Currently reading:
The daftest change or addition in the 18th edition

Discuss The daftest change or addition in the 18th edition in the UK Electrical Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net

O

Octopus

pretty much as the title says ....

For me it’s a txss up between the regulation about no mixing makes or mcbs or rcbos - but what if they are identical except for the name or logo

Eg lewden and control gear

AND

the design limit of 30% earth leakage on circuits with rcbo or rcds - how can this be tested / checked and what happens when people move in a new build and plug in all sorts or carp accessories

Next!
 
From what I understand, the new prohibition applies to all DBs and similar switch gear within the BS EN 61439 series.
Installing a component which was not included in with the type testing would make the installer the manufacturer and thus responsible for ensuring conformity with the standard.
But a control panel with a variable speed drive, contactors etc is not a distribution board. It is not covered by BS7671.

BS7671 only applies to the power supply up to the control panel.
 
I've never met anyone who uses the RCD test button as per the sticker. I have a little safety chat with folks before leaving and I'm pretty sure no one I've spoken to has ever pressed the test button.
You would get more people pushing it if you changed the label to read "Under no circumstances attempt to push the Test button on the RCD"
 
1) Pick and mix protective devices - So I have no OEM instructions, they don't make this particular device anymore....power outage, work has stopped...mmmm...try one of these...Ah...it fits perfect...test...power on...I certify & sign that I take full responsibility for my actions....nothings changed really.
2) IR Test voltage column on SOTR - if its not at 500v I put it in remarks or note it anyway.

I like the sky blue colour - when you hold it up to the sky in this nice weather ....it just blends in....disappears...wow.. thats magical.
 
pretty much as the title says ....

For me it’s a txss up between the regulation about no mixing makes or mcbs or rcbos - but what if they are identical except for the name or logo

Eg lewden and control gear

AND

the design limit of 30% earth leakage on circuits with rcbo or rcds - how can this be tested / checked and what happens when people move in a new build and plug in all sorts or carp accessories

Next!
There is one or two jobs worth at the IEE. I suspect many brands of MCBs and RCDs come of the same production line, it's known as badge engineering.
 
pretty much as the title says ....

For me it’s a txss up between the regulation about no mixing makes or mcbs or rcbos - but what if they are identical except for the name or logo

Eg lewden and control gear

AND

the design limit of 30% earth leakage on circuits with rcbo or rcds - how can this be tested / checked and what happens when people move in a new build and plug in all sorts or carp accessories

Next!
Yes. Respectively, it is impossible to create a set of standards that everyone is happy with and have no errors. On the same principal, we have courts and Judges to decide on points of law. Often, with hindsight, they can get decisions wrong.

Please let me respond to 2 of your points.

Mixed protective devices in consumer units.

A BS60898 will provide a given level of protection for a given set of electrical parameters. That said, there is no requirement for them to be of a particular size of even how they are connected into the circuit.

Universally we use din rails mainly to mount our mcbs in consumer units and distribution boards. The height or distance from the base of the din rail to the terminals on the db are different on different boards. Mixing different connecting heights on a bus bar will put mechanical strain on the bar, terminals and can eventually cause bad connections due to the expansion and contraction of the bar due to changes in temperature. Result - Fire.

A competent electrician will be able to identify where the only difference in mcb is the lable or badge. This will be noted and is fully in line with the regulations.

This regulation will hopefully stop bodgers from sticking/forcing any random breaker into consumer units.

Limiting of earth leakage to 30% downstream of a RCD (531.3.2).

I am assuming that you are referring to the above regulation. Please note that though it is a regulation, it is a consideration.

In a computer suite which has 30 2 gang switch socket outlets across 3 ring final circuits. the leakage to earth on a 10 point rfc will be around 15mA. Maybe, as much as 20mA. Without advertising manufacturers instruments, there are many instruments that can measure the leakage without breaking into the circuit. Computers, monitors and fluorescent lights can leak as much as 1mA to earth by nature.

A competent electrician/designer will take this into account when designing the circuit and will require the installer or inspector to carry out some sort of tests to confirm that the design has been followed and is correct.

As humans, we tent to look for faults before looking for the good. As my grandma used to say, "bad news travels faster than good news".

Did you know that the IET are a "not for profit charity"? If you visit a law library you will note that the cost of books of a similar size and complexity are significantly much more.

That aside, there are lots of formatting errors. There are lots of errors that have been in the regs for many years too. Personally, it is a bit unprofessional to produce a document that has so many simple formatting errors and spelling mistakes.

Finally, the CG2382 has been an easy exam to teach. I have taught 1000s of persons, many were not even electricians. I think I had 5 people who failed in total. As the questions are now random, it will be harder to pass.

I am going back to the drawing board to produce an new teaching tool for the future.
 
Does it really need a competent electrician to be able to tell if a particular MCB will physically fit onto a DIN rail populated with --- other type(s)?? As for stipulating that they all have to be of the same make/brand/manufacturer, I am sorry that is just b$$locks.
 
Does it really need a competent electrician to be able to tell if a particular MCB will physically fit onto a DIN rail populated with --- other type(s)?? As for stipulating that they all have to be of the same make/brand/manufacturer, I am sorry that is just b$$locks.
It’s not that a competent Electrician can or cannot make that call, it’s that the competent Electrician will now have to state the CU/DB complies with the BS EN 61439 series standard.
 
Mixed protective devices in consumer units.
A BS60898 will provide a given level of protection for a given set of electrical parameters. That said, there is no requirement for them to be of a particular size of even how they are connected into the circuit. So we need a more precise standard to include maybe 2 standard Protective device dimensions where busbars are at equal depth and fit type A or type B boards.....(oh dear Wylex have brought out new double pole RCBOs not backwards compatible "end of life" cycles are more frequent now ££££)

Mixing different connecting heights on a bus bar will put mechanical strain on the bar, terminals and can eventually cause bad connections ......Result - Fire. Agree ... we need a better standard.(see above)

A competent electrician will be able to identify where the only difference in mcb is the lable or badge. ...
This regulation will hopefully stop bodgers from sticking/forcing any random breaker into consumer units. A little common sense will bring a decision whether, by physical comparison, the size/shape of the MCB, is/isn't satisfactory (even if the moulding is different). He/she can make a competent decision if it is safe to use or not. A blanket ban on mixing MCBs does not make complete practical sense in the real world.

Limiting of earth leakage to 30% downstream of a RCD (531.3.2).
Like what you say here...+ informative

Did you know that the IET are a "not for profit charity"? If you visit a law library you will note that the cost of books of a similar size and complexity are significantly much more.
But why is it still a non-statutory regulation? I am all for not for profit charities so long as there is some decent ethics involved.
I only wanted to look at a labelling section today (18th ed)... labels (p541) see also marking: "warning notices" (p555) "see notices - warning" (p544) go to section 514.12.1 -periodic inspection ...(p132)under chapter "Common rules" ....phew got there in the end .......all while trying to be a competent person.
 

Reply to The daftest change or addition in the 18th edition in the UK Electrical Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net

OFFICIAL SPONSORS

Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Electrician Courses Green Electrical Goods PCB Way Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Pushfit Wire Connectors Electric Underfloor Heating Electrician Courses
These Official Forum Sponsors May Provide Discounts to Regular Forum Members - If you would like to sponsor us then CLICK HERE and post a thread with who you are, and we'll send you some stats etc
This website was designed, optimised and is hosted by untold.media Operating under the name Untold Media since 2001.
Back
Top