415v 3 phase sockets and rcd protection.

[simpson93]

Afternoon all,

Looking for a little guidance, other than doing sub mains in armoured I don’t do much three phase work.

I’m looking to install some final
Circuits for some three phase cooking equipment but I find myself stuck on a few things, as the sockets will be over 16amp they will need to be rcd protected but I can’t seem to find anything to find a Hager board rcbo etc. What’s the best way to protect it?

Also generally if doing a three phase sub main I would take an additional earth as I’m not so keen on solely relying on the armoured earth. Do most people generally rely on the armoured earth or use 5core?

Thanks for your help

 

[Charlie_]

reasonable assumptions based on the information he has given and the huge amount of experience I have in this area..
I have designed and installed many commercial kitchens, the information I have given is very helpful.

 

[simpson93]

thank you all for your advise.

Installer who is connected the equipment has specified socket outlets.

The catering equipment, i belive will be on wheels for cleaning etc.

From all the info i have recieved there seems to be several ways todo this.

I think i will be taking the route of having an inline rcd for each peice of equipment, i would have prefered go put it in the board but it seems the costs for a hager addon rcd is quite expensive £300 a peice.
The rcd socket also seems like a viable option however i wonder if being directly behind equipent would make it less accessible or in the way due to the size, if its further up the line at least more of the cable is protected.

 

[davesparks]

reasonable assumptions based on the information he has given and the huge amount of experience I have in this area..
I have designed and installed many commercial kitchens, the information I have given is very helpful.

I don't think they are reasonable assumptions. No matter how many kitchens you have designed, unless you have seen the design for this kitchen or the specification the OP is working to you can't assume what is required.
Some specifications require socket outlets to be fitted to allow quick replacement of faulty equipment to reduce downtime, removal for deep cleaning or changing the equipment as required.

The majority of my experience of commercial kitchens is for events, so everything is on plugs and sockets. Sometimes this is in fields on generators and sometimes indoors with various three phase outlets provided.

 

[Strima]

I can feel the love in this thread.

I'm currently in negotiations with several major telecoms providers who want socket outlets to power their racks but don't want RCD protection but refuse to do a risk assessment. They are the designers but don't want the responsibility for the risk assessment, rock and a hard place this change to 411.3.3.

I need a beer.

 

[Charlie_]

I’m not disputing the need for a plug and socket only the need for RCD protection..
Up until now equipment in this environment hasn’t needed to be considered for RCD protection..

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Regulations change.
Some of use keep up with the changes, some don’t.
I guess this why we have update courses.

 

[Charlie_]

Regulations change.
Some of use keep up with the changes, some don’t.
I guess this why we have update courses.

Trouble with the courses is they only skim through the regs..
Some of us keep up to date and also know how to apply them accordingly

 

[freddo]

can’t seem to find anything to find a Hager board rcbo etc.

Hager now make compact add on RCD modules, the finished unit takes up 4 modules.

Oops I missed the last 2 pages of replies...

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Trouble with the courses is they only skim through the regs..
Some of us keep up to date and also know how to apply them accordingly

The last course I did for the 16th edition, was mostly about how to label up the book and doing past papers.
There was some discussion about particular Regs.
In the main the course was designed to help us pass the exam, not learn the Regs.

One of the reasons I’m a member of this and other forums is to keep my knowledge of the Regs up to date.
I know for a fact that I have mentioned this change in the requirements to provide RCD protection for sockets, as have a number of other members.

As for applying the changed requirements, the solutions are to provide RCD protection, produce or have produced a documented RA which indicates RCD protection is not required, or use a socket rated higher than 32A.

 

[Charlie_]

The last course I did for the 16th edition, was mostly about how to label up the book and doing past papers.
There was some discussion about particular Regs.
In the main the course was designed to help us pass the exam, not learn the Regs.

One of the reasons I’m a member of this and other forums is to keep my knowledge of the Regs up to date.
I know for a fact that I have mentioned this change in the requirements to provide RCD protection for sockets, as have a number of other members.

As for applying the changed requirements, the solutions are to provide RCD protection, produce or have produced a documented RA which indicates RCD protection is not required, or use a socket rated higher than 32A.

We got there in the end

 

[Deleted member 26818]

We got there in the end

I got there a long time ago.

 

[Charlie_]

I got there a long time ago.

Ditto

 

[ipf]

What's an odd RCD between friends

 

[magnoliafan89]

What did i miss???

 

[Charlie_]

What's an odd RCD between friends

Kirchhoff ‘s Law
It’s a very fine balancing act you know

 

[Nigel]

He is explaining himself poorly but I am actually with Charlie here.

If ever there was a socket to be risk assessed out of requiring an RCD then it is this.

1. The 3 phase socket is only going to be used for one item of equipment.

2. The socket can be labelled so that it is clear only this equipment can be used with it. No other equipment can be used.

3. It could be added that the appliance will be tested annually to confirm it is safe for continued use.

4. The socket is not near an external door so that temptation to use it for external portable appliances is not there.

All these questions would form a part of the risk assessment to negate the need for a RCD protecting the socket.

I have assessed out RCDs a few times.

 

[Charlie_]

He is explaining himself poorly but I am actually with Charlie here.

If ever there was a socket to be risk assessed out of requiring an RCD then it is this.

1. The 3 phase socket is only going to be used for one item of equipment.

2. The socket can be labelled so that it is clear only this equipment can be used with it. No other equipment can be used.

3. It could be added that the appliance will be tested annually to confirm it is safe for continued use.

4. The socket is not near an external door so that temptation to use it for external portable appliances is not there.

All these questions would form a part of the risk assessment to negate the need for a RCD protecting the socket.

I have assessed out RCDs a few times.

