"Pretty" or "Smart" consumer unit options.

[mrwkuk]

What is on the other side of the wall? Possible to move the CU into another room, so it isn’t in view as you come into house?

You can make the CU as pretty as you like, but you might still see a great ugly distributors head, fuse, meter and tails.

What about a well made cabinet around it all?

It could be possible. I hadnt considered that, but it would mean raising it up higher, meaning my partner couldnt access it in my absense.

All the meter and tails are in the cupboard outside, the only stuff inside is the CU. I dont mind trunking and other boxing around the CU, as that can be tidied. I was just looking for nicer options for the CU itself.

There is already a kind of cabinet around it, but if we enlarge the CU, theres not really enough space for a surround on the bit of wall that the CU will be on, hence why it would likely be exposed where it currently isnt (hence my interest in making it look better).

 

[nicebutdim]

Ok I mis-spoke, saying a ring will trip "quicker" was perhaps poor wording. Obviously the breakers will all break at similar speeds.

I meant that with an increasing current situation, a smaller breaker will trip at a lower current threshold, i.e. "sooner".

So the plugs are rated at 13a, if you plug in a device that (for whatever reason) doesnt break the fuse at 13a and pulls say 25a, a 16a or 20a radial will trip, but a 32a RFC wont. It will keep feeding the full 25a to a 13a socket (potentially overheating it and causing a fire).

In this, admittedly very unlikely, scenario a radial is "safer" than a ring because the design implies a lower rating of breaker and that gives less headroom for unexpectedly high loads.

The breakers in your board aren't there to protect appliances fitted with a 13A plug, but to protect the cables supplying power to each of those plugs. There are many members with vastly greater experience than me, but I doubt many (if any) will have experience of the situation described above.

As @davesparks has stated, the best way to protect against faults is to have a well designed installation installed by competent electricians. Householders can further assist by learing about cable safe zones, to avoid unintended damage to the installation, and avoid potential fires by not directly importing unsafe electrical appliances. Of course appliance fires can also happen when every possible step is taken to mitigate the possibility, but these are generally attributed to design flaws and not the sort of situation you describe.

I'm not trying to be contrary, but simple don't see any merit in your argument.

 

[Joules]

You may find a CU that looks pretty smart but finding an electrician to compliment it is altogether another matter and remember electricians run businesses so their profit motive comes first, not you. In the UK the profit motive obliges the electrician to recommend a CU filled with RCBO for every circuit courtesy of 17th Edition Regs, its a win for both electrician and customer but is very expensive. There will be little or no nuisance tripping and the electrician does not need to go to the expense of buying an earth leakage instrument such as a Megger DCM 305E.

When the 18th Edition Regs came along two options presented themselves: the first carried across from 17th Edition in that the board must be entirely filled with RCBO. The second option allowed an RCD to protect a group of MCB just as long as the total leakage current measured down stream was less than 9mA. This allows for a split neutral board to be installed albeit with a risk of nuisance RCD tripping. There is however a third option which is a hybrid combination of the first two.

The CU is split into three parts each with separate neutral bars. The first is to leave spare module slots after the main breaker to accommodate RCBO. The second is for an RCD to monitor a group of MCB power circuits and the third an MCB to monitor another group of MCB for lighting. Have installed or as a prelude to install an audit of leakage currents is undertaken. Circuits like ring mains that feature higher leakage currents use RCBO as do any PV inverters and so on. The cost to the customer of such a CU should be around the £350 mark as opposed to between £700-£950 for a 17th Edition full RCBO board.

Youtube's eFIXX electrician explains the pros and cons of this in his Earth Leakage Currents video.

 

[westward10]

You may find a CU that looks pretty smart but finding an electrician to compliment it is altogether another matter and remember electricians run businesses so their profit motive comes first, not you. In the UK the profit motive obliges the electrician to recommend a CU filled with RCBO for every circuit courtesy of 17th Edition Regs, its a win for both electrician and customer but is very expensive. There will be little or no nuisance tripping and the electrician does not need to go to the expense of buying an earth leakage instrument such as a Megger DCM 305E.

When the 18th Edition Regs came along two options presented themselves: the first carried across from 17th Edition in that the board must be entirely filled with RCBO. The second option allowed an RCD to protect a group of MCB just as long as the total leakage current measured down stream was less than 9mA. This allows for a split neutral board to be installed albeit with a risk of nuisance RCD tripping. There is however a third option which is a hybrid combination of the first two.

The CU is split into three parts each with separate neutral bars. The first is to leave spare module slots after the main breaker to accommodate RCBO. The second is for an RCD to monitor a group of MCB power circuits and the third an MCB to monitor another group of MCB for lighting. Have installed or as a prelude to install an audit of leakage currents is undertaken. Circuits like ring mains that feature higher leakage currents use RCBO as do any PV inverters and so on. The cost to the customer of such a CU should be around the £350 mark as opposed to between £700-£950 for a 17th Edition full RCBO board.

Youtube's eFIXX electrician explains the pros and cons of this in his Earth Leakage Currents video.

Your second option is not really permitted by BS7671 in residential installations.

 

[Joules]

Your second option is not really permitted by BS7671 in residential installations.

Your interpretation of BS7671 stands as personal opinion. In the best interests of the OP please provide members with evidence to support your view so that it may undergo peer review

 

[westward10]

@Joules that is exactly what I will do when I get home. You are new to the forum so I will let your attitude pass.

 

[littlespark]

@Joules that is exactly what I will do when I get home. You are new to the forum so I will let your attitude pass.

Attitude?

He did finish with a smiley face. I’m sure no “attitude” was inferred.

Merry Christmas, Scrooge.

 

[Electro-tech]

This is a hotly contested debate amongst electricians. Dual RCD & split load boards were popular under previous versions of BS7671. Whilst these never really met the requirements for division of circuits, they were a safe compromise.
It should be recognised though, especially since RCBOs are so plentiful and relatively cheap, that an RCBO board is really the properly compliant with consumer unit regulations, specifically the parts of BS7671 related to dividing circuits to minimise inconvenience in the event of fault.
For a regular 30mA RCD the regular leakage current must not exceed 10mA under normal circumstances.
RCBOs not only minimise inconvenience to the end user, but they allow for much faster fault finding & rectification of issues as it obvious from the get-go which circuit is involved. Dual RCD boards do not allow this, each RCD can cover a multitude of circuits, thus complicating locating faults.

 

[JBW175]

I don’t know anyone installing split load boards these days, I’ve not done one for over 4 years.

I only ever quote for full RCBO boards with SPD.

 

[mrwkuk]

You could fit one of these, adapted for single phase usage. Plenty of room for 'smart accessories)
View attachment 104696

I missed this post on the first pass. What make/model is that ?