- Reaction score
- 4,371
I often say to others, do some work for yourself for a change, if you want to know something look it up.
Discuss C3s putting you in harms way ?? in the Periodic Inspection Reporting & Certification area at ElectriciansForums.net
I think you've completely failed to realise why I'm asking the question.I often say to others, do some work for yourself for a change, if you want to know something look it up.
Did you actually read ALL of my post and did you actually digest any of it before you responded.Not identify whether something is a non-conformance or not, what do the Wiring Regulations say about what code to give any non-conformance?
BS7671 only gives one suggestion for a Code and that is a minimum Code 3 for lack of additional rcd protection.I think you've completely failed to realise why I'm asking the question.
UNG keeps saying that things should be coded on the basis of what BS 7671 says, not what a publication from NICEIC/NAPIT/et al says.
So I'm asking him what the Wiring Regulations say about what code to give any non-conformance?
Profile has you down as a Domestic Installer, have you got any test & inspect/EICR experience?I think you've completely failed to realise why I'm asking the question.
UNG keeps saying that things should be coded on the basis of what BS 7671 says, not what a publication from NICEIC/NAPIT/et al says.
So I'm asking him what the Wiring Regulations say about what code to give any non-conformance?
agreed, but BS 7671 does not give us the approriate codes for different situations. the actual code classifications are in guidance notes and best practice giude. this is where individual inspectors may differ over codes. usually between C2 and C3. what 1 guy may see as a potential danger, another may just think improvement recommended. err on the side of caution, you are accused of making up work. be lenient and a resulting fire or injury, it's yous in the dock. in the light of the dark side. we're the front line expendables. only the lawyers win, even if they lose, they get paid 10 x our charges. any 5 week law courses about?Profile has you down as a Domestic Installer, have you got any test & inspect/EICR experience?
Think about the codes and what they mean (don't have my book so can't quote word for word);
C1 - Immediately dangerous, should be rectified immediately or at least made safe (which would then (possibly) knock down to a C2) - I can see it, I can touch it, it will kill me now
C2 - Potentially dangerous, has the potential to elevate to a C1 dependant on external influences - Something has to happen to elevate to a C1 - Remedial as soon as practicable
C3 - Non-compliance but not dangerous
Now think about what things you're likely to find.
Exposed live parts; C1 every day of the week.
Underrated OCPD; C2, which you cant die from touching it, continued use would give rise to danger
Plastic CU with no thermal damage; C3, nothing to indicate the switchgear isn't operating at intended but current regs would want a non flame propogating ferrous metal enclosure.
You get the idea, it's all down to engineering judgement, not what advise guides like Codebreakers et all day.
it's all down to engineering judgement
Do you mean an over rated OCPD which could be dangerous if the circuit is overloaded, all an under rated OCPD would do is tripUnderrated OCPD; C2, which you cant die from touching it, continued use would give rise to danger
Current regulations require a non combustible CU or a CU contained within a fire rated enclosure, E.G. metal is only an example and not an absolute requirement when it comes to the construction of a CUPlastic CU with no thermal damage; C3, nothing to indicate the switchgear isn't operating at intended but current regs would want a non flame propogating ferrous metal enclosure.
Yes and yes.Did you actually read ALL of my post and did you actually digest any of it before you responded.
Please show where I've even suggested that I am.Why are you so insistent that the gospels according to NAPIT and / or the NICEIC is law'
That's all true, but you were arguing against the use of best practice guides issued by officially recognised organisers of competent person schemes, saying that non-conformances should only be judged against the wiring regs, so it seemed reasonable to consider the fact that those contain effectively nothing in the way of guidance on codings.There is no substitute for proper qualifications, the appropriate skill set and EXPERIENCE when it comes down to making the decision at the coalface for what coding is needed for a non compliance with BS7671. If you are not able to do that then IMO you should not be doing EICR's,
And if, after some incompetent fiddling which can never be proved, that plastic CU catches fire, I wish you every luck in defending how your qualifications, skills and experience justified you ignoring what officially recognised competency organisations advised.Plastic CU with no thermal damage; C3, nothing to indicate the switchgear isn't operating at intended but current regs would want a non flame propogating ferrous metal enclosure.
You get the idea, it's all down to engineering judgement, not what advise guides like Codebreakers et all day.
Reply to C3s putting you in harms way ?? in the Periodic Inspection Reporting & Certification area at ElectriciansForums.net
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.