NICEIC Certification Scheme Using Niceic sheets commercially and differences of opinion

[Guest112]

Hi everyone,

As the title says does anyone else feel as if the Niceic sheets are not very commercial/industrial friendly? And generally not very user friendly...

Also it seems to me as I work with diferent Sparks on different jobs that they interpret different sections in different ways.

For example the main switch or circuit breaker, some people put the main switch of the CU/DB that they have worked on or installed but I tend to enter the protective device protecting the origin of my installation.

For example this week I installed a new distribution circuit from an existing electrical panel supplying a new 3 phase board, with one final circuit from the new board.

First of all what would you put for the cert for the additional circuit from the LV switch panel, the main switch???
What would you put for the cert for the new board the main switch again or the protective device supplying the board?

Plus an added extra one, I got criticized recently for entering 1667 as the max earth fault loop impedence on a C32A rcbo and the foreman changed it to 0.57, but there is this grey area between short circuit impedance and earth fault impedance what do you put???

Any help? My Niceic book isn't any use and I can't find my 2391 notes from college...

 

[ipf]

The 1667 max is a get out, easy way and shouldn't even come into play for a TN-S or TN-C-S.

The main switch is a different thing altogether than the MPD...one in supply characteristics, the other in the particulars of install at origin.

 

[ian.settle1]

NICEIC forms are not designed for large commercial/industrial installations was stated by the NIC engineer when he made a site visit during the company yearly visit I worked a onetime.

That is why you will find that large companies design their own test sheets when it comes to large installations

 

[Guest112]

Yeah I agree regarding the atittude of some people regarding "it's on an rcd it'll be fine" these days, but it doesn't answer my question.

I once failed a circuit on an rcbo for failing the max zs reading that I interpreted as 0.57 (C32) and got told off by the boss telling me it had a max value of 1667 just because it had additional protection and now the opposite has hapenned (but without the high zs readings)

A lot of arguments stem down to the fact that the rcd side will only trip with earth leakage or faults to earth and that a L-N fault will only trip on the MCB side and so we should meet max impedence values to ensure the device operates intime. But we measure earth fault loop impedence...

SO you're saying what I said then that the main switch or circuit breaker is the device protecting the installation or work that has been installed??? So if you fitted a new circuit to an existing board then you would enter the breaker details for that circuit?

 

[Guest112]

Yeah I agree why commercial companies use the NIC is beyond me, but the company I'm currently working for uses them so therefore I have to use them....Great

 

[ipf]

Yeah I agree why commercial companies use the NIC is beyond me, but the company I'm currently working for uses them so therefore I have to use them....Great

For large industrial/commercial, which may have above 10 db's, I use the NIC certs but omit observations and recommendations inserting 'see defects and comments', my own sheets which include a header with main details, a 'db summary' and 'defects and comments' which includes circuit details and regulation involved. Rather than tick and fill in boxes, it's a refer to defects and comments.

 

[guest119]

For large industrial/commercial, which may have above 10 db's, I use the NIC certs but omit observations and recommendations inserting 'see defects and comments', my own sheets which include a header with main details, a 'db summary' and 'defects and comments' which includes circuit details and regulation involved. Rather than tick and fill in boxes, it's a refer to defects and comments.

Isnt that a PIR or now an installation condition report?

 

[Guest112]

Anyone have clarification on the scenarios of entering the Main switch or circuit breaker?
e.g

A) Adding a circuit and protective device to an existing board, main switch or mcb/rcbo entered?
B) Installing a new sub circuit and new board, protective device covering the whole of the new installation or main switch of new board installed

ANyone?

 

[Guest55]

the main switch is always always the multi pole device used to isolate power as close to source as possible.

not the dno protective device
not any local mcb / rcbo / rcd device.

seems like the guys working with you have got it right but your getting a bit muddled

 

[Guest55]

in your defense though , nic certs are a loada ----.

;-)

 

[guest119]

Peter, for your situation described the NICEIC 5 page (or more with page 4 and page 5 duplications numbered 6 and 7) installation cert is correct. MW or PIR would not be correct when installing a new circuit or two.

Page 1, yours and company details.

Page 2, details at origin as you pointed out. Main tails size ZE, main switch or circuit breaker bs number then overcurrent device bs number. Both of these would be the same if a circuit breaker or mccb was at the origin. Otherwise, bs88 etc. for overcurrent and 60947 etc for main switch. Nothing on page 2 is to do with your new db or the one you looped from.

Page 3, tickboxes, self explanatory.

Page 4, the header details only the db that you ran your new sub main from then in the columns details the sub main itself.

