Linking Tails From Main Switch.

[Steve3948]

What regulation number relates to a domestic installation having one point of isolation, I think I may have overlooked this.

 

[Wilpickard]

Reg 537.1.4 but then 537.1.6 says you can have a main switch for each source of supply.

To be honest I'm not a lot wiser now I've looked it up!

 

[SLIPSHOD & SLAPDASH]

Reg 537.1.4 but then 537.1.6 says you can have a main switch for each source of supply.

To be honest I'm not a lot wiser now I've looked it up!

Your wrong. If 2 consumer units are fitted each one is classed as an installation, each with its own isolation. This has been discussed here before. When i have a situation like this, or say a E7 supply i fit a commonly available warning  sticker 'More than one point of isolation'.

 

[Wilpickard]

Your right I am wrong and I stand corrected. Glad I looked it up.

 

[steptoe]

who is designing this?

who is signing it off?

just do what they say,

I and you know its wrong, but work is work and if someone else is willing toi put their name to it who are we to argue?

at present Im spending a lot of my time changing consumer units in council properties that have already been signed off satisfactory for solar PV that are non compliant,

the council dont want to rock the boat as they accepted them, so I change every one I meet to make it compliant,

do I care the MCS cert is wrong? do I f****

 

[Sharpend]

That's what I like about you Steps,

Is your mission statement : to change the face of electrical safety one installation at a time.

Truthfully, you are probably correct in what you say, there will always be a lesser idiot who will put their name to a non compliant install for the sake of MONEY.

Maybe that's why I'm broke??

 

[steptoe]

sharpend, if he doesnt do it someone else will, as has already been said,

someone is signing these jobs of as compliant on a daily basis, as long as its not my name why worry,?

its a mockery though, and yet again it proves the point as to why our trade is a joke,

I know for a fact that a lot of the jobs on PV I am correcting have never ever had anyone MCS even near them,

I know the spark wired them, and the roofing team fitted the panels,

and the MCS guy came out and stuck a schematic beside the CU and signed it off,!

what a ******* joke, he signed off about 20 a day, the install guys were doing 3 a day,

HTF is that possible to get right/proper/decent ?

 

[Barx]

sharpend, if he doesnt do it someone else will, as has already been said,

someone is signing these jobs of as compliant on a daily basis, as long as its not my name why worry,?

its a mockery though, and yet again it proves the point as to why our trade is a joke,

I know for a fact that a lot of the jobs on PV I am correcting have never ever had anyone MCS even near them,

I know the spark wired them, and the roofing team fitted the panels,

and the MCS guy came out and stuck a schematic beside the CU and signed it off,!

what a ******* joke, he signed off about 20 a day, the install guys were doing 3 a day,

HTF is that possible to get right/proper/decent ?

I agree with everything you say steps, I've been sent to do this by the boss and I either do it or don't get paid / don't have a job. I have told him it's all happening on a wing of what bit of knowledge I have of solar and what little bit the people on site know. There is no technical guy available as there are 'only' 41 properties to do and it's classed as too small a project to required these technical bods. Bit of a joke really.

Out of curiousity, what is it your 'putting right' I hate the fact I may be doing something wrong and would much rather get it right the first time.

We supposedly have tons more to do in peterborough to do after xmas, so I'm going to try to do some reading up over xmas. Any sources of info would be appreciated.

 

[wozz]

sharpend, if he doesnt do it someone else will, as has already been said,

someone is signing these jobs of as compliant on a daily basis, as long as its not my name why worry,?

its a mockery though, and yet again it proves the point as to why our trade is a joke,

I know for a fact that a lot of the jobs on PV I am correcting have never ever had anyone MCS even near them,

I know the spark wired them, and the roofing team fitted the panels,

and the MCS guy came out and stuck a schematic beside the CU and signed it off,!

what a ******* joke, he signed off about 20 a day, the install guys were doing 3 a day,

HTF is that possible to get right/proper/decent ?

Pretty much the same can be said for the whole QS system.

 

[steptoe]

I agree with everything you say steps, I've been sent to do this by the boss and I either do it or don't get paid / don't have a job. I have told him it's all happening on a wing of what bit of knowledge I have of solar and what little bit the people on site know. There is no technical guy available as there are 'only' 41 properties to do and it's classed as too small a project to required these technical bods. Bit of a joke really.

Out of curiousity, what is it your 'putting right' I hate the fact I may be doing something wrong and would much rather get it right the first time.

We supposedly have tons more to do in peterborough to do after xmas, so I'm going to try to do some reading up over xmas. Any sources of info would be appreciated.

most of the time they have just stuck the solar on a spare MCB in the existing CU , load side of the RCD along with other final circuits, sometimes the RCD wont even trip out when the solar is turned on!

the only time they have used a 2nd CU is when there are no spare ways in the existing,

as for the rest of the install, its usually a mess, havent seen any labels on any of the cables yet,

its a limitation on my PIRs that the PV is not inspected, if I change a CU I dont re-connect the PV, I leave an RCBO on the hi-int side and put the cable in the CU for them and they send out a council bloke to stick the cables in.

Pretty much the same can be said for the whole QS system.

yep, the QS system is good in certain circumstances, 100 or so men [sparks, mates, labourers etc] on a com/ind job with the QS foreman can work IMHO,

have done a few jobs like this, but even then there were a couple of other guys acting as working supervisors etc that had their 2391s etc,

but for stuff like most domestic its a farce,

probably only feasible on a new build site with a few dozen houses with , again, the QS on site permanently as electrical foreman.

 

[wozz]

yep, the QS system is good in certain circumstances, 100 or so men [sparks, mates, labourers etc] on a com/ind job with the QS foreman can work IMHO,

have done a few jobs like this, but even then there were a couple of other guys acting as working supervisors etc that had their 2391s etc,

but for stuff like most domestic its a farce,

probably only feasible on a new build site with a few dozen houses with , again, the QS on site permanently as electrical foreman.

The example i like to use is would you have a gas safe engineer around your house, or a gas safe company where the engineer has never been inspected but some one who works in the office has?  I know which one I would choose.  This is a off topic though.

Would the reg being quoted go back to the days before fuseboards had main switches within them?

 

[kme]

OK.

Barx:

I have done it - and, if they`re adjacent / in a piece of trunking; I see ZERO requirement for them to be 16mm tails on a G83 16A system - why would 4mm be wrong? It cannot be overloaded - you`ve a 16 or 20A MCB "protecting" the PV circuit - as long as the links are not likely to be damaged.....what`s the problem??

Besides which - it can also be a way of avoiding having to get bogged down with the compliance (or lack of) with the existing install. We all KNOW it ought to be up to scratch before the PV goes in - but many aren`t. If you walk away from it, you`re out of pocket (or a job), and someone else`ll do it.

As long as YOUR work is as safe as possible; and you`ve covered your own rear end (includes limiting out ANY involvement with the existing install, if necessary!) - then I`d be happy.

The question is: Who is signing the EIC? If you are, then you are free to design it as you see fit. If someone else is signing, then they must tell you what their design criteria are.

KME