Warmup RCD

Interesting Spin. Ok I presume the scenario is that a bathroom has had electrical work carried out in it and the following items for instance has been fitted as an example. (All items within specified zones)

1 - Towel warmer

2 - Underfloor heating

Right it is decided that the above are to be taken off of a non RCD protected Ring Final as two spurs from said.

Regulations dictate that the spurs must be RCD protected (or maybe the whole Ring Final) thus the fitting of  FCU/RCD's are indicated.

So the FCU's are fitted outside of the bathroom (but possibly could be placed inside subject to zones)

So the items are RCD protected as per regulations - however from what I can gather the actual Ring Final itself has to be RCD protected which would obviously be at DB position and would negate the use of RCD/FCU's and allow the use of an FCU only.

So presumably the argument is is that the  whole Ring Final proper has to be RCD protected. and the use of RCD/FCU's is not allowed

Quantification of the above - Bit difficult actually. The RCD/FCU spurs into the bathroom provides the necessary protection as does the RCD protected Ring Final without the RCD spurs.

I can only look at things from a simplistic angle, but can really see no differentiation between the two methods - the end result is the same - all the named circuits in the bathroom are RCD protected. .but there must be more to this. Must go, all good stuff and will watch with interest.

 

JP
There are requirements for certain cables to be protected.
There are requirements to provide certain socket-outlets with RCD protection.
There are requirements to provide mobile equipment used outdoors with RCD protection.
There are requirements to provide certain circuits with RCD protection.
Which of the above requirements apply in your scenario.
How does providing RCD protection to the spur meet any of those requirements?

 

As soon as you take on the whole circuit then under part p you have not installed it not designed you have no idea of any cable problems or hidden joint boxes cable or smaller cable installed in between sockets or any other bad practices so under part p how can you sign off and all ring final test should be completed if ring broken and ring made two radials or overload down rated ie to 20amp and breaker starts tripping who fault is that should one issue a eicr old pir. For ring main and mwc for bathroom after spur part p states you are responsible for design and installation then you can sign off so how can you sign off ring final That you have not had nothing to do with???

 

Not quite certain how this relates to providing RCD protection harmonic.
Surely if you are extending a circuit, or spuring off of a circuit, you would have to check that the circuit is ok before conducting the work.

 

This would be where 132.16 would come in with no mention of  residual current devices

 

. .. . 6,277 views and its still ongoing, Kin 'ell!

 

Your point being?

 

Only saying thayou can not verify wiring unless it is exposed for inspection when I have installed equipment have protected my work by fused spur so secondary side of spur has calculated load and just protecting my work with minor work certificate and local overload and shock protection

 

YES and I have two emails from moderators explaining that they have removed two of my replys,,,, now I wonder why that happened on a spinlondon thread, never happened before

 

Yes harmonic, and what has that got to do with providing RCD protection?

Lok, strangely enough, I have received no Emails informing me that any of my replies have been removed.

 

Another immature rant from Lucy, have we not been here before?
Lucy your tedious posts have no more substance than graffiti on a toilet wall.

 

because i know rcd has to be used as from 17th regs in bathroom conditions the point i am talking about is were it is installed if a spur for a boiler is installed it is a fixed appliance an central heating engineers will install surface wiring normally so no rcd required with mwc issued they do not check wiring from consumer unit as small load
if in this case of were rcd goes one has to assume all wiring is correct up to that point of your work
saying that loading has to be taken in to account so maybe the circuit should be checked in case it overloads but overload protection is there for that reason  do kitchen fitters installing all manor of extra loading issue eic for circuit from board i would say no as most not fully approved limited scope

 

I have answered your comment regarding you having to check the existing install prior to proceeding. .

Would love to discuss the philsophy of this comment further, but have to go and earn a living doing an example of this work funnily enough.

 

If I understand you correctly harmonic.
You know that an RCD is required as it's a location containing a bath or shower.
Central heating engineers won't normally install an RCD when fitting a boiler.
Central heating engineers will not check the existing wiring as it's a small load.
You would assume that the existing wiring would comply.
You believe that there's no point in checking out the wiring, because it has overload protection.
Kitchen fitters don't issue EICs to cover the existing wiring.

Not quite sure what any of that has got to do with the requirement to provide RCD protection for circuits of locations containing baths or showers.

Harmonic, you haven't answered, you've replied.
You don't answer comments, you answer questions.
Except in your case you don't.
132.16 Requires that before you make any addition or alteration, that the existing equipment will be adequate for the altered circumstances
What exactly is your point that there is no mention about RCDs in that Regulation?
Is there a point?
Let's hope that in this instance your work complies, or (as is most likely judging from your comments) if it doesen't, that nothing goes pear shaped in the near future.

 

I agree with you as you state wiring should be adequate for additional load but rcd need not be placed at consumer unit it can be installed prior to the special location work as wiring before was completed prior to the 17th so regs not retrospective so just recommendation that rcd is required for socket outlets on that circuit you have used ie upgrade to 17th edition as you say just answer question of rcd positioning first question on this subject

 

Why need not the RCD be placed at the consumer unit?
The Regs require the circuit be protected, how would placing the RCD partway along the circuit comply?
It's not a question of upgrading the circuit, it's a question of complying with the Regs.
The fact that the existing part of the circuit gets upgraded is happenstance, a bonus if you like, as a result of the Reg requiring the circuit be RCD protected being complied with.
You apper to believe that protecting the circuit will mean that you are taking on and that the EIC will be for the whole circuit.
This is not so.
The EIC would list the work as being an extension to an existing circuit and provision of RCD protection for the circuit.

 

Give it a rest for goodness sake luv.

 

It was just it is possible easier specially if lighting circuit work just put in the airing cupboard but as you say can be done at the board but then rcd could trip borrowed neutral etc so then is the decision what to d I will stick rcd outside of zone for lighting and cover socket circuit at board which I do now off kitchen alterations thanks for pointing out some interesting points