8 way CU with 17 circuits

[TPES]

What's your thoughts on EICR code?

It's all lighting, 8 x 6a MCB's some MCBs have 4 or 5 1-1.5mms twisted into the top of them, nothing labeled up correctly as can't fit info for all circuits onto the board.. Circuits not actually overloaded just way to overcrowded in the board. Finding it impossible to test

What code would you give?

 

[Octopus]

No code - as there is nothing wrong with what is in place BUT I would recommend improvement in comments on the cert and invoice.

 

[GMES]

^^^ Agree not great design, but as Murdoch says you cant code it just try to get the job to do it right.

 

[Meggerman]

Definatly no code. You really need to treat it as 8 circuits which happen to be joined at CU so as already stated not a great design. You just need to identify which is on each MCB then ZS all on that breaker and record highest reading as a single circuit, other than that it same as usual really.

 

[Octopus]

What's your thoughts on EICR code?

It's all lighting, 8 x 6a MCB's some MCBs have 4 or 5 1-1.5mms twisted into the top of them, nothing labeled up correctly as can't fit info for all circuits onto the board.. Circuits not actually overloaded just way to overcrowded in the board. Finding it impossible to test

What code would you give?

On the testing front, turn ALL lights on, remove 3 of the 4 cables in the board and see which ones stay on (keep a note on your plan drawing) - then repeat the process for the other 3 cables - time consuming but its the way I do it!

 

[Pete999]

No code but I bet it looks the dog's dodas

 

[7029 dave]

Four or five finals on 6amp mcb, have you checked it's not on RFC lol.

 

[TPES]

Just looks a right mess, a big building and a nightmare to locate where each entire circuit goes to..

 

[Engineer54]

You can't have multiple circuits being fed from a single point, so effectively you have 8 circuits not 17. ....No Code!!

Use Murdoch's method to locate, label and test, these multibranch lighting circuits. What you might want to check, is there the same number of corresponding neutral conductors for these lighting circuits...

 

[bluestar]

after an argument with a qs on spuring a socket at the origin of installation
his view was its a no no as "every circuit should have its own way" im sure he did point out in the regs to me this particular line but cant recall where

 

[Pete999]

Nothing wrong with spurring at the origin, you aren't forming a new circuit, are you

 

[Plonker 3]

A MCB is one circuit, regardless of how many cables are terminated into it.

 

[Octopus]

after an argument with a qs on spuring a socket at the origin of installation
his view was its a no no as "every circuit should have its own way" im sure he did point out in the regs to me this particular line but cant recall where

er no. Many socket circuits have a spur at the board. You are correct. The QS is wrong.

 

[trev]

after an argument with a qs on spuring a socket at the origin of installation
his view was its a no no as "every circuit should have its own way" im sure he did point out in the regs to me this particular line but cant recall where

While I agree that this is RAF I have to say that by the "logic" displayed by this QS it would not be compliant to spur a socket out of an MCB/RCBO if it was already feeding an RFC.

 

[bluestar]

I think I have missed making my point after an argument (friendly) his view was that every circuit should have its own way and did point this out
the point I was trying to make was there3 is something in the regs regarding this
(I will look it up)

 

[wozz]

I think I have missed making my point after an argument (friendly) his view was that every circuit should have its own way and did point this out
the point I was trying to make was there3 is something in the regs regarding this
(I will look it up)

I think you may struggle to find something in 7671 regarding this.

 

[SirKit Breaker]

It goes along the lines of "every circuit should be installed to minimise inconvenience in the event of a fault", read into that what you want, but there is nothing wrong with putting more than one circuit into one device as long as this requirement is met. from memory it is probably in part 5 of the BGB, but i don't have the inclination to go and have a look.

Cheers............Howard

 

[wozz]

sounds like a very very wooley (sp?) reg there howard.

 

[Richard Burns]

I think I have missed making my point after an argument (friendly) his view was that every circuit should have its own way and did point this out
the point I was trying to make was there3 is something in the regs regarding this
(I will look it up)

Possibly the line and neutral conductors of each final circuit shall be separate from all other final circuits.


However multiple conductors in one device just means it is a single circuit with multiple conductors.

 

[sparks1234]

yes, nothing wrong with it, bad design etc etc etc but can't fail it