IET logo
 
IET
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: Test Cert ?
Topic Summary: Meter & board install ?
Created On: 11 January 2015 06:06 PM
Status: Read Only
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch
<< 1 2 3 Previous Next Last unread
Search Topic Search Topic
Topic Tools Topic Tools
View similar topics View similar topics
View topic in raw text format. Print this topic.
 11 January 2015 08:42 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Manxie

Posts: 246
Joined: 08 January 2015

Scenario...
Just the DB is installed, wired into Henly blocks..
Addition to an existing circuit, therefore, minor works..
If it was a sun main fed from the existing DB then it would be an EIC

Next job, maybe a week later, is relocate 3 circuits from one DB to another....
Alteration to existing circuit, therefore, minor works again...

Regards
Charlie
 11 January 2015 09:00 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



peteTLM

Posts: 3715
Joined: 31 March 2005

Originally posted by: Ampman


problem is they are inaccessable for testing , too high on outside of building ,

So how can they be tested? There will be an internal fan coil unit that is fed off the external unit, so thats available for test. No live? R2 will work or hot probe.



Fire alarm panel , no local spur am i to dismantle panel to test ?

Has it got a metal case? It should have a local means of isolation anyway for the panel to meet regs....



am i to test the board ive removed circuits from as i could of disturbed a earth that may have fell out ?

Im sure a visual will suffice if you feel the need.



no because ive made sure that everything was left connected like my new board ,



cheers




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

Every man has to know his limitations- Dirty Harry
 12 January 2015 12:54 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



spinlondon

Posts: 5494
Joined: 10 December 2004

Did you install the air conditioners or the circuits?
If you did then you will have to test them.
 12 January 2015 05:12 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



davezawadi

Posts: 3848
Joined: 26 June 2002

Ah Paradigm, they do, do they?

Pompous rantings? Not a rant my boy, pompous, not as such! I spend quite a bit of time on these questions, and not for my own advantage either. Almost no one wnats to disagree with what I say, at least they cannot be bothered to do so here. I try to ensure that they are clear, have good English so cannot be misunderstood, and directly address the OP where possible. I try to give you the benefit of 40 years experience of the kind of problems you are dealing with, but without the pain.

If you want to be better at the job, find it easier, make more money, gain good reputation with customers etc, in fact succeed it is worth reading what I say. There are no shady short cuts, dodgy deals etc. and it works! You do the "right thing" in every situation and will immediately benefit in the pocket, simple as that.

So Ampmans little problem.
The IR can be tested easily as L+N to CPC and armour. I'm not really interested in the polarity to the AC unit, but I would like to check the Zs. Use brain, AC circuits have nice copper pipes from the external unit, so measure the CPC to the pipes! what value? Is it within the required maximum for the CPD? If Yes then you have an estimate for R2, probably a bit higher than the CPC but not bad. Double it for R1+R2. Is that number in range? If yes, then job done, if not you have to decide why it is high. Is the circuit over long (make an estimate)? Is there a fault on the circuit? Is the CPD capable of reduction say 10A in place of 16A. Is it OK now?

A little logic goes a long way here. Pop these valuse in the EIC and job done. They may be slightly high but much better than no cert at all, an no one is going to critisise you even if the building burns down tomorrow, due to a duff AC. How long did that take? 10 minutes max. Do you sleep better having done a proper job? Of course you do!

No need to be a cowboy you see, it is a lifestyle choice, and a very unwise one to take.
Pompous no, just helping as usual. First happy customer to Ampman, and his name and address available on the EIC for the next job!

-------------------------
David
BSc CEng MIET
david@ZawadiSoundAndLighting.co.uk
 12 January 2015 05:59 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Paradigm

Posts: 853
Joined: 10 September 2010

David

Yes they do actually, this is a crap medium for interactive communication, the thoughts, feelings and true meanings that are evoked with visual clues such as body language, smiles, frowns etc are not apparent, so the true meanings behind your words are not known except by you, so what we are left with is your words, which are quite often rantish, as I said, if you don't want to be heard that way, change the delivery method. As for people not disagreeing with you, mmmmmmm, I don't really know what to say but you seem to suffer from the same infliction as another David who was on here a while back, he thought he had the one true answer and everyone else was wrong.

I am going to be really honest here, I actually enjoy reading your posts, not because of your sheer brilliance but for the same reason people watch shows like celebrity big brother, I normally have one eyebrow up and my jaw open by the end, so I win either way, regardless of what you do.