Thank you for that input!
I’m guilty of not going into things in too much detail as in my head I know what’s right and automatically think others do.. cheers Essex

 

[Deleted member 26818]

He is explaining himself poorly but I am actually with Charlie here.

If ever there was a socket to be risk assessed out of requiring an RCD then it is this.

1. The 3 phase socket is only going to be used for one item of equipment.

2. The socket can be labelled so that it is clear only this equipment can be used with it. No other equipment can be used.

3. It could be added that the appliance will be tested annually to confirm it is safe for continued use.

4. The socket is not near an external door so that temptation to use it for external portable appliances is not there.

All these questions would form a part of the risk assessment to negate the need for a RCD protecting the socket.

I have assessed out RCDs a few times.

Omitting RCD protection for stationary equipment that will only ever be unplugged for replacement or servicing by skilled/competent persons is one thing.
Omitting RCD protection for equipment that will routinely be unplugged for cleaning by ordinary persons is another.

I honestly think that if you were willing to sign a Risk Assessment stating RCD protection is not required in this instance, you would be considered incompetent or a fraudster in a court of law.

 

[Charlie_]

Once that piece of stationary equipment is unplugged it is isolated from the supply..
That instructed person will only ever plug that same piece of stationary equipment back into that same socket..

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Once that piece of stationary equipment is unplugged it is isolated from the supply..
That instructed person will only ever plug that same piece of stationary equipment back into that same socket..

How can you guarantee that the person unplugging the equipment will be instructed?
How can you guarantee that the equipment will always be plugged back into the same socket-outlet?
What difference would it make whether the equipment is or isn’t plugged back into the same socket anyway?

 

[Charlie_]

How can you guarantee that the person unplugging the equipment will be instructed?
How can you guarantee that the equipment will always be plugged back into the same socket-outlet?
What difference would it make whether the equipment is or isn’t plugged back into the same socket anyway?

Because it through the risk assessment is a controlled environment..
All equipment and associated sockets will be labeled as per regulations..
And as you say it won’t matter, as long as it is all designed and implemented correctly

 

[Nigel]

Omitting RCD protection for stationary equipment that will only ever be unplugged for replacement or servicing by skilled/competent persons is one thing.
Omitting RCD protection for equipment that will routinely be unplugged for cleaning by ordinary persons is another.

I honestly think that if you were willing to sign a Risk Assessment stating RCD protection is not required in this instance, you would be considered incompetent or a fraudster in a court of law.

That is quite simply a ridiculous comment.

 

[Nigel]

How can you guarantee that the person unplugging the equipment will be instructed?
How can you guarantee that the equipment will always be plugged back into the same socket-outlet?
What difference would it make whether the equipment is or isn’t plugged back into the same socket anyway?

Since when was unplugging something something that needed to be done by someone skilled?

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Because it through the risk assessment is a controlled environment..
All equipment and associated sockets will be labeled as per regulations..
And as you say it won’t matter, as long as it is all designed and implemented correctly

The exception for skilled and instructed persons using socket-outlets has been removed.
Again the exception for specifically labelled or otherwise suitably identified socket-outlets has been removed.
Both of the exceptions were removed in 2015 amendment 3 of the 17th edition.

Producing a Risk Assessment that relies on outdated and non-compliant exceptions, would not to my mind be acceptable.

What I’m asking what difference does it make whether the equipment is plugged back into the same socket-outlet?

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Since when was unplugging something something that needed to be done by someone skilled?

It never has done.
What has happened is the Regulations since 2008 have required RCD protection for socket-outlets used by anyone who is not skilled or instructed.

I’m not surprised at your lack of knowledge in regards to this matter, as it’s pretty consistent with previous posts you’ve made.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

That is quite simply a ridiculous comment.

You can dislike my post as much as you want.
Doesn’t affect the veracity of it.

 

[Charlie_]

The exception for skilled and instructed persons using socket-outlets has been removed.
Again the exception for specifically labelled or otherwise suitably identified socket-outlets has been removed.
Both of the exceptions were removed in 2015 amendment 3 of the 17th edition.

Producing a Risk Assessment that relies on outdated and non-compliant exceptions, would not to my mind be acceptable.

What I’m asking what difference does it make whether the equipment is plugged back into the same socket-outlet?

Don’t forget this is not a domestic environment.. everyone involved in that environment will be competent in their own right and in those duties bestowed upon them..
The importance of plugging the stationary equipment back into their respective sockets is down to the fact that there is a discrepancy of + 16anps to 32 amps per phase when selecting between different sockets...
One socket may be fused at 20 amps whilst another may be fuses at 32amps so, why do you think it is important not to get them mixed up?

 

[Nigel]

It never has done.
What has happened is the Regulations since 2008 have required RCD protection for socket-outlets used by anyone who is not skilled or instructed.

I’m not surprised at your lack of knowledge in regards to this matter, as it’s pretty consistent with previous posts you’ve made.

What a pity you intend on being rude.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Don’t forget this is not a domestic environment.. everyone involved in that environment will be competent in their own right and in those duties bestowed upon them..
The importance of plugging the stationary equipment back into their respective sockets is down to the fact that there is a discrepancy of + 16anps to 32 amps per phase when selecting between different sockets...
One socket may be fused at 20 amps whilst another may be fuses at 32amps so, why do you think it is important not to get them mixed up?

Doesn't matter that it’s not domestic.
The exceptions have been removed.

Ah, so now we know that the various sockets will not be fused according to the maximum rating of the sockets but to the various ratings of the individual items of equipment.

Again what difference would it make as to whether RCD protection is provided?

 

[Deleted member 26818]

What a pity you intend on being rude.

I wan’t aware that stating facts was rude?