- Reaction score
- 17,080
Since when?! On that logic, any LIM is also an unsatisfactory
Since we changed from PIR's and the old coding system to EICRs it has always been that C1, C2 and FI are an automatic unsatisfactory result.
Discuss satisfactory unsatisfactory in the Periodic Inspection Reporting & Certification area at ElectriciansForums.net
Since when?! On that logic, any LIM is also an unsatisfactory
What’s the difference between not conducting an R1R2 on a circuit you can’t find and not conducting one that you can’t deenergise? None whatsoever - both could potentially fail to be safe.Surely limitation is something you haven't checked, but have no reason to suspect any issues, whereas FI indicates a potential issue which requires further investigation?
As such I fail to follow your logic.
I see where you're coming from, but there is a difference. The unknown circuit could have any number of C1s or C2s on it, you just don't know. The circuit that can't be switched off can be visually inspected, and live tests such as polarity, Zs, R2 etc can indicate the health of the circuit and whether disconnection times are met.What’s the difference between not conducting an R1R2 on a circuit you can’t find and not conducting one that you can’t deenergise? None whatsoever - both could potentially fail to be safe.
"FI" automatically makes the Report outcome "Unsatisfactory".
BS7671 page 521 item 9
OK - every day’s a school day and having just stuck my head into the books over a coffee for a refresh, I got it wrong-ish.Since we changed from PIR's and the old coding system to EICRs it has always been that C1, C2 and FI are an automatic unsatisfactory result.
What’s the difference between not conducting an R1R2 on a circuit you can’t find and not conducting one that you can’t deenergise? None whatsoever - both could potentially fail to be safe.
Yet if you can’t find the end of one circuit in an otherwise 100% spanking install, simply because the heating engineer (a theoretically skilled and competent trade) has had to hide it somewhere in an un-obvious location then you have to return a failure and an instruction to the client that they’ll have to dismantle the place brick by brick until you’ve found it??!
BPG4 (page 16) says that “Presence of circuits that cannot be readily identified or traced” warrants an FI code. And both BPG and 7671 state that an FI = an unsatisfactory result. So that sadly is that as far as the OP here.
OK - every day’s a school day and having just stuck my head into the books over a coffee for a refresh, I got it wrong-ish.
BPG4 (page 16) says that “Presence of circuits that cannot be readily identified or traced” warrants an FI code. And both BPG and 7671 state that an FI = an unsatisfactory result. So that sadly is that as far as the OP here.
Where I come back to my ‘ish’ is that it’s the job of an inspector to determine whether or not something is safe for continued use. We have all seen test sheets (mostly on here) with circuit after circuit full of LIM - making them largely meaningless but passable. Yet if you can’t find the end of one circuit in an otherwise 100% spanking install, simply because the heating engineer (a theoretically skilled and competent trade) has had to hide it somewhere in an un-obvious location then you have to return a failure and an instruction to the client that they’ll have to dismantle the place brick by brick until you’ve found it??!
You could, but that's getting into the territory of remedial action as opposed to reporting. And you would want to be certain that it's not something critical.If I had a circuit that I really couldn't identify, even after enquiring about things like sewage or water pumps, then I would disconnect it and notify the occupier, rather than marking it FI in an otherwise satisfactory installation.
Not really. You will be disconnecting to test, so just leave disconnected. There's a perfect example in another current thread, where a (badly) terminated, but still live wire was discovered behind plasterboard in a bathroom.You could, but that's getting into the territory of remedial action as opposed to reporting.
I don't generally disconnect anything to test it - an exception perhaps being the humble ring final circuit for ring continuity.Not really. You will be disconnecting to test, so just leave disconnected. There's a perfect example in another current thread, where a (badly) terminated, but still live wire was discovered behind plasterboard in a bathroom.
As for "something critical", I mentioned sewage and water supply pumps, and always report to the property occupier what I've done, with instructions to contact me immediately if something that was working is now found not to be.
One example I remember from some time ago, was that the stairwell lights in the neighbouring property had ceased working after my visit.
Reply to satisfactory unsatisfactory 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.