Protection for >3m tails

[SJD]

I'm familiar with current regulations for protection of meter tails over a certain (e.g. 3m) length, but what about a periodic inspection of a fairly old installation?

The installation in question has a Henley block, then an old isolator - looks to be perhaps 40+ years old, with no fuse - feeding a distribution board in a remote part of the house (in addition to an old fuse board close by the meter, also from the Henley block). The isolator looks in good condition otherwise. The distribution circuit is 10mm2 twin & earth, and maybe 15m or so long.

If this was acceptable practice at the time, does it need more than a C3 code now on an EICR for missing protection of long tails?

 

[telectrix]

could be a potential danger if 10mm tails are protected only by the DNO fuse of 80A or 100A, in which case it's a code C2. if the tails show no sign of overheating, then you might give it a C3. your call, mate. personally, i'd quote for a 50A fused (or MCB) isolator. they're not a huge cost.

 

[SJD]

Thanks Tel. Actually I don't know the fuse size in the DNOs fuse carrier, and will only find out later, if I end up replacing the isolator (or the other fuse board). However, your post made me realize that because the tails are only 10mm T&E, probably it needs a C2 for that anyway with the mix of installation methods applicable. I'd still be interested in comments that suppose if the tails were larger, e.g. 16mm T&E clipped direct with an 80A DNO fuse, was that once OK and thus only need a C3?

 

[telectrix]

suppose if the tails were larger, e.g. 16mm T&E clipped direct with an 80A DNO fuse, was that once OK and thus only need a C3?



AGREE.

 

[Flanders]

Re: Protection for >3m tails

Due to the fuse board being remote there should be a local fuse adjacent the Henley Block anyway but due to size of cable I would C2 it and also add no RCD protection on cable as a C3

- - - Updated - - -

Due to the fuse board being remote there should be a local fuse adjacent the Henley Block anyway but due to size of cable I would C2 it and also add no RCD protection on cable as a C3

 

[telectrix]

it's a C2 and 1/2, IMO. LOL.

 

[Guest55]

i thought the max length of tails was a dno , therefore an ESQCR , regulation.
you could argue it falls out of the remit of a inspection to bs7671.
if all other aspects of the tails are ok ( correct size , adequately supported / protected )
exactly which reg do you code against ?
mention it in the report , but without code.

 

[telectrix]

i thought the max length of tails was a dno , therefore an ESQCR , regulation.
you could argue it falls out of the remit of a inspection to bs7671.
if all other aspects of the tails are ok ( correct size , adequately supported / protected )
exactly which reg do you code against ?
mention it in the report , but without code.

i agree up to a point, as regards the DNO and ESQCR comment, but you still have 10mm tails protected by an over sized fuse, which, IMO, warrants a code, even if only a C3,

 

[Guest55]

i agree up to a point, as regards the DNO and ESQCR comment, but you still have 10mm tails protected by an over sized fuse, which, IMO, warrants a code, even if only a C3,

good call , didnt notice the tails only 10mm , my bad.

 

[richy3333]

Code 2 and a code 3 for no additional protection with it being T&E - presuming it's in a wall etc?