it would be a code 3 with further investigation required to confirm the CU still complies with BS EN 60439-3

Does it comply with the most powerful Reg in the book?

134.1.1



-------------------------
Regards,
Ebee (M I S P N)

Knotted cables cause Lumpy Lektrik

Code C3 improvement recommended, on what basis? that it may not be installed to the manufacturers instructions?
So still a satisfactory report.

-------------------------
Regards

Dave(not Cockburn)

In my view 134.1.1 is not relevant to an EICR because the manufacturers instructions are not available to the inspector unless the manufacturer has fixed the indelibly to the equipment. In fact I think that it should probably be removed completely, because if you read the instructions provided with many accessories for example, they attempt to transfer any responsibility to the installer! Of course I understand the manufacturers representatives want this provision, but it can never override any other regulation, or standard to which the item is claimed to be manufactured.
If you take this idea to a logical conclusion an inspection would require weeks of research into every item, the exact manufacture date, modification drawing status etc. Some might say that this level of traceability is a good idea, but then you would get an aircraft price tag and documentation trail for every installation! So we could go back to EN60898, which gives no provision for mounting orientation (which is obvious really as they are used both horizontally and vertically, and often somewhere in between). Those handy level bubbles are to get them looking good, not because the orientation is critical to a few degrees. If it were (and some oil filled equipment is quite critical) then I expect a proper fixed notice that says so, and in a place where I cannot miss it upon inspection. You will be saying that a manufacturer can set a different level of current capacity for a cable roll by providing a scruffy set of "installation" instructions next (and claim it were to the BS and BASEC at the same time!), and if you could where would we be; any kind of later inspection would be impossible without that immense paper trail.
BTW has anyone a set of instructions which say that some CU is only suitable for (normal) horizontal mounting, because I don't think I have.

-------------------------
David
CEng etc, don't ask, its a result not a question!

FFS look at the data for a CU, it will tell you the size of the unit in the width, height and depth, if a fire starts in that CU and it is not mounted the same was as the sizes are stated then the manufacturers will be very happy to say it is fleck all to with them as the unit was not mounted correctly.

its not thier fault if you cant be ***** to take the time to look at their specs.

All equipment should be mounted and installed as per manufactures recomendations, if you dont then on your head be it

Perhaps someone on here who is contact with the UK importers/manufacturers could get the answer from the 'horses mouth' to settle this once and for all, if they dare commit themselves in this blame passing culture?

Dave69, the manufacturer won't be interested in a fire in his box anyway, it was clearly caused by loose connections. Can you provide a torque test report for every terminal, with the calibration certificates of the kit, and the verification data before and after each measurement? Have you had all the requisite manufacturers training and passed the practical tests within the last 6 months? I thought not. That is why this regulation is useless.

-------------------------
David
CEng etc, don't ask, its a result not a question!

I have just emailed Contactum to ask about this, I only used Contactum because they had the easiest email address to find, I very rarely use their boxes!

Dave.

Dave 69 you have already stated on an EICR code C3,so a satisfactory report,cant be that bad then.

-------------------------
Regards

Dave(not Cockburn)

my torque rachets have calibration certs as do my crimpers etc. and yes if I do a job all certifcation confirms this. How many of you bother to even think about obtaining calibration certs for you crimpers let alone torque drivers? I do, but I have to because the people I do work for ask for the certs

Dimensions =/= Orientation.

On that basis upside down is ok?

In the real world space can be optimal, i personally would not want to charge the customer the extra cost of a complete CU move unless of course they choose that option from the outset.

On that basis upside down is ok?
---------------
Good point Sweetsnap!

It is likely that the change to the smart-meters over the next few years will require the board to be relocated from the supplier's meter box anyway, to ensure sufficient space for the new meter. Most DNOs state that although the box has to be supplied (or paid for) by the owner of the property, the box is to be used exclusively by the supplier, without any customer equipment. It is not unusual to see two meter boxes in some scenarios, one for the supplier's equipment, and one for controlling the submain to the CU (or in some circumstances the CU itself). The fitting of customer equipment can and does prevent the installation of temporary supplies in the event of network faults. Often in these circumstances, a temporary cable is run over-ground and terminated on a second cutout mounted within the box. No room = no temporary supply.

Regards,

Alan.

When you say move the meter to fit the DB may I assume you are not refering to the external white kind of meter cupboard, maybe a cupboard in the house where the meter happens to be? Rather than moving the meter or twisting the new board to fit the existing cabling maybe it would be worth considering fitting some kind of terminal box to extend the existing cables to fit the new consumer unit in a more suitable location?

terminal box
---------
Henley Block.

Hi Dave, I was thinking of some kind of multi way terminal box to extend the existing circuits to a new more appropriate position rather than just the tails!

Sorry Weirdbeard, I was thinking you were just considering the tails! I had to move a meter over a couple of inches recently to get a board in, luckily it wasn't sealed!

Dave.

No probs dave, as I mentioned in another post if there was a dedicated way to post pics to this site it might help!

I'm not saying this isn't true though I must say I have never seen this assertion documented, aren't the tails customer equipment?