Been sorting through a box or two of old mcbs today, and noticed that the old style MK LN590 series are identical to the old Square D SQO series (apart from the top prong terminals which can be removed if desired)

So, if you need say, an old Sq D mcb, you could use an MK LN590 type and vice versa.

Hope this helps someone.

-------------------------
Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Quite so Mr johnson, although you would then be negating any type approval of a consumer unit, and possibly nullifying any insurance claim that could come about due to say a fire deemed to originate from the electrical system.

-------------------------
Regard
Richard (Dick)

www.rllewellyn.co.uk

however i think we could allow say volex/ wylex/ alto interchange as they 100% identical.
MK and dopeke are identical depending on the year. (Dopeke made them for mk)

Ancient wylex and Ancient MK and a bit old proteus are the same.

CGD/BG /CED and other cheapie are all from the same trough.

Tenby/ legrand are identical (and now the same company)

-------------------------
----------------------------------------
Lack of planning on your part doesn't make it an emergency on mine....

Every man has to know his limitations- Dirty Harry

Not MCBs, but on the same lines. I spoke to Schneider recently about their grid range (GET), and mentioned dimmers made by Xano (formally Richmond Grid 500) and weather they fit the Schneider grid as they themselves don't make a dimmer that will work with LEDs. I spoke to several different people, and all said that they would not recommend fitting anything other than Schneider products to their grid systems as it would invalidate any type approval and warranties etc.

Whilst many items may fit other manufacturers kit, in this day and age of "manufacturers instructions" and insurance companies refusing claims on terminal torque grounds etc etc, the risk is yours to take.

-------------------------
Regard
Richard (Dick)

www.rllewellyn.co.uk

Yea but in real life if its identical and it fits

-------------------------
Keep up with the antics of the UK,s most humoured electrical company
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/RtIndustriaLtd
Twitter: @rtindustria

Since the items I have described are identical, it is likely that they have gone through a single type approval procedure, despite having two different labels being printed on them.

All this red tape rubbish is meaningless when it comes down to it.

-------------------------
Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

I build control panels multiple items in a metal or plastic box lots of different manufactures no fires to date

Ill report if this changes

-------------------------
Keep up with the antics of the UK,s most humoured electrical company
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/RtIndustriaLtd
Twitter: @rtindustria

Making a control panel is slightly different to making a CU. Often with a CU, the breaking capacity of the mcbs is dependant on the conditions in annexe ZA of the standard, which relies on the type-testing carried out by the manufacturer and the type of fuse on the supply side.

Regards,

Alan.

No torque driver or torque terminal tightener required by the NICEIC as I asked when I had my Full Scope assessment recently.


So If my assessing body has no requirement to verify the correct torque of an MCB or connected equipment how can an insurance company ???

Regards

Daren

-------------------------
..... Dont pee in my pocket and tell me its raining ......


www.quest-electrical-sw.co.uk

It is possible, but it is at your risk. It is possible that if you were unfortunate enough to have something go wrong with one of your installs, your insurers would not pay up. Like I said, your decision, your risk.

Regards,

Alan.

This is a difficult one and not as clear cut as that, the standards do recognise there are cases where assemblies could be constructed of parts from different manufacturers having different type testing parameters or even no evidence of type testing, for this purpose they refer you to Regulation 4 of the EAWR for guidance.

Insurance companies base their judgements on risk and rarely get too involved in the technical aspect so if you have used your common sense, skill and judgement in assessing the risk there is rarely a problem.

regards

-------------------------
"Take nothing but a picture,
leave nothing but footprints!"
-------------------------
"Oh! The drama of it all."
-------------------------
"You can throw all the philosophy you like at the problem, but at the end of the day it's just basic electrical theory!"
-------------------------

I spoke to Crabtree technical about this the other day and asked if they are happy for Wylex MCB's to be fitted into a Crabtree CU and the official answer was no.
Regulations 510.3 & 512.1.5 apply

well of course they would say that- its a completely different make is it not??

-------------------------
----------------------------------------
Lack of planning on your part doesn't make it an emergency on mine....

Every man has to know his limitations- Dirty Harry

All electrium Pete. As is newlec and volex. Essentially the same kit with different branding.

-------------------------
Regard
Richard (Dick)

www.rllewellyn.co.uk