30ma RCD tripping on TT circuit

[bluetof]

to comply with 17th it still most prob needs 30mA protection,and has been said before, he has left installation in a less safe condition than when he arrived.

sorry, and now you have touched it you MUST put 30mA protection in.

I don't know whether you are right here.

Surely if you are fault finding on a pre 17th edition install, you would not have to upgrade to current regs to effect repair.

 

[NozSpark]

All work that you do should be to be to the current regs...

 

[bluetof]

All work that you do should be to be to the current regs...

What about replacing a main switch on a 16th edition split board. Would you then have to RCD protect the non RCD protected side ?? Come on FFS

 

[septiclecky]

Whilst one circuit by its self does not cause the RCD, there could be a leakage to earth on all of the circuits that when all are switched on can add up to enough to trip the RCD.

 

[ianmacd]

What about replacing a main switch on a 16th edition split board. Would you then have to RCD protect the non RCD protected side ?? Come on FFS

You haven't just replaced it you have redesigned it to be less safe. Its not a "like for like" replacement is it? Do you know why it was a 30mA? Have you done IR tests? Have you seen previous certs?

 

[gordy71]

Is there maybe a small amount of earth leakage on a number of circuits that when combined = >30mA? Rcbos would provide an answer to nuscience tripping and be to current standards.

 

[ianmacd]

Is there maybe a small amount of earth leakage on a number of circuits that when combined = >30mA? Rcbos would provide an answer to nuscience tripping and be to current standards.

And then replace the main RCCD with a time delayed one to provide discrimination?

 

[NozSpark]

Like for like replacement is maintenance and is allowed...

So you can change an Isolator for an Isolator

a 30mA RCD main switch for a 30mA main switch

etc...

But if you change a 30mA RCD main switch for a 100mA main switch then you are redesigning the protective devices for the circuits that it covers and therefore it SHOULD comply to the current regs..

as said before going from a 30mA RCD to a 100mA RCD is a step backwards - not an upgrade

 

[Andy™]

What about replacing a main switch on a 16th edition split board. Would you then have to RCD protect the non RCD protected side ?? Come on FFS

you are having a real hard time understanding this aint you.

replacing like for like does not make the installation worse. changing 30mA to 100mA to hide the fault does make it worse.

now go find your horse, go back and put a 30mA in and find the fault.

 

[bluetof]

[quote name='Andy

 

[Lurch]

You have fluked it on this one so it has nothing to do with your great electrical skillz. You can;t do any backpedalling, it's all above in black and white. Just accept it, no-one is being a troll or exerting their electrical knowledge and prowess, you unknowingly reverted a circuit back to what it was some years ago.

And for the next job I would look at why this board has now needed a 3rd main switch replacing.

 

[steptoe]

Totally agree Andy:But

Lets say a ring main circuit wired in 2.5mm twin and earth (ring circuit verified) was on a 16A Type B MCB and was constantly tripping - would you change the MCB to 32A ?

AndyMy horse is parked up for the night ; -)

This has caused a lot of confusion. It is one though that I have got to the bottom of. Listen to this.

Found this out today after asking for previous certs.

DIY Dan had a main switch burn out (prob due to loose connection). He went to wholesaler and replaced main switch (which was an RCD) with new. When I asked him was this switch a 30ma RCD he looked at me blankly, the guy at the counter asked him did it have a test buton, he said yes. He was then given a 30ma RCD. The burnt RCD which I have since found (bottom of cabinet) is in fact a 100ma RCD.

SO

I did not downgrade/upgrade the circui

me in RED

 

[bluetof]

post removed by mr smith

 

[NozSpark]

I've only posted a couple of comments on this thread, it seems bluetof doesn't like the advice he came here asking for!

My last word on this is that you have altered a protective device for several circuits in this house from a 30mA RCD to a 100mA RCD,, as this is against BS7671:2008 (buried cables <50mm), you have also now broken the building regulations (Part P).. It does not matter a jot how the 30mA RCD came to being there.. it was there and that's that

 

[steptoe]

I think you will find that Im noit very fond of BS7671,

just about safety,

quite often I will derate posters about working to 7671 when it is quite obviously IMO an unsafe method,

perhaps you need to stop trying to bait flamers, you wont find any on here, just good advice and opinions, none of which you need to pay attention to.

 

[bluetof]

I have not broken the building regulations (Part P)

 

[bluetof]

Steptoe - are you Polish ?

 

[ianmacd]

I have not broken the building regulations (Part P)

Did you advise LABC before you started the work? If not then you have broken the building regs.

Please do not start 'having a go' at everyone that has tried to help you. You asked a question hoping that people would support your actions and that does not seem to be the case and are now getting upset with us all for advising you that it was wrong to do what you did.

Were your many years of working in the industry mainly in commercial?

 

[NozSpark]

I did say that was my last word...BlushingBlushing

but for "distress" work you can notify afterwards!

or bluetof could be a scam member??

 

[steptoe]

Steptoe - are you Polish ?

if I answer yes does that make a difference.?

are you racist.?