What EICR code for plastic trunking in escape routes?

[KevinH]

Hi to all. I'm new and this is my first post.
I'm doing an EICR on a 3 story building split into multiple offices to let.
One thing I noticed is t+e cables in plastic trunking almost throughout (switch/socket drops, across ceilings to lights etc).
Would this be a code 2 or 3? Also would same code be throughout or just in escape routes?
I understand it could potentially be dangerous (causing entanglement when melting/falling etc), but surely an EICR is regarding electrical safety and as far as I can see the installation is electrically safe!
Any views as it would be a massive job to correct.
Surely if its a C2 then most commercial buildings in the country would fail?
Should I just C3 it and suggest landlord gets a fire safety report done?

 

[Ian1981]

You are inspecting and testing an electrical installation to the current addition of bs 7671 and as such you are checking compliance with regulation 521.11.201 so a code needs applying to this regulation if found non compliant and is a safety concern.

I have applied a C2 to this in the past regarding numerous LV and ELV cables installed above suspended ceilings in escape routes where the cables where mearly supported by twin and earth loops screwed to the existing ceiling, some just screwed into the plasterboard.
If all that lot had come down then yes it’s potentially dangerous in my opinion.
If it’s just the odd piece of trunking without metallic or non combustible supports for the wiring then a C3 at the most if found in escape routes.

 

[Strima]

No code for the plastic trunking. However a definate C3 for cables likely to suffer premature collapse in the event of a fire.

 

[Ian1981]

It will be interesting to see how this is coded when all wiring in an installation requires protection against premature collapse in a fire and the words escape route is removed, Christ make up your minds!

 

[KevinH]

No cables are exposed as all are contained within trunking throughout the installation.
So you guys are saying I give it a C3 ? Im assuming that just applies to the escape routes (stairwells/corridoors etc) as per 521.11.201 and no coding for trunking across ceilings in all rooms.

 

[Adam W]

According to my boss, who's really clued up on things like this, it's a C2 because the cables aren't supported by fire resistant fixings; following the normal thought process it would be a C3, ie it used to comply but doesn't any more, but apparently this is an exception because firefighters have died due to it.

Does it have to be a massive job to correct or could you put stainless steel cable ties and bases inside the plastic trunking?

 

[Octopus]

Another resounding success for the ambiguity of our regs .....

C3

 

[Ian1981]

To be honest all the guidance written by the so called experts (NICEIC, best practice guide and I’ve read Napits code breakers guide) all do suggest a C2.
Me if it’s a high concentration of cables at risk of collapse then I C2 it.
A picece of yt2 in an escape route with say a twin and earth cable in it on its own C3 as I believe the risk is severely reduced.
As the inspector it lies with you.

 

[KevinH]

Thanks guys. Think I will take Ians advice and C2 the 'bulky' concentrations and C3 the odd little ones.
Then if Landlord agrees (and pays) I will secure the worst with stainless ties and bases inside the trunking as Adam suggests.
Cheers!

 

[Octopus]

Thanks guys. Think I will take Ians advice and C2 the 'bulky' concentrations and C3 the odd little ones.
Then if Landlord agrees (and pays) I will secure the worst with stainless ties and bases inside the trunking as Adam suggests.
Cheers!

It’s irrelevent what the landlord thinks..... you are doing an EICR and any remedial work is up to them ........ the landlord is under no obligation to get anything done.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Problem with this new requirement, is that the danger existed before the Regulation was introduced.
It now not only presents a danger but is also a non-compliance.

 

[magnoliafan89]

We were once told to fall withing fire regs the cable within the trunking had to be supported with something such as a butterfly clip every 300 or 900mm i cant remember what distance now. Is this correct?

 

[Adam W]

Problem with this new requirement, is that the danger existed before the Regulation was introduced.
It now not only presents a danger but is also a non-compliance.

Surely you could say that about any changes to the regs?
For example previously RCD protection could be omitted if the installation was under the supervision of a skilled or instructed person, but since that was abused and disallowed the same circuit which previously didn't require RCD protection would now not be compliant.

The requirement for fire resistant supports doesn't have to be expensive or intrusive, as I mentioned earlier it could simply involve taking out a few screws and adding metal cable tie bases and cable ties. It doesn't even have to be all the way along, just every metre or so to keep the cables out of the way in the event of a fire.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

There’s never been an exception to omit RCD protection to circuits.
My point is, that having cables anywhere (not just escape routes) which can fall down and entangle fire fighters has always been a dangerous situation warranting a code C2.
Just because there is now a specific requirement does not mean it should only warrant a code C3.

