Do these internally exposed meter tails require mechanical protection?

[MJPD29]

It's terrible, I would be ashamed to put my name to that.

That’s a bit dramatic

 

[Dustydazzler]

That’s a bit dramatic

Agree , I have seen far far worse installs in recent years , in fact I spend most of my working week putting right bodged installs or fixing faulty new works etc

 

[James]

Absolutely, not every job I do, would I want to be taking pictures of and showing off to people.

modern times with people showing off their instagram lives etc, we all know people only post there best look. Rare to see real world stuff.

sometimes, “make it work” is the only thing the customer wants/needs.
I am not saying that anything will do,
if I can’t upgrade “make it work” to make it work and make it safe then it’s not going to happen.
but sometimes looking nice is just not possible with the restrictions in place for that job.

 

[mainline]

That’s a bit dramatic

Do you really think that's a decent job, one that you would put your name to ?

It's pretty obvious to me that the original Cu was installed fairly competently, although an isolator instead of the henley blocks would have been a bonus and its only being assumed to be compliant.

There was no need for those tails at all, as they could have taken a supply from the Consumer unit, there is a spare way to take a 63amp mcb and side entry would have been simple.

The cost and time would have been significantly reduced, not withstanding the aesthetics side of it.

 

[DPG]

Do you really think that's a decent job, one that you would put your name to ?

It's pretty obvious to me that the original Cu was installed fairly competently, although an isolator instead of the henley blocks would have been a bonus and its only being assumed to be compliant.

There was no need for those tails at all, as they could have taken a supply from the Consumer unit, there is a spare way to take a 63amp mcb and side entry would have been simple.

Was there enough capacity in the original CU?

 

[mainline]

Was there enough capacity in the original CU?

It's fed by 25 mm tails and I assume its 100amp main switch.

 

[DPG]

It's fed by 25 mm tails and I assume its 100amp main switch.

Was there enough spare capacity to feed a 63A MCB though? Presumably that's why an extra unit was installed.

 

[mainline]

Was there enough spare capacity to feed a 63A MCB though? Presumably that's why an extra unit was installed.

It's never going to draw 100 amps for any length of time.

 

[DPG]

It's never going to draw 100 amps for any length of time.

No worries then. Wasn't sure what circuits they had in the original consumer unit. Might have had 2 showers or something.

 

[Dustydazzler]

Absolutely, not every job I do, would I want to be taking pictures of and showing off to people.

modern times with people showing off their instagram lives etc, we all know people only post there best look. Rare to see real world stuff.

sometimes, “make it work” is the only thing the customer wants/needs.
I am not saying that anything will do,
if I can’t upgrade “make it work” to make it work and make it safe then it’s not going to happen.
but sometimes looking nice is just not possible with the restrictions in place for that job.

Im in the same boat , if a customer wants £1000 worth of repairs for £500 I will do my best to see what i can do maybe cheaper materials for example , but at some point their just isn't enough money to actually do the job properly so I turn it down. However I guarantee someone will take on the job on the cheap for cash in hand and do a right old lash up of it...and probably a photo of lash up will one day end up on here

 

[davesparks]

There was no need for those tails at all, as they could have taken a supply from the Consumer unit, there is a spare way to take a 63amp mcb and side entry would have been simple.

Feeding a CU from an MCB is bad practice as it gives little to no chance of selectivity.

 

[mainline]

Feeding a CU from an MCB is bad practice as it gives little to no chance of selectivity.

It's a better alternative to having those tails running up the wall.

And selectivity between what ?

 

[DPG]

It's a better alternative to having those tails running up the wall.

And selectivity between what ?

Between an OCPD tripping in the original CU as opposed to the new one.

 

[mainline]

Between an OCPD tripping in the original CU as opposed to the new one.

He's got a 40amp in the LV and a proposed 63amp in the main cu.

There is partial selectivity between two MCBs up to the selectivity
limit current if the downstream MCB has a lower rated current than
the upstream MCB

 

[davesparks]

It's a better alternative to having those tails running up the wall.

The surface installation of tails complies with the regulations but disregarding selectivity does not.

And selectivity between what ?

Between protective devices, the 63A mcb will not achieve any selectivity with the downstream MCB's.

 

[DPG]

He's got a 40amp in the LV and a proposed 63amp in the main cu.

There is partial selectivity between two MCBs up to the selectivity
limit current if the downstream MCB has a lower rated current than
the upstream MCB

That's not enough to give much selectivity though. Probably better in this case to split the tails as they have done in this case.

 

[westward10]

Can't believe this is pushing 70 posts for something that essentially just looks bad.

 

[nicebutdim]

Can't believe this is pushing 70 posts for something that essentially just looks bad.

We've moved on to suggesting options for poor design.

 

[mainline]

The surface installation of tails complies with the regulations but disregarding selectivity does not.

That's not true, there is partial selectivity if the downstream MCB has a lower rated current than the upstream MCB

There are already rcbos downstream of the 40 amp MCB, so does that mean there is no selectivity ?? Even using tails ?

Between protective devices, the 63A mcb will not achieve any selectivity with the downstream MCB's.

Not true.


Also bear in mind that these boards are next to each other.

 

[nicebutdim]

Also bear in mind that these boards are next to each other.

That's a fair point.

 

[westward10]

We've moved on to suggesting options for poor design.

Next thing we'll have 50 odd posts for what drill should I use.

 

[James]

Next thing we'll have 50 odd posts for what drill should I use.

stick with the ones that go round and round, I have always found them ok.

 

[rewireIT]

stick with the ones that go round and round, I have always found them ok.

Bit and brace?

 

[pirate]

73 posts on this?
FFS, if you don't like how it looks, cover it up!

 

[mainline]

Next thing we'll have 50 odd posts for what drill should I use.

I don't care as long as it's not mine.

 

[mainline]

That's not enough to give much selectivity though. Probably better in this case to split the tails as they have done in this case.

How about something like this with the outbuildings MCB omitted.

73 posts on this?
FFS, if you don't like how it looks, cover it up!

Or design it properly in the beginning.