Connecting a shaver point to a shower circuit.

[MDJ]

314 and section 5

 

[Rockingit]

314 and section 5

Not that I can see! My first reply said section 5, but darned if I can actually find it!!

 

[MDJ]

526 I think, had a look last night but it is way to early to start checking out the BGB today haha, something about correct connection of similar sized cores blah blah and 314 goes into proper circuits and not spuring everything together I think, that was yesterday I canny remember all the words now

 

[telectrix]

you can't do it that way. you've already fitted a socket in the shower cubicle for her hair dryer. spur off that. don't forget the FCU.

 

[ChrisElectrical88]

you can't do it that way. you've already fitted a socket in the shower cubicle for her hair dryer. spur off that. don't forget the FCU.

does it need to be a RCD FCU? as i only have a old BS3036 board, which i shorted all the fuses out with copper as they kept blowing.

 

[ChrisElectrical88]

And on a serious note, my BGB has grown legs and walked off, it was right in front of me last night for doing some cable calcs and showing one of the sparks not every friggin reference method is B (does anyone else get this?) come in this morning and its vanished!!!

 

[Hawkmoon]

And on a serious note, my BGB has grown legs and walked off, it was right in front of me last night for doing some cable calcs and showing one of the sparks not every friggin reference method is B (does anyone else get this?) come in this morning and its vanished!!!

Perhaps your 'ref method b' spark stole it...in order to expand his reference method horizons (every cloud....)

 

[ChrisElectrical88]

He doesn't need it, i give everybody a small testing folder with ref methods disconnection times all the essentials in to help them when the are testing. Once this amendment 3 is out i am getting a job load of GN3 and OSG for the lads, cant warrant paying nearly 500 quid now and then another 500 in about 6 months time though.

 

[mechelec]

if replies tell you why u shouldn't, are u sure you won't do it anyway and ask for proof why you can't?

Thats the problem not one reply gave a sound answer why it should not be done.

We can take a fan feed from a lighting circuit (fused down correctly to manufacturers recommendations) so the fan comes on only with the bath room light. Well what if you only want the fan to come on with the shower ? Is this such a no no ?
Smoke detectors and intruder alarms are often spurred from lighting circuits. This is common practice.
is it only that the shower fan is not regular practice or is there a valid reason why not ?
it was suggested that dissimilar conductor CSA in the same terminal may be an issue but with stranded 6 or 10 mm with a 2.5 in the same terminal it would bed correctly, try it.
I quoted the reg regarding positioning of FCPD which is exactly what I suggested.
I'm all for taking the p**s but let's have some proper electrical input.

 

[telectrix]

I'm all for taking the p**s but let's have some proper electrical input.but electrical input comes from supplier, and that's outside the scope of the beano ( sorry BS7671)

 

[mechelec]

I'm all for taking the p**s but let's have some proper electrical input.but electrical input comes from supplier, and that's outside the scope of the beano ( sorry BS7671)

Great reply.

 

[mechelec]

Ok let's make this really really simple.

If you carried out a domestic EICR and came across a fan spurred from a shower circuit and fused as per the previous post what code would you give it and why ?????

 

[telectrix]

i'd give it a C3. as " improvement recommended IMO". that's not to say that it contravenes a specific reg. just that i'd like it improved.

 

[Zebra Stripe]

Mechelec, thats a bit unfair.....I put forward quite a strong reason not to proceed with an extract fan connected to the shower.
These fans usually require a 3amp fuse (manufactures instructions) and in this instance the OP had suggested 2No FCU ie a fuse on the live and a separate fuse on the switched lived. This would effectively create 2 new circuits sharing the same neutral and as such is non compliant with BS7671...borrowed neutral

 

[telectrix]

how is it a shred neutral when the fan sub-circuit is now part of the shower circuit? remember that a circuit starts at the point of origin. in this case the MCB in the CU.

 

[mechelec]

Mechelec, thats a bit unfair.....I put forward quite a strong reason not to proceed with an extract fan connected to the shower.
These fans usually require a 3amp fuse (manufactures instructions) and in this instance the OP had suggested 2No FCU ie a fuse on the live and a separate fuse on the switched lived. This would effectively create 2 new circuits sharing the same neutral and as such is non compliant with BS7671...borrowed neutral

Sorry zebra you are right that would be a poor idea but my suggestion was for no run on timer fan only on when isolator is on.
see telectrix good answer above.

One reason could be not complying with the building regs on a new build.

 

[Zebra Stripe]

Circuit definition is 'an assembly of electrical equipment supplied from the same origin and protected against overcurrent by the same protective device(s) therefore IMO the 3amp fuses are the same as two diffent MCBs in a DB sharing the same neutral....borrowed neutral...the origin for the fan is now the 2No FCUs

 

[mechelec]

Circuit definition is 'an assembly of electrical equipment supplied from the same origin and protected against overcurrent by the same protective device(s) therefore IMO the 3amp fuses are the same as two diffent MCBs in a DB sharing the same neutral....borrowed neutral...the origin for the fan is now the 2No FCUs

The supply would be to a fan wired in 4 core flex more than likely. Would you really be disconnecting any core of the flex without carrying out safe islolation ?

 

[Zebra Stripe]

Probably not, but it still would not comply and anyway it only bites when disconnected..sorry the neutral that is...it could also be a blown fuse etc.but not a good design.

 

[mechelec]

i'd give it a C3. as " improvement recommended IMO". that's not to say that it contravenes a specific reg. just that i'd like it improved.

OK but an EICR should be objective not subjective. Care to put some meat on the bones.