 

[Adam W]

There’s never been an exception to omit RCD protection to circuits.

That was just the first example I could think of, but there has - as I said if the installation was under the supervision of skilled and instructed operatives, dedicated circuits for specific items of equipment, if a risk assessment was attached to the certificate, there may have been others.
It seems the 18th edition is largely about removing these 'loopholes'.

 

[Nigel]

I think a C2 is too strong personally. But it is what the guidance notes suggest.

If the ceiling is fire boarded then a C3 surely.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

There was an exception to omit RCD protection for cables concealed in walls if the installation was under the control of a skilled or instructed person.
There was also an exception to omit RCD protection for socket-outlets if their use by ordinary persons was supervised by a skilled or instructed person.

 

[MDJ]

C2? rollox, there would be hundreds of millions of pounds worth of urgent work required in hundreds of thousands of properties, C3 at best, it was perfectly safe before they updated the Regs lol, the world wasn't going to end then.

 

[Octopus]

As usual, ill thought out regs, poor communication and inconsistent application of codes..............................

Should we be surprised?

 

[Adam W]

We had a seminar today from one of the surveyors, which was largely about fire safety.
Apparently (unlike BS7671) fire regulations are retrospective, hence lack of fire resistant supports being a C2 and not a C3. I suppose the logic behind this is the best person to rectify it would be an electrician.

 

[Ian1981]

C2? rollox, there would be hundreds of millions of pounds worth of urgent work required in hundreds of thousands of properties, C3 at best, it was perfectly safe before they updated the Regs lol, the world wasn't going to end then.

Tell that to the fire fighters families who lost loved ones due to falling cables and being entangled in them as a resulting investigation concluded that the death of a few fire fighters was caused by said entanglement hence the introduction of the regulation.
I think millions of properties is a bit far considering the requirement is escape routes only and 99% of the time domestic dwellings are not an issue due to the plaster board integrity of the ceilings.
I am all for the regulation and even the new requirement due out when the 18th edition is in full effect.

 

[MDJ]

Bollox, the regs have changed thats all, no doubt some fire fighters have seen problems with wires hanging down, but I would say it is minimal, same as plastic DBs, there are millions, but one catches fire and suddenly they all need to be metal. I never said millions of properties, hundreds of thousands I said, open your eyes.

 

[Ian1981]

Bollox, the regs have changed thats all, no doubt some fire fighters have seen problems with wires hanging down, but I would say it is minimal, same as plastic DBs, there are millions, but one catches fire and suddenly they all need to be metal. I never said millions of properties, hundreds of thousands I said, open your eyes.

Hundreds of thousands then happy now?
The relevance of the regulation has obviously passed you by.
Wires hanging down!!

 

[MDJ]

I'm aware of the reasons of the regulation, and I understand why the regulation has been put into the bible, but coding a new regulation failure as a C2 which means action is required is total bollox, it must be a C3, I don't care what they suggest, if we coded every new reg which was not up to the latest ammendment as a c2 we would all need to have our homes rewired every 2 years. Regarding telling it to the families, even one fire fighter dying is a tragic, but seriously how many have died due to this? it cannot be so dangerous all of a sudden to make it a C2, if the case then insurance companies must refuse to insure houses, as they are not safe to live in, again total bollox.

 

[Adam W]

Bollox, the regs have changed thats all, no doubt some fire fighters have seen problems with wires hanging down, but I would say it is minimal, same as plastic DBs, there are millions, but one catches fire and suddenly they all need to be metal. I never said millions of properties, hundreds of thousands I said, open your eyes, dick wipe.

Their names were Jim Shears and Alan Bannon.
This isn't someone's perception or scaremongering, it was an actual thing which happened, at Shirley Towers in Southampton:
Fire deaths lead to safety change - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-30845937
Perhaps this is only seen as an important issue around here due to it's proximity.

 

[MDJ]

As I said even one death a tragic situation, but lets be sensible here, as I said vertually every house in the country could be considered dangerous if cabling not secured properly near entrances and exits, the IEE, IMO have done right by including this new reg into the bible, but a C2 for this, nah not in my view, a C3 yes, but not a C2, total bollox.

