Search the forum,

Discuss Back fusing in the Electrical Wiring, Theories and Regulations area at ElectriciansForums.net

Reaction score
376
Hi Guys,

We have an installation we are about to carry out some extras on.
One of which is a small 3 phase DB adjacent to the main switch fuse in the remote DNO's building next to the transformer to install power to 3 caravan hook up points. (Max 20a per phase)

Some background info,
The supply is TN, 800amp Schneider ACB as incoming over current set to 550amps.

Ze from the switch fuse is 0.02

The switch fuse is a 630amp with 500A fuses fitted.

As everything is sealed and no busbar chamber is present for alterations I was thinking of installing tails 25mm ho7 insulated and sheathed singles from the load side of the switch fuse (to ensure we still have one point of isolation) through existing galv trunking to new DB which will be attached to it also.
In the DB install a 63a CB as incomer.
This obviously relies on back fusing as with a busbar system, but have never really done this without a chamber. I know the principal is the same but just wanted some thoughts.

Thanks in advance, Rich.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Hi Guys,

We have an installation we are about to carry out some extras on.
One of which is a small 3 phase DB adjacent to the main switch fuse in the remote DNO's building next to the transformer to install power to 3 caravan hook up points. (Max 20a per phase)

Some background info,
The supply is TN, 800amp Schneider ACB as incoming over current set to 550amps.

Ze from the switch fuse is 0.02

The switch fuse is a 630amp with 500A fuses fitted.

As everything is sealed and no busbar chamber is present for alterations I was thinking of installing tails 25mm ho7 insulated and sheathed singles from the load side of the switch fuse (to ensure we still have one point of isolation) through existing galv trunking to new DB which will be attached to it also.
In the DB install a 63a CB as incomer.
This obviously relies on back fusing as with a busbar system, but have never really done this without a chamber. I know the principal is the same but just wanted some thoughts.

Thanks in advance, Rich.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sounds ok to me.
 
You need to check Section 434 and do some calculations as to whether those conductors are adequate.
 
Will those conductors withstand the possible FAULT current, nothing to do with the 63A device.
 
I have just re done my calcs,
35mm is very close but on the right side.
Am I right with the following? Doubting myself now.

T =kxs/ 11500
(All the above squared)

So 13225 X 1225 = 16200625

/ 132250000

= 0.1225 sec

Information for fig 3a3c shows with 11,500 fault current the device will disconnect in less than 0.1 seconds

Am I missing something?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
I was thinking along the lines of a fault on the 2m cable inside the galv trunking.
However slim it may be.
Or am I over thinking this?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Being in the metal trunking, using insulated and sheathed singles and keeping the length to a minimum you've installed it in such a manner as to reduce the risk of fault to a minimum by reinforcing the protection of the wiring against external influences.
 
Last edited:
I am lost for words that you consider the 63 device will solve any problems with regards to thermal damage of conductors should a fault occur between the point of connection and said protective device.
 
I am lost for words that you consider the 63 device will solve any problems with regards to thermal damage of conductors should a fault occur between the point of connection and said protective device.

It wont but that's not the intent of the regulation as its permissible to be installed in such a manner as long as certain criteria is met for example under 3 meters and protection against external influences.
 
Last edited:
I am lost for words that you consider the 63 device will solve any problems with regards to thermal damage of conductors should a fault occur between the point of connection and said protective device.

I don't think anyone said it will.
The tails are to be enclosed in steel trunking and kept as short as possible so regulations wise they will be compliant with the 63A device as the ocpd
 
Thanks for all the replies :)
I thought it would be as a busbar system.
The fact that I have proved it will disconnect quicker than the maximum time allowed by calculation doesn't mean that the cable will withstand said fault for 0.1seconds?
How would I calculate withstand current of the cable then?
Because that is how it was taught to me on my 2396 a few years ago.
Thanks again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Reply to Back fusing in the Electrical Wiring, Theories and Regulations area at ElectriciansForums.net

OFFICIAL SPONSORS

Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Electrician Courses Green Electrical Goods PCB Way Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Pushfit Wire Connectors Electric Underfloor Heating Electrician Courses
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

YOUR Unread Posts

This website was designed, optimised and is hosted by untold.media Operating under the name Untold Media since 2001.
Back
Top
AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website. For the best site experience please disable your AdBlocker.

I've Disabled AdBlock