Regulations 314.1(iv) and 531.2.4 concerning the avoidance of unwanted tripping.

[baldsparkies]

Good old AMD 3 hey lads,
So here's the situation.
Need to install floor sockets and related circuits including under floor busbars tap offs ect to office area with loads of PCs connected via work stations and monitors.
RCBO's at the dist board would be in keeping with AMD 3 regulations on socket outlets up to 20A
But of course they will be tripping out more often than staying in with all those PC's running.
And that would not be a good commercial situation.
The above regulations could be used to support a risk assesment but as the installer, I just feel another head on the chopping block situation as been thrust upon us.
So now RA's have to support non compliance with this nice new reg by yours truly.
Talk about getting stitched up.
Makes you wonder why we even bother in the game, its all up hill.
Rant over.

 

[Darkwood]

Schneider do a rcbo that filters and ignore some of the designed leakage and still trips on genuine faults meaning more workstations can be added.

They do a super immune (SI) device to background pollution like designed earth currents ...this allows for an increase in work stations per device.

 

[davesparks]

RCD sockets could be a solution

 

[andyb]

Not sure what this has to do with amd3, rcds for socket outlets in not new.

 

[baldsparkies]

RCD sockets could be a solution

I agree Dave its the best practical solution but job was priced before AMD3 and when yer working to tight costs, 40 Rcd sockets can kick your profit margin right between the legs. Ouch !!

 

[davesparks]

I agree Dave its the best practical solution but job was priced before AMD3 and when yer working to tight costs, 40 Rcd sockets can kick your profit margin right between the legs. Ouch !!

If it was designed to ammendment 2 then install it to ammendment 2!

 

[andyb]

I agree Dave its the best practical solution but job was priced before AMD3 and when yer working to tight costs, 40 Rcd sockets can kick your profit margin right between the legs. Ouch !!

Someone might pull me up on this Baldsparkie, but if it was designed pre 1st July, can you not still install to amd2 ?

 

[telectrix]

if the installation was designed pre amd3, then it does not need to comply with amd3.

 

[baldsparkies]

Schneider do a rcbo that filters and ignore some of the designed leakage and still trips on genuine faults meaning more workstations can be added.

They do a super immune (SI) device to background pollution like designed earth currents ...this allows for an increase in work stations per device.

Nice option boards are star breakers so will check to see if the same devices exist for those as per schneiders gear,

 

[davesparks]

Not sure what this has to do with amd3, rcds for socket outlets in not new.

It is new for the vast majority of installations, it is only domestic where there has been a pretty much blanket requirement for the last decade or so

 

[Andy78]

It is new for the vast majority of installations, it is only domestic where there has been a pretty much blanket requirement for the last decade or so

I'm not sure the regs ever made that distinction did they ?

 

[baldsparkies]

Planning is still in provisional stages with budget costs submitted pre AMD 3 as opposed to design specs so room for negotiating on costs, but these days any increase justifiable or not is often met with the ifs whats and whys.
My rant is that regs are changed which involve increased costs and associated problems but the powers to be leave us guys to do the justifying and thrashing out the financial implications.
Sorry I'm in moaning mode, but I'm sure you lads have been there and worn the T shirt.

 

[andyb]

It is new for the vast majority of installations, it is only domestic where there has been a pretty much blanket requirement for the last decade or so

The exceptions have changed from skilled or instructed person to a risk assessment, either way the electrician has to make a judgment.

 

[baldsparkies]

It is new for the vast majority of installations, it is only domestic where there has been a pretty much blanket requirement for the last decade or so

Precisely +1

 

[baldsparkies]

The exceptions have changed from skilled or instructed person to a risk assessment, either way the electrician has to make a judgment.

No its deffo not an either way scenario, a written signed risk assessment by you and me is very different to pre AMD3's instructed skilled persons scenario.
the electrician has just been very neatly shoved further out there in harms way, and at the stroke of a pen or paragraph.
Thanks IEE.

 

[davesparks]

I'm not sure the regs ever made that distinction did they ?

Not explicitly, but the wording was something along the lines of sockets for use by unskilled persons or not supervised by skilled persons require rcds which pretty much covers general domestic sockets without much room for argument

 

[Andy78]

Not explicitly, but the wording was something along the lines of sockets for use by unskilled persons or not supervised by skilled persons require rcds which pretty much covers general domestic sockets without much room for argument

That's very true, but that also covered a massive proportion of commercial installs. I see what you were pointing out though, I didn't read your other post very well.

 

[netblindpaul]

The Duty Holder MUST do the RA in conjunction with the designer, and the designer MUST hold PII to cover them for the design and be competent to do the RA if they are going to get involved in doing the RA, else leave it to the duty holder.
Poor foresight the proposed changes were issued a year ago almost before they were implemented so any quotes which could have crossed the threshold should have been worded to cover such issues.

 

[Risteard]

As stated the Risk Assessment is a matter for the Duty Holder. Why take on a duty which belongs to someone else?