 

[Adam W]

It doesn't have to be a big job though Mike - a catenary wire spanned above a suspended ceiling with a few metal cable ties on it, and lives could be saved. What is so bad about that?

 

[MDJ]

The idea of the reg as I have said is a good one, I am all for it, but telling thosands of people their homes are suddenly dangerous and not insurable due to a new reg stinks IMO, I understand all new homes need to adhere to this, and agree with it, but when a EICR is carried out on a home for sale for example and this is put in as a c2, it means the house need to have work done to it before it can get sold and that IMO due to a new reg is wrong, the coding should be a C3 not up to current regulations and no more.

 

[Ian1981]

I'm aware of the reasons of the regulation, and I understand why the regulation has been put into the bible, but coding a new regulation failure as a C2 which means action is required is total bollox, it must be a C3, I don't care what they suggest, if we coded every new reg which was not up to the latest ammendment as a c2 we would all need to have our homes rewired every 2 years. Regarding telling it to the families, even one fire fighter dying is a tragic, but seriously how many have died due to this? it cannot be so dangerous all of a sudden to make it a C2, if the case then insurance companies must refuse to insure houses, as they are not safe to live in, again total bollox.

In the 60s lighting circuits here not required to have cpc’s installed.
I can only assume common sense or perhaps the amount of people receiving electric shocks prompted a drastic safety improvement.
Would you C3 this if exposed conductive parts where connected to the circuit without a cpc present?
As for the fire fighters, a change to the regulation and actually identifying a potential risk and danger may just save someone’s life during a fire and I think that’s worth it.
What’s someone’s life worth to you?

 

[MDJ]

we are not talking about cabling without CPCs, and do not insult my intelligence about asking what I think someones life is worth, I have clarified my view.

 

[Ian1981]

The idea of the reg as I have said is a good one, I am all for it, but telling thosands of people their homes are suddenly dangerous and not insurable due to a new reg stinks IMO, I understand all new homes need to adhere to this, and agree with it, but when a EICR is carried out on a home for sale for example and this is put in as a c2, it means the house need to have work done to it before it can get sold and that IMO due to a new reg is wrong, the coding should be a C3 not up to current regulations and no more.

A plaster board ceiling in a dwelling gives 30minutes fire protection so as I said before the likelihood of finding a C2 in a dwelling is slim.
It’s more to do with escape routes in communal areas , offices public buildings etc where cables may run above say a suspended ceiling.

 

[MDJ]

A plaster board ceiling in a dwelling gives 30minutes fire protection so as I said before the likelihood of finding a C2 in a dwelling is slim.
It’s more to do with escape routes in communal areas , offices public buildings etc where cable may run above say a susp
.

Yeah I get that bit, about the plasterboard ceiling, I have seen plenty of houses with trunking around them though, usually council, it would mean lots of work to be done and no insurance, hence they C3 rather than C2 which would mean possibly no insurance.

 

[MDJ]

It doesn't have to be a big job though Mike - a catenary wire spanned above a suspended ceiling with a few metal cable ties on it, and lives could be saved. What is so bad about that?

Nothing bad about it, but seriously is it a C2? why not a C1 then? surely it has to be a C3

 

[Ian1981]

Yeah I get that bit, about the plasterboard ceiling, I have seen plenty of houses with trunking around them though, usually council, it would mean lots of work to be done and no insurance, hence they C3 rather than C2 which would mean possibly no insurance.

I would not C2 one piece of trunking.
However meters upon meters of cable running above a suspended ceiling unsupported and a serious risk of falling ,I would C2 all day long.

 

[Ian1981]

Nothing bad about it, but seriously is it a C2? why not a C1 then? surely it has to be a C3

Not a C1 because there’s no immediate risk of life.
However there’s potentially a risk so C2.
C3 safety recommended but yeah just get on with your life’s and leave it , in a nutshell.

It’s what I believe anyway reading upon it and I haven’t been persuaded to change my views as yet.
Will be interesting when the words escape route is dropped By the 18th edition and all the installation will require non combustible supports.
What to code then?

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Forget about the new Regulation.
This situation has always warranted a code C2, just the same as any other situation which could present a danger.
So now they’ve brought out a specific Regulation for this scenario.
Now not only does it present a danger, it is also a non-compliance.
So give it a code C3 for non-compliance, then give it a code C2 for presenting a danger.

 

[Marvo]

Thanks Lee.
Please guys try be a bit more civil and a bit less abrasive.

