Wylex wooden back db

[graham123]

Eicr code 2? Thoughts

 

[Silly Sausage]

Eicr code 2? Thoughts

Is it charred or showing signs of spontaneously combusting?

No Code, it's been sat there perfectly alright for the last 100 years!

 

[graham123]

Does it not condition in terms of fire rating?

 

[Plonker 3]

Have you thought maybe doing EICRs isnt for you?

 

[a1guvner]

Ive heard its ok if its white oak coated in danish oil.

 

[graham123]

What makes you say that Dillb?. I'm only asking for other peoples opinions as you we'll know with eicr it's down to the person who is conducting the testing to make any recommendation. IMO wylex wooden back box db does constitue a fire hazard. Therefore potential danger under an overload in the board or fault. So C2

 

[telectrix]

and what's the wylex fastened to? a wooden or weetabix board? that's also just as great a fire risk.

 

[Andy78]

What makes you say that Dillb?. I'm only asking for other peoples opinions as you we'll know with eicr it's down to the person who is conducting the testing to make any recommendation. IMO wylex wooden back box db does constitue a fire hazard. Therefore potential danger under an overload in the board or fault. So C2

There is little or no danger of the wood used in these boards combusting under a fault condition.
It's a no code in my book as it poses no greater risk than it did when installed and if undamaged, is perfectly serviceable for use.
If you must code it, it's a C3 at most.

 

[dan86]

No code for me. Can't see how you can justify it

 

[telectrix]

you can always justify a code C3 as "improvement recommended". a lot of these boards have the fuse cover missing, so that could even be a code C2 due to the fact that live parts are not protected to IP4X

 

[HappyHippyDad]

I think it's an interesting point and worth discussing.

I think a C2 is way over the top though (unless there are signs of thermal damage), I wouldn't even put a C3 simply because it is a recognised CU and has been perfectly acceptable for many years as Archy says. But... part of form 7 does mention about the type of enclosure with regards a fire hazard (haven't got the form to hand) and wood is certainly combustible!!

 

[Andy78]

you can always justify a code C3 as "improvement recommended". a lot of these boards have the fuse cover missing, so that could even be a code C2 due to the fact that live parts are not protected to IP4X

As far as I know Tel it's only the horizontal top surface of any enclosure that has to be IP4X. Any other surface requires only protection of IP2X/standard finger from live parts.

 

[telectrix]

i always thought it was top and front.

 

[Andy78]

No code for me. Can't see how you can justify it

I don't either as I cannot think of a reg to support it, which is necessary for a coded observation

I think it's an interesting point and worth discussing.

I think a C2 is way over the top though (unless there are signs of thermal damage), I wouldn't even put a C3 simply because it is a recognised CU and has been perfectly acceptable for many years as Archy says. But... part of form 7 does mention about the type of enclosure with regards a fire hazard (haven't got the form to hand) and wood is certainly combustible!!

There is a section which relates to adequacy of fire barriers/sealing. Not all EICR forms are made equal though....... I'm working from the model form.

 

[Andy78]

i always thought it was top and front.

It probably should be. Section 416 states IPXXB or IP2X for enclosures or barriers protecting live parts, and the only mention of IP4X is the top surfaces of enclosures.