![]() |
IET | ![]() |
|
search :
help :
home
|
||
|
Latest News:
|
|
|


|
Topic Title: PIR / EICR advice on the following Topic Summary: Created On: 25 June 2012 05:25 PM Status: Post and Reply |
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch |
Search Topic |
Topic Tools
|
|
|
|
|
Carrying out an inspection in a factory, many things found wrong.
Few I'm not sure of. 1) SWA sub-main running for 30 meters is cable tied directly to a 50mm main gas pipe. What code would you give this? - the owner of the factory cannot see a problem with it. 2) The installation is TT Ra is 150ohms, there is no RCD anywhere, and it's all metal DBs and rusty old steel trunking. C2? I think both code 2's but little unsure about the SWA Thanks. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Both code 1,s I would have said
1 - if the gas main wasn't designed to support the swa load, you could have a sudden and immediate fracture - with the attendant outcome. BS 7671 warns against detrimental influence and proximity to non electrical services. The gas regulations would take a stiffer view. 2 - Ra = 150 ohms and no RCD - how is ADS being achieved then OMS ------------------------- Failure is always an option |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the reply,
The thing is the gas pipe is a heavy duty, threaded 50mm pipe, fixed with heavy duty brackets to the wall, I couldn't imagine the SWA is stressing it, wouldn't code 2 be more appropriate? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Services should be independantly fixed from each other.
Regs is in the office, its there near the start! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Whats your opinion on this, is this the same installation as the garage ramp?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Both code 1 & both dangerous
Gas pipes can not be used for anything else including cable support, its not unusual to find that the client does not think anything is wrong but his opinion does not realy count. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I would have said that both are C2 - Potentially dangerous, urgent remedial action required. GN3 give an example of C2 as "non earthed installation as it requires a further fault to manifest injury". The lack of an RCD is only a problem in the event of a further fault.
C1 is risk of injury, immediate action required and gives examples such as badly damaged equipment with risk of access to live parts and bare live parts. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Again you should not be doing EICRs.
------------------------- David CEng etc, don't ask, its a result not a question! |
|
|
|
|
|
IET
» Wiring and the regulations
»
PIR / EICR advice on the following
|
Topic Tools |
FuseTalk Standard Edition v3.2 - © 1999-2013 FuseTalk Inc. All rights reserved.





Search Topic


