Discuss EICR for house in the Periodic Inspection Reporting & Certification area at ElectriciansForums.net

Welcome to ElectriciansForums.net - The American Electrical Advice Forum
Head straight to the main forums to chat by click here:   American Electrical Advice Forum

tigerpaul

-
Arms
Reaction score
101
Hello,
After years of working for firms in commercial and industrial I have started picking up more and more of my own work now. Some of this is commercial and some domestic.
I've not really done much domestic before, I always managed to stay clear of it.

Now, I've just done an EICR for someone thinking of buying a house, and I notice test and inspection sheets have changed somewhat compared to what I had before. So, a few Q's.

After checking Table 4D5 BYB, I notice 4mm T&E ref method 101 gives a ccc of 22A. I take it, this has already taken into account correction factor Ci (thermal insulation). Therefore, it is only the other CF's I need to consider. Is that right?

I am unable to access the pipework near to the water stopcock, and therefore I cannot physically see or check if there is a protective bonding conductor. However, with both 10mm bonding conductors disconnected at the CU, I have tested for continuity to the water pipe on both and have 0.02ohms on one and 0.04ohms on the other. Would I record this on the schedule as a LIM or a Not Verified, or as a Code 3?

The meter enclosure on the external wall is loose, but I'm not sure which line of the schedule of inspections to record this on. Section 1.0 but which line, as none of them seem specific to the enclosure. Or should I just note it in the observations only?

Okay, last one.
A 16A 60898 feeds a radial which supplies 3 pieces of equipment both off of fuseds spurs (one 3A, one 5A) So, on the test sheet I should fill in the max ZS for the mcb. and test Zs at the spurs.
But then should I fill on an extra 2 lines below, with maz Zs values for each fuse and then test Zs twice more?
Companies I work for before would just test to the spur, but that seems to me like only testing part of the circuit? When I'm doing it for myself, I tend to worry about it a bit more.

Thanks..
 
You really need to be at the top of your game to conduct ECIRs and have a full knowledge of what you are testing, why you are testing and how this impacts on the regulations and the safety of the installation.
The ESF guide to EICRs can be a very useful aide memoire, to guide you in the right direction, though remember they are only the interpretation of the writers and may not be correct, this is down to your engineering judgement.
Insulation is taken into account on the tabulated values, you have an operational imitation of the inspection of the main bonding conductor connections, it would also be a C3 for access to the connections. Does the loose box present a danger? if so 1.5 comments and note in observations.
Ignore the fuses, test at the furthest point of the circuit outside the equipment and if the Zs is compliant for 16A BSEN60898 then you are fine. Only consider if the fuses are correct for overcurrent protection.
 
Hello,
After years of working for firms in commercial and industrial I have started picking up more and more of my own work now. Some of this is commercial and some domestic.
I've not really done much domestic before, I always managed to stay clear of it.

Now, I've just done an EICR for someone thinking of buying a house, and I notice test and inspection sheets have changed somewhat compared to what I had before. So, a few Q's.

After checking Table 4D5 BYB, I notice 4mm T&E ref method 101 gives a ccc of 22A. I take it, this has already taken into account correction factor Ci (thermal insulation). Therefore, it is only the other CF's I need to consider. Is that right?

I am unable to access the pipework near to the water stopcock, and therefore I cannot physically see or check if there is a protective bonding conductor. However, with both 10mm bonding conductors disconnected at the CU, I have tested for continuity to the water pipe on both and have 0.02ohms on one and 0.04ohms on the other. Would I record this on the schedule as a LIM or a Not Verified, or as a Code 3?

The meter enclosure on the external wall is loose, but I'm not sure which line of the schedule of inspections to record this on. Section 1.0 but which line, as none of them seem specific to the enclosure. Or should I just note it in the observations only?

Okay, last one.
A 16A 60898 feeds a radial which supplies 3 pieces of equipment both off of fuseds spurs (one 3A, one 5A) So, on the test sheet I should fill in the max ZS for the mcb. and test Zs at the spurs.
But then should I fill on an extra 2 lines below, with maz Zs values for each fuse and then test Zs twice more?
Companies I work for before would just test to the spur, but that seems to me like only testing part of the circuit? When I'm doing it for myself, I tend to worry about it a bit more.

Thanks..

I agree with Richards comments, but we all had to start somewhere. You obviously have the knowledge and ability, but as you say, domestic is not your bag. I personally think you are overthinking it.

Generally if it looks OK it more often than not is. If you are trying to work out all the CF's you'll never get it done. If your 4mm is protected by the 16a 60898, then all is well..

Your main protective bonding test results are within spec, and you appear to have tested them properly, you should expect a max of 0.05 ohm, and you are just under it, so i would tick the box to confirm that they are connected, and put a note in the comments that the connections were not inspected for whatever reason, and note your test result in the note.

There is a tick box section on the inspection sheet for Suppliers equipment, code it C2 or C3 as you see fit depending on how loose it is, and what the consequences will be if it falls off, and it is down to the home owner to get the supplier to sort it out, again make a note in the report to that effect.

Do a Zs on both spurs, as this is the correct method, and you need to record the highest reading in the Zs box on the test result schedule for that circuit.

EICR's are open to interpretation, and the most important part of it, is to cover your own backside. Make sure you note everything, giving reasons why, and make sure you also keep a copy of it all.

Cheers............Howard
 
Two great posts. I'd add make sure you use the scope and limitation boxes fully so the customer and you know exactly what you are and are not doing/covering with the EICR. Whilst you know what the beast is they just think the electrics are being checked. One example is appliances if they exist. Are you checking them or not. Again as an example if the house is full of electric heaters they might think you are checking them but you might think you aren't because normally the EICR is for fixed wiring in the building etc etc. same goes for outbuildings if they exist, are they part of the scope or not? Hope that helps.
 
Two great posts. I'd add make sure you use the scope and limitation boxes fully so the customer and you know exactly what you are and are not doing/covering with the EICR. Whilst you know what the beast is they just think the electrics are being checked. One example is appliances if they exist. Are you checking them or not. Again as an example if the house is full of electric heaters they might think you are checking them but you might think you aren't because normally the EICR is for fixed wiring in the building etc etc. same goes for outbuildings if they exist, are they part of the scope or not? Hope that helps.

Well said.
 
Regarding the bonding, N/V But with a note that the test readings verified it was bonded just the connections aren't available to visibly check (NIC said to me think of N/V as not visible on this is very subject).

Just make sure that it tests out ok.
 
N/V means not verified. If the test shows Bond then tick the box and add a comment that you could not physically see the clamp to check its integrity. IMO the NICEIC comment is nonsense.
 
I know it means not verified, but if the bond isn't visible (Not Visible) Its kind of the same thing in regards to this topic, If you can prove the pipe is bonded by means of testing and identification at the other end then you are proved it exists so no need for a C3 but to cover yourself a N/V because you haven't seen that connection with you own eyes
 

Reply to EICR for house in the Periodic Inspection Reporting & Certification 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
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