a practicing electrician - qualified. I guess I would just have thought he knew the Regs, had a knowledge of part RCD protected CUs and also how to do an IR test? Yeah I’m confused ?

 

[Williamshoeste]

hi,

it's not a new circuit. it's an addition to an existing circuit. if you're not going to help richy333 then please post elsewhere.

 

[richy3333]

I was trying to help, but I can't if I dont understand what you are saying.

Now you say it is not a new circuit but before you said 'ive connected into the current downstairs lighting mcb at the consumer unit'. That sounds like a new circuit to me even if it is 2x cables coming out of 1x MCB. OK its a radial with a branch at the MCB but you are still effectively creating a new circuit?

Sorry if you dont like what I said in post no23. I'll duck out now, just hope some customer isn't paying for this and its in your own home.

 

[ipf]

hi,

it's not a new circuit. it's an addition to an existing circuit. if you're not going to help richy333 then please post elsewhere.

Be it new circuit or not, domestic new wiring should be RCD protected at source. The point being made in the previous post, I'm sure. (#23)
As regards the tripping.....#2 sums it up.
[automerge]1593686221[/automerge]

I was trying to help, but I can't if I dont understand what you are saying.

Now you say it is not a new circuit but before you said 'ive connected into the current downstairs lighting mcb at the consumer unit'. That sounds like a new circuit to me even if it is 2x cables coming out of 1x MCB. OK its a radial with a branch at the MCB but you are still effectively creating a new circuit?

Still one circuit rich, just a 'Jake the Peg'.

 

[Williamshoeste]

no it’s not a new circuit. Would it make you feel better if I made a radial off an existing light? It’s still the same additional connections regardless of where they’re made in the existing circuit.

you’re allowed to add a spur by connecting to the mcb in a consumer unit effectively putting 3 cores in one mcb. Do you consider that a new circuit too? It’s exactly the same as what I’ve done with the lighting circuit.

You guys are going to be minted if adding a single light to an existing lighting circuit may mean a mcb or consumer unit replacement just to give rcd protection. Unless of course the customer says no thank you I just want an outside light by the door.

I was just after some advice from people who have had domestic experience with led drivers, rcds and split boards. I don’t need snippy comments thank you.

 

[UNG]

So the "socket side" RCD tripped is the lighting MCB you connected to on the "socket side" of the CU as well? Otherwise for a spark your description and terminology is very confusing

 

[westward10]

Whether you have extended an existing circuit or created a new circuit is debatable what isn't debatable is that your part of the circuit, all of it requires additional rcd protection. The tripping of the rcd as stated in #2 is likely to be coincidental, is it still tripping.

 

[dodger421]

641.5 For an addition or alteration to an existing installation, it shall be verified that the addition or alteration complies with the Regulations and does not impair the safety of the existing installation.

To me that means if you add a light to an existing installation you need to ensure the altered circuit complies with Regulation 411.3.4. Effectively each final circuit supplying luminaires must have additional protection by RCD. I don’t see how that can be interpreted as anything other than having RCD protection at the CU for each lighting circuit.

You’ve added RCD protection for the actual lights via the spur but, as has been pointed out, the added bit from the CU to the spur isn’t RCD protected. Your additions must comply with the Regulations and as the final circuit includes the bit from the CU to your RCD spur your additions don’t comply.

And yes, that does mean if I were to add a new light to an existing circuit in a household I’d fit either an RCBO or upgrade the CU as required. Same thing if the main earthing and bonding isn’t up to scratch, that gets fixed before any additions or alterations as required by 132.16. If the customer says no thank you I’d politely decline the job.