Board upgrade but cpc woes???

[a1]

ProDave - The OP said that that is Possible, and that he will check again (as far as he can) and hopefully take some pics too.

 

[a1]

Little concearned why you are using 30ma RCD main switch board which does not comply with regs unless there are more than one consumer unit. Not sure about why there is no main earth would need dno to sort probably.

Why Batty? Not against the regs, Just frowned upon. I do believe. :|

 

[batty]

Why Batty? Not against the regs, Just frowned upon. I do believe. :|

I am sure there is a reg to say you cannot have one RCD to control whole property not good a looking up regs SL is the man for that.

 

[a1]

I suppose it could be argued about Discrimination, Convenience, etc etc.

But it is a grey area, and is one of those things that is a case of "which way YOU interpret the regs".

 

[kme]

No mate, I`d go with batty there, but its late, and I`m NOT delving through the BRB tonight.

Init: Tell you what. You "interpret" this (and any other) O/P the way you see it, and I`ll do the same. Your final sentence, to which I referred, stated that it did NOT need a rewire, which was misleading, IMO.

 

[initforthemoney]

Your final sentence, to which I referred, stated that it did NOT need a rewire, which was misleading, IMO.

Ah yes i do apologise.

Typo on my part. Should have read......" may not need".

 

[ianmacd]

No mate, I`d go with batty there

+1

 

[Foxmeister]

I am sure there is a reg to say you cannot have one RCD to control whole property not good a looking up regs SL is the man for that.

Regs require the diversion of circuits so as not to cause inconvenience in the event of a fault etc.

Understand exactly wot u mean here and wot is expected from the regs, reason i chose the said cu was the install is unusual and in a very tight, small location which i could only source a single type cu to use, which would be either standard DP main switch or the RCD. Chose the RCD as the property only has 4 or 5 circuits with no shower and seeing as its only a cu change, i was led to believe that if you cannot prove the deeper than 50mm cable outwith conduit rule you should protect the circuit with 30mA RCD. Also the lighting circuit would feed the bathroom.

Usually would go for split type(main and RCD) but for this unusual situation i chose the above mentioned. Does anybody agree or disagree and any pro's n cons? Any advice welcomed guys.

 

[Foxmeister]

Foxy , from your OP you say there are no socket earths at the board , the ones at the plugs may be a bare earth wire system connected to the water main. I think the place needs upgrading TBH.

If the main earth is the pyro sheath then fit a metal C/U .

Cheers mate, thought they might be taking earth from other service, will look into that when i revisit the property, hopefully this weekend.

That said, if this was the case and where taking the cpc by this means, personally i will report that a re-wire would be recommended to get property up to standard but how does the install fair up in terms of safety and if its legal?

 

[sparkytim]

Regs require the diversion of circuits so as not to cause inconvenience in the event of a fault etc. Understand exactly wot u mean here and wot is expected from the regs, reason i chose the said cu was the install is unusual and in a very tight, small location which i could only source a single type cu to use, which would be either standard DP main switch or the RCD. Chose the RCD as the property only has 4 or 5 circuits with no shower and seeing as its only a cu change, i was led to believe that if you cannot prove the deeper than 50mm cable outwith conduit rule you should protect the circuit with 30mA RCD. Also the lighting circuit would feed the bathroom.

Usually would go for split type(main and RCD) but for this unusual situation i chose the above mentioned. Does anybody agree or disagree and any pro's n cons? Any advice welcomed guys.

BRB Pg39 Reg 314.1

Suggest Main switch C U with RCBOs to comply