Report.

[telectrix]

I need to do the customer a report on this. done buy a supposed "electrician" via Bathroom installers. This SWA is for a 9.5kW shower.

apart from the SWA armour not being earthed, the black core is used as cpc but no Gn/Y ID. joins in loftto T/E in a broken adaptable box with 30A 3 pole choc strip. the SWA is exposed in the CU room and drilled out through cavity wall, then takes a convoluted route up outside wall to attic. Apart from having 2 tight bends where it enters wall, it's a bloody eyesore. a minor point is the grey conductor is unused and I beleive it should be connected to earth.

They have at least fitted a 40 RCBO albeit a Wylex in an Ashley& Rock CU.

What i need is reg. nos. from 18th for above non-compliances if anyone could oblige, as I still only have 17th (3rd Amdt.)

 

[plugsandsparks]

I have a spare copy of 18th if you want it.

 

[telectrix]

I have a spare copy of 18th if you want it.

how much mate?

 

[David Prosser]

522.8.3 The radius of every bend in a wiring system shall be such that conductors or cables do not suffer damage and terminations are not stressed.

 

[telectrix]

522.8.3 The radius of every bend in a wiring system shall be such that conductors or cables do not suffer damage and terminations are not stressed.

thanks for that

 

[James]

not got mine to hand but you are going to get a lot of reg numbers thrown at you by many I suspect.

reg 155.TH155.5H1T.4.RE4L
springs to mind??

 

[David Prosser]

526.1 Every connection between conductors or between a conductor and other equipment shall provide durable electrical continuity and adequate mechanical strength and protection. Broken box and 30A choc block no good for that.
[automerge]1587036297[/automerge]
Most of section 134 Erection and Initial Verification.

134.1.1 Good workmanship by skilled or instructed person. Proper materials to be used in the errection of the electrical installation. The instalation shall take into account manufacturers' instructions.

 

[plugsandsparks]

how much mate?

you can have it, seriously

 

[David Prosser]

Would also point out that as this installation was carried out by someone "at work" then the EAWR reg 8 should also come into it.

 

[plugsandsparks]

@ tel, just ping me your address or you can pick it up from Ashbourne, Derbyshire which i think is the closest place i work to you.

 

[telectrix]

you can have it, seriously

thanks a lot. will pm address later. i will of course reimburse you for postage.

 

[plugsandsparks]

thanks a lot. will pm address later. i will of course reimburse you for postage.

You can give the postage to Captain Tom Moore's 100th Birthday Walk for the NHS - https://www.justgiving.com/fundraising/tomswalkforthenhs
will save me a job,,, lol

 

[telectrix]

my draft report.
Report on Shower installation



!. SWA cable does not have the steel armour earthed.

2.The SWA is not adequately supported at the Consumer Unit ( 522.8.5 )

3. The black conductor used as cpc is not identified as such (Green/Yellow Sleeving or tape required)

4. The joint in the attic to Twin&Earth cable is inadequately joined with 30A connector blocks, as the circuit load is 41A. There is no strain relief provided. ( 526.1. & 522.6 )

5. The RCBO fitted is 40A. This is inadequate as it does not comply with Ib<In<Iz.

6. Where the SWA enters the structure, the bend radii are too tight ( Reg. 522.8.3 )

7. The SWA cleats outside are spaced too far apart ( Reg. 522.8.4. )

Section 134 of BS7671 applies.

It is my considered opinion that this installation is non-compliant; the SWA outside the building will allow water ingress into the masonry and is an eyesore.

My recommendation is to rip it out and start again.

 

[David Prosser]

514 for identifaction of conductors.

 

[westward10]

Armour not earthed, 411.3.1.1
Conductor identification, 514.3
Unsuitable connection enclosure, 526.7
Bends in swa cable, 522.8.3
Non compatible protective device, 536.4.203
There are multiple Regs you could throw at this including the slick termination of the cable at the board.

 

[telectrix]

Armour not earthed, 411.3.1.1
Conductor identification, 514.3
Unsuitable connection enclosure, 526.7
Bends in swa cable, 522.8.3
Non compatible protective device, 536.4.203
There are multiple Regs you could throw at this including the slick termination of the cable at the board.

SUPER. THANK YOU.

 

[Ian1981]

I wouldn’t include no 5 in your report, as overloaded protection can be omitted for fixed loads such as a shower so ib<In<Iz is not relevant, you just need to make sure that the Iz of the cable is large enough including the protective device for the load of the shower and that you have the required fault protection.
So in this case the rcbo is incorrectly sized for the final load 433.1.1 (i)

 

[David Prosser]

Apart from all that sounds like a good job.

 

[telectrix]

well, it doesa work. but can't for the life of me understand fitting an instantaneous shower when it would be far less work fitting a mixer shower, hot feed from C/H boiler. all the necessary pipework( not necessarily in the right order though) is under the floor only about 4 ft. away.
[automerge]1587049839[/automerge]

I wouldn’t include no 5 in your report, as overloaded protection can be omitted for fixed loads such as a shower so ib<In<Iz is not relevant, you just need to make sure that the Iz of the cable is large enough including the protective device for the load of the shower and that you have the required fault protection.
So in this case the rcbo is incorrectly sized for the final load 433.1.1 (i)

so i'm half right. the 40A MCB is running at above In, so is in danger of tripping if shower is used by teenage girls, which in this case, it is. 1 x 14 year old monster teenage daughter.
[automerge]1587049912[/automerge]

Apart from all that sounds like a good job.

just seen a pink pig in flight over the trees.

 

[richy3333]

Seriously, WTF! Does the cover fit on that CU?