Commercial PIR question (faulty CU)
- Thread starter ProDave
- Start date
Help Support Talk Electrician Forum:
Manator
©Honorary Essex Boy™
I would like to add a few points and this has relevance to all who carry out PIR inspections.
The first part of any inspection even if you are unaware of it, is the initial risk assessment, by talking to the manager, workforce, your risk assessment is revised. Next time you are on a job take a moment to ponder that thought.
A code 1 should only ever be given if you as the inspector define the fault found as posing an immediate danger, this is one of the most abused codes in all PIR inspections.
A cracked or broken enclosure can be either a code 1 or a code 2, this would be dependant on the inspectors "risk assessment", if maintenance has been lacking and the owner shows lack of interest I personally would give it a code 1 based on MY risk assessment, and on the experiance that if it was delayed by a code 2 the owner would probably do nothing to rectify the problem.
It would warrant a code 2 if I found that there are regular maintenance and corrective measures in place, so whilst I can agree there is a danger I know that the people in charge will rectify this problem as soon as.
As for RCD protection there is no requirement to upgrade any system that provides equal protection by either trained staff or correctly installed wiring, and or both. It would be unlikely that any member of the public will plug anything into a socket in a shop, but very possible in a cafe for example.
However you have to make the owner aware of the responsibilities they have towards the protection from harm, no good quoting the Act they are often unaware it exists. Any socket near a doorway I would advise that RCD protection be insisted on, simply because regardless of training people will use the outlet to supply power to a pressure washer or any other electrical appliance, and we all know the dangers of potential differences.
Back to the OP, you were correct in asking the question, it is far better asking than to decide without consultation.
Andy whilst I can sympathise with your replies, it would be better to be humble and explain in a friendly way that maybe in this instance the OP never really thought things through. Sometimes even the more experianced of us (used loosely) get confused or need a little prod.
Remember a PIR is really, even more important as a certificate as a MWC or EIC the implications in a mis represented PIR are immence in court of law.
The first part of any inspection even if you are unaware of it, is the initial risk assessment, by talking to the manager, workforce, your risk assessment is revised. Next time you are on a job take a moment to ponder that thought.
A code 1 should only ever be given if you as the inspector define the fault found as posing an immediate danger, this is one of the most abused codes in all PIR inspections.
A cracked or broken enclosure can be either a code 1 or a code 2, this would be dependant on the inspectors "risk assessment", if maintenance has been lacking and the owner shows lack of interest I personally would give it a code 1 based on MY risk assessment, and on the experiance that if it was delayed by a code 2 the owner would probably do nothing to rectify the problem.
It would warrant a code 2 if I found that there are regular maintenance and corrective measures in place, so whilst I can agree there is a danger I know that the people in charge will rectify this problem as soon as.
As for RCD protection there is no requirement to upgrade any system that provides equal protection by either trained staff or correctly installed wiring, and or both. It would be unlikely that any member of the public will plug anything into a socket in a shop, but very possible in a cafe for example.
However you have to make the owner aware of the responsibilities they have towards the protection from harm, no good quoting the Act they are often unaware it exists. Any socket near a doorway I would advise that RCD protection be insisted on, simply because regardless of training people will use the outlet to supply power to a pressure washer or any other electrical appliance, and we all know the dangers of potential differences.
Back to the OP, you were correct in asking the question, it is far better asking than to decide without consultation.
Andy whilst I can sympathise with your replies, it would be better to be humble and explain in a friendly way that maybe in this instance the OP never really thought things through. Sometimes even the more experianced of us (used loosely) get confused or need a little prod.
Remember a PIR is really, even more important as a certificate as a MWC or EIC the implications in a mis represented PIR are immence in court of law.
I`d code the CU as a 2; unless there were extenuating circumstances, a la Manator.
As for the RCD issue - IF you believe the sockets will only be used by skilled / instructed persons: no RCD is necessary ( though I WOULD comment on it, but in part "G", NOT in part "F".) This is one of those times when the inspector`s judgment is necessary, I`m afraid - though I would echo Manator`s sentiments with regard to RA of the installation.
KME
As for the RCD issue - IF you believe the sockets will only be used by skilled / instructed persons: no RCD is necessary ( though I WOULD comment on it, but in part "G", NOT in part "F".) This is one of those times when the inspector`s judgment is necessary, I`m afraid - though I would echo Manator`s sentiments with regard to RA of the installation.
KME
One last (first) comment.
I would never RCD the whole of a commercial installation, on a single rcd, especially general lights & sockets on the same.
Minimise inconvenience in the event of a fault...
Let me give you a scenario
I would never RCD the whole of a commercial installation, on a single rcd, especially general lights & sockets on the same.
Minimise inconvenience in the event of a fault...
Let me give you a scenario
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2008
- Messages
- 454
- Reaction score
- 0
The fact is that the accessory is DAMAGED - which is a code 1 in this case.
Anyone may remove the plug-in mcb and be exposed to an increased risk of electric shock - the board needs changing. Why not install a basic board with rcbo's providing protection where applicable?
Anyone may remove the plug-in mcb and be exposed to an increased risk of electric shock - the board needs changing. Why not install a basic board with rcbo's providing protection where applicable?
Similar threads
- Locked
