Ive been part of a team doing ECR's and we have had various differing opinions on codes, etc.

When finding electrical equipment with multiple circuits inside but no warning labels I have given a code 3. Others have given a Code 2 and we need to issue the same code as the work is for the same client.

My point is that to work on the equipment you need to be a competent person and should follow safe isolation procedures, etc, regardless of whether the equipment is labelled or not.

Any comments appreciated

Might be worth putting EICR at the top of the report and using the new codes with a key for the unwary...
check out
http://www.theiet.org/forums/f...tid=205&threadid=45636

Start with a regulation number - what regulation do you think the arrangement doesn't comply with ?

Regards

OMS

-------------------------
Failure is always an option

Hi Oms, 514.11.1

and 537.2.1.3

Can't both circuits be isolated by the installation's main switch?


Does the installation have more then one supply?

Many 2-gang light switches in halls are fed from two circuits - landing light on the upstairs lighting, hall on the downstairs (a safety feature to ensure that the stairs still had some light if either one circuit failed). I don't recall seeing many warning stickers...

- Andy.

The installation only has one supply, but three circuits.

So just 514.11.1 then.

You could just turn off the main switch, although might be awkward in this case as you would be in darkness. But the reg still requires a label I believe.

Would it be different for a TT installation under your theory? (given that single pole MCBs can't provide isolation in TT)
- Andy.

well, Andy has given you the answers to my question - so either no code or a code 3 or a recommendation under separate cover to the client - good engineering practice though, not a departure rom BS 7671 (assuming the installation has a main switch)

Regards

OMS

-------------------------
Failure is always an option

Sorry, this is TNCS, there are 3 panels that all have the 3 circuits going to them. with remote isolators that are not lockable.

I think it should have been labelled and the 3 mcbs indicated to comply with the reg.

As I said in my initial question, I dont think its a code 2, I think it is a code 3.

Ah I see - the 514.11.1 says were there is not a single device to isolate all live parts, and the main switch is a single device.

So really in 99% of installations, those that have a main switch, this reg does not apply at all?

It is only really required where you have say changeover switchgear where there is say mains and a generator - to isolate parts of the syatem requires both mains and generator switchgear a
to be open before isolation of the changeover devices takes place.

Other examples might be big comms rooms where there are potentially multiple generator and UPS inputs to systems that, if you were to isolate the main switch, would still remain live - a wrap around bypass panel being an obvious one

regards

OMS

-------------------------
Failure is always an option

Blimey, on another contract, Mitsubishi spent loads having there ASHP control panels fitted with these labels. Im going to tell them not to bother from now on, perhaps they will send me a reward!

I don't imagine Mitzi spent loads on a few labels - and typically they only deal with thier system - so theoretically have no knowledge of the installation main switch (location, type capability etc)

Regards

OMS

-------------------------
Failure is always an option