Page 5, again the header is only for the existing db, and test meter serial nos. Again the columns are for the new sub main circuit.

Page 6, same as page 4, but the header is for your new db and the columns are for your one new final circuit.

Page 7, Again relevant header info from your new db and columns for your new final circuit.

If you have done it correctly the new sub main you ran in should show ZE twice. Firstly in the columns of page 5 and secondly in the header of page 7 (this time with PSCC)

Where it falls down a bit is for example, An incomer with distribution feeding a sub board then another sub board and again etc. The only details being recorded are your new stuff and the db you looped from but in theory there could be more between that and the incomer, all effectively ignored.

 

[Guest112]

the main switch is always always the multi pole device used to isolate power as close to source as possible.

not the dno protective device
not any local mcb / rcbo / rcd device.

seems like the guys working with you have got it right but your getting a bit muddled

Cheers mate, yeah I think I am to be honest , too many sparks saying different things you lose your head after a while,

so in my instance I mentioned earlier for the distribution circuit from the Lv panel I would enter the main switch of the panel,

and for a new board I would enter the main switch of the new board

and for a new installed circuit and protective device I would still enter the main switch of the board?

right?

 

[guest119]

Oh and page 7 is a duplicate of page 5

 

[Guest112]

Peter, for your situation described the NICEIC 5 page (or more with page 4 and page 5 duplications numbered 6 and 7) installation cert is correct. MW or PIR would not be correct when installing a new circuit or two.

Page 1, yours and company details.

Page 2, details at origin as you pointed out. Main tails size ZE, main switch or circuit breaker bs number then overcurrent device bs number. Both of these would be the same if a circuit breaker or mccb was at the origin. Otherwise, bs88 etc. for overcurrent and 60947 etc for main switch. Nothing on page 2 is to do with your new db or the one you looped from.

Page 3, tickboxes, self explanatory.

Page 4, the header details only the db that you ran your new sub main from then in the columns details the sub main itself.

Page 5, again the header is only for the existing db, and test meter serial nos. Again the columns are for the new sub main circuit.

Page 6, same as page 4, but the header is for your new db and the columns are for your one new final circuit.

Page 7, Again relevant header info from your new db and columns for your new final circuit.

If you have done it correctly the new sub main you ran in should show ZE twice. Firstly in the columns of page 5 and secondly in the header of page 7 (this time with PSCC)

Where it falls down a bit is for example, An incomer with distribution feeding a sub board then another sub board and again etc. The only details being recorded are your new stuff and the db you looped from but in theory there could be more between that and the incomer, all effectively ignored.

Cheers Boydy, yeah that's what I've done I've used 7 pages the first 3 being the set standard and then a 4 and 5 for each of the panel and board.

Why haven't you got a thanks button on your posts?

 

[Guest112]

Must've been a glitch your thanks button has returned...

 

[ipf]

Isnt that a PIR or now an installation condition report?

Sure is. Thats the one I'd think about changing, though.

 

[Guest112]

I've done large commercial/industrial condition reports for a company which had it's own paperwork, was much more suited to the type of environment.

 

[D Skelton]

The 1667 max is a get out, easy way and shouldn't even come into play for a TN-S or TN-C-S.

You're right, it certainly shouldn't come in to play on a TN system. 7667 can however.

Regardless of our opinions of people using RCDs to provide earth fault protection, 7667 ohms IS the max permitted Zs. It's the value that goes down on my certs for any circuit that is protected by a 30mA RCD (1667 on a TT) however any new circuit installed will not only conform to the circuit design spec, but the values obtained during testing will be used to ensure that the circuit complies with the values permitted for MCBs only.

In short, I will test a circuit on C10 RCBO for example and ensure that the value obtained is lower than 1.84, but I will record 7667 on the cert.

 

[Guest112]

Just reading through my thread and am still a bit muddled, multiple answers have been given one leaning towards entering the main switch of the DB that has been added to and others have said it's the multi pole device closest to the origin as possible...

So for example if I installed a new circuit from an existing board, and this board is fed from a LV panel and this panel fed from a transformer feeder pillar oon the load side of the transformer, I would need to determine the Main switch on the feeder pillar???

 

[Guest112]

I know it's the particulars of the installation at the origin but commercially it's a different scenario

We know the origin is the point of where electricity enters an installation...

But in say a factory how can someone be expected to take the installation apart possibly halting production costing thousands to enter details on a form??

I can see why most in a commercial/industrial scenario enter the local main switch closest to the part of the installation that has been worked on...