F

freedomrun

In the process of a domestic EICR. RFC, i'm getting L-L (0.11) N-N (0.11) cpc-cpc (0.48) had to take off all socket fronts anyway as i did not like what i saw on a couple of random selected s/o & i've tightend up any loose cpc terminals i can find. I'm guessing that there could be a JB with a loose terminal somewhere. What code would you recommend i put on the EICR? Thanks.
 
(TN-C-S) The RFC has RCD protection to 30mA, so Zs not an issue?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
whats it wired in? t+e? even if it is, end to end on cpc is usually slightly higher than live and neutral due to being slightly less in csa.
 
For T&E it should only be around 1.67 times greater - not 4 1/2 times greater!!!

Had trouble before trying to explain the problem to firms I've worked for. It requires improvement in my opinion as there is very clearly a loose connection on the most important conductor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
T&E copper (2.5mm L) (1.5mm cpc) CU says 1991 as date of manufacture, i'd say cable is same age. got he same test results at two different locations on the RFC.
 
Time for the wander lead to come out of it's hidey hole. Find where the resistance increases.
 
(TN-C-S) The RFC has RCD protection to 30mA, so Zs not an issue?

It is an issue!! ....RCD protection is classified as ''Additional'' protection on TN systems, not a circuits Prime protection!! In other words they should not be seen as a replacement to the normal/standard automatic disconnection system!! It's a bit different on a TT system!! lol!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
Ok, maybe i should have said it was'nt an issue as RCD protection present, but just trying to say that on a TT system, the OSG quote a recommended maximum of 200 ohms for a cct. The cct in question is 30mA RCD protected on a TNCS - So the 'real' maximum Zs could be up to 200 ohms & not the figures in the OSG. I still have to record my figures of Zs anyway. I understand RCD protection is not Prime protection.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What is your Zs? Could be old earthing terminals on the back of sockets causing resistance?

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk
 
Zs recorded live on this cct is (0.54 ohms) and Ze is (0.21 ohms) many of the sockets have cpc's twisted together and single sleeved also.
 
Even with a 1.0mm2 cpc the lengths don't stack up so I would think it is, as already stated, a loose connection but more likely to be a corroded high resistance joint.
Do you zero your instrument every time you continuity test?
 
Back to the OP, IMHO its a code 2 and no fiddling with sockets or wander leads until the client agrees to pay!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person

OFFICIAL SPONSORS

Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Electrician Courses Green Electrical Goods PCB Way Electric Underfloor Heating Electrician Courses Heating 2 Go Electrician Workwear Supplier
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

Daily, weekly or monthly email

Thread Information

Title
RFC - end to end on CPC higher than expected ( EICR code advice please )
Prefix
N/A
Forum
Periodic Inspection Reporting & Certification
Start date
Last reply date
Replies
13

Advert

Thread statistics

Created
freedomrun,
Last reply from
freedomrun,
Replies
13
Views
5,831

Advert