 

[MDJ]

My profound apologies

 

[GBDamo]

Going to embarrass my self now but, suspended ceiling?

We are talking about the metal grid type suspended by metal wires from the fabric of the building. How badly does this fail in a fire and how quickly?

My brief google on the subject suggested the tile and grid should maintain structural integrity for between 30 and 60 minutes i.e. as long as a plasterboard ceiling.

I get the maxi trunking with twenty T&Es above a fire escape route but above suspended ceilings.

Would you really secure KILK flexis, PIR cables and the like? I have not seen one suspended ceiling that doesn't have a rats nest of data and lighting wires strewn across it.

where does it stop?

 

[Ian1981]

A fire risk assessment is the only way to know for sure however suspended ceilings are often penetrated throughout with various items fixed to/ through them including light fittings,signage etc and broken/missing tiles.
I wouldn’t imagine a suspended ceiling can be used as a fire compartment but again when installing and assessing the fire risk on a building a fire risk assessment will identify the requirements.
It’s obviously been highlighted as an issue.

 

[Octopus]

UK sparks are not trained to undertake fire risks and therefore checks abve ceilings should not be under our remit .......

Just saying

 

[Toneyz]

C2? rollox, there would be hundreds of millions of pounds worth of urgent work required in hundreds of thousands of properties, C3 at best, it was perfectly safe before they updated the Regs lol, the world wasn't going to end then.

But sadly it did for some firefighters.

 

[Ian1981]

UK sparks are not trained to undertake fire risks and therefore checks abve ceilings should not be under our remit .......

Just saying

Because the cables run above and are easily accessible and electrical accessories and equipment are housed often above them then I’m afraid we would be negligent in not lifting up the ceiling tiles in my opinion.
If they were not accessible I’d agree
I agree on the fire risk point tho we often need to check that fire protection say between 2 floors in a riser housing electrical equipment such as the consumer units are fire sealed and fire compartments are not breached by cables passing through them.
They go on my report anyway.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

I would not expect a suspended ceiling grid to have any real fire rating.
Whenever I install lights into a suspended ceiling, I try to keep the flexes off the grid by passing them over pipes, ducts, fan coil units etc.

 

[Ian1981]

Quite often you find the original cable tray above the suspended ceilings, all alterations and editions to the wiring are obvious because the altered cables are just flung across the ceiling not supported and even tie wrapped to air conditioning pipework.
Lovely job.

 

[Octopus]

Quite often you find the original cable tray above the suspended ceilings, all alterations and editions to the wiring are obvious because the altered cables are just flung across the ceiling not supported and even tie wrapped to air conditioning pipework.
Lovely job.

Never a truer statement made

why do people think that chucking unsupported cables is a good idea?

 

[Ian1981]

Never a truer statement made

why do people think that chucking unsupported cables is a good idea?

The sad truth is people just don’t care!
Get in ,get out, get paid ,---- job

 

[Adam W]

With any luck a change to the regulations will bring home the message that it's unacceptable to simply fling cables over the ceiling grid, maybe even slow this 'race to the bottom' where uninitiated clients opt for the cheapest quote where the cowboys are planning to cut corners by not bothering with any containment.

It's actually already in the regs somewhere that you mustn't rely on other services to support your cables, partly because if the pipes or ceiling grid are taken down for an unrelated reason there'll be nothing supporting the cables at all and they'll just drape across the floor.

If the idea that you shouldn't do it because it's lazy and unprofessional isn't enough, maybe the idea that it's also dangerous will help.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

With ceiling grids, the lights, smoke detectors, PIRs, etc. are installed after the ceiling is put up.
Even with step ladders, the height you can reach above the grid is restricted, so if the real ceiling is more than a meter above the false ceiling you are not going to be able to fix cables to anything other than existing services.
There is also the problem, that many lighting systems in false ceilings use Lighting Control Modules which the light fittings are plugged into.
The purpose being they can be unplugged to be replaced so tying the flexes onto containment is not an option.
Worrying about other services being removed is a bit pointless, as to remove them would entail first removing the ceiling grid and light fittings.

 

[ForkEnigma]

No cables are exposed as all are contained within trunking throughout the installation.
So you guys are saying I give it a C3 ? Im assuming that just applies to the escape routes (stairwells/corridoors etc) as per 521.11.201 and no coding for trunking across ceilings in all rooms.

Is this reg still valid?