Understanding 411.3.4, RCD's for lights.

[HappyHippyDad]

I just wanted to make sure I understood the new regulation above.

I am about to replace some ELV downlights with mains voltage, do these now have to be 30mA RCD protected?

At present they have 100mA protection and the earthing is TT.

Cheers.

 

[telectrix]

1`8th staes RCD for luminaires, so technically, RCD protection should be provided, unless:
1. you call it like for like maintenance, or
2. you "designed" the work before jan 1st.

 

[Silly Sausage]

2. you "designed" the work before jan 1st.

Phew, that's a relief!
I 'designed/planned' to change my mates bathroom lights which I did last week on New Years Eve

 

[HappyHippyDad]

Everything that I plan to do in the future I think was already planned in my head before Jan 1st so I should be ok for quite some time.

 

[HappyHippyDad]

This is going to create quite a bit more work on some occasions then isn't it!
There is a spare way on the 30mA side but then that means putting the lights on the same side as the sockets.
It's a starbreaker board and there seems to be so many different configurations of the RCD's that I'm bound to get the wrong one if i choose to replace the 100mA RCD! They all have different holes in different places. (should have opened the CU up!)
I think it's the same one as last time, i.e the one you gave me Tel, but not sure.

 

[HappyHippyDad]

Actually after a quick scan of the net..
Is this the right one to replace the 363/S100
https://www.NoLinkingToThis/p/crabtree-starbreaker-63a-30ma-dp-type-ac-rccb/29042

 

[Midwest]

I haven’t the latest addition, but under the previous, guidance from my Scheme, when replacing luminaries (like for like) in a bathroom for example, there was no requirement to ensure of addition protection.

The installation of additional luminaries would.

What does the new reg state?

 

[telectrix]

something like all luminaire circuits need RCD, when before it was only needed for cables <50mm deep in walls.

 

[Midwest]

IMO that would be the installation of new circuits, or the alteration of existing ones. I’ve been wrong before, guess one would need to ask a grown up.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Anyone know where I find the source for the "like for like"?

The term ‘like for like’ can be found in Approved Document Part P.

 

[Blaspark]

The term ‘like for like’ can be found in Approved Document Part P.

Thanks

 

[Wilko]

IMO that would be the installation of new circuits, or the alteration of existing ones. I’ve been wrong before, guess one would need to ask a grown up.

I've been asked to move the security light motion detector "round the corner of the building". It's all surface mounted cables and the associated light is not moving. I'm thinking an upgrade to RCD isn't mandatory, but very happy to be shown the error of my ways.
BTW - there is an earth at the fitting .

 

[westward10]

I've been asked to move the security light motion detector "round the corner of the building". It's all surface mounted cables and the associated light is not moving. I'm thinking an upgrade to RCD isn't mandatory, but very happy to be shown the error of my ways.
BTW - there is an earth at the fitting .

Assuming this is domestic then you have two choices because the circuit has been altered/extended.
1. Put in place additional rcd protection.
2. Carry out a risk assessment which must prove that omitting additional rcd protection is not detrimental to the safety of the installation as your works are a departure from BS7671.

 

[Wilko]

I'm useless at using RA in that way, because I think it would always be better with an RCD. Oh well, another nice conversation you've gotten me into .