Btw, have you been back to thinking atheist recently, they miss you over there for the very same reason I quoted above.

As for your second paragraph, I am doing quite alright thank you very much, been in the game for a while now, I could probably teach you a thing or two about running a business but Im not really into self aggrandisement, I leave that for others who need to fulfil their own value systems.

You say a little logic goes a long way, maybe you should start learning about logical fallacies then.

All the best

Nick

-------------------------
"be careful of what you write"

Edited: 12 January 2015 at 06:26 AM by Paradigm
 12 January 2015 08:44 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



mapj1

Posts: 9371
Joined: 22 July 2004

Ignoring personal politics, actually, there is no reason to disconnect very much more to do testing than was already if its done at the time, you had L, N and E as free ends in your hand while you did the transfer. A quick flick with the megger (L+N) realtive to E would have done. What you do if it comes back 500 ohms is another matter. (if you are confident all circuits are good, you can do a whole board at once this way from the tails)
R2 holding a meter and a bit of wandering to far points is easy enough.
I don't think any one cares what order the paper gets filled out, of even if you really choose the same furthest far point for that R2 test as the installer - its more a case of a schedule of results that indicate that some testing has occurred, and you can be happy that the ADS is more or less all, right CPC unbroken by new work.
After all, unless you have and trust the original test certs (yeah, right, like we always do) then it may possibly been wrong from day one, or damaged on day two when the decorator came in.
As it is, one might reasonably ask why you did not check as you went along...

-------------------------
regards Mike
 12 January 2015 11:52 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Zimmerman

Posts: 96
Joined: 31 July 2009

Sorry chaps but I have very little respect for certain posters here and none at all for the odd one in particular who gives out duff advice at the best of times.. People who guess at readings are a little suspect and when they advertise their company to make themselves credible it puts a smile on my face.

Ampman, you are everything I panic about when I read of people like you involved in electrical work. You seem to have little or no idea at all about inspection and testing. If I were you I would seriously go into the closest college and take the 2395 course. You really need to.

I'm not having a pop at you sir, but if you carry on like this you will get hurt, hurt someone or be found guilty of making fraudulent and false claims on you paperwork. Are you a qualified electrician? Are you with the NICEIIC or one of the other scams?

This is not your fault but a flaw in your training. Please get trained properly as a forum such as this is not the place for formal teaching.
 12 January 2015 01:06 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



davezawadi

Posts: 3848
Joined: 26 June 2002

Thanks Paradigm, it good to hear that your jaw drops, at least that part of you is not dead.

Perhaps you would like to be a bit more specific as to which regs you think I have got wrong? Then at least we can examine your understanding.

Why don't you suggest a way out of Ampmans dilemma?

As for that aetheist site and the rubbish on it, I can't be bothered. They have lost it anyway.

-------------------------
David
BSc CEng MIET
david@ZawadiSoundAndLighting.co.uk
 12 January 2015 01:22 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



AJJewsbury

Posts: 15849
Joined: 13 August 2003

But surely im not going to become reponsible for the electrical installation in this building ?

You are responsible for the work you've carried out and only the work you've carried out. Whether you issue and MWC or a EIC makes no difference to that at all. You just need to fill in the 'Extent of the installation covered by this certificate' box correctly. Your testing only need to be sufficient to be able to show that your work is correct and that you haven't adversely affected the existing installation.

(It is perhaps unfortunate that the IET decided to use the name "Electrical Installation Certificate" - as it's often incorrectly presumed to refer to the entire installation, rather than what's just been installed.)

- Andy.
 12 January 2015 01:47 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Zimmerman

Posts: 96
Joined: 31 July 2009

Actually you are required to make an assessment of the existing installation to ensure that what you are adding has no detrimental effect on the existing (Nod to Andy). Bonding needs to be assessed as if, for arguments sake, if you are on a TN-C-S system, it needs to be 17th.and if not, then a recommendation to up-grade is the least you need to do. You main bonds to water etc. should not be more than 0.05 Ohm between any extraneous-conductive-parts and exposed-conductive-part. s Again, if the circuits you have moved have socket outlets then you need to assess if they will require RCD protection. If not socket-outlet circuits they will still need to be tested IMHO.

For the circuits moved from an old DB to a new I would suggest that a EICR is made as they will need to be documented as the outgoing circuits for the new board ( the circuit details are a requirement and should be displayed in or adjacent to the new board and the details removed from the old one). Plenty of things to think about.

So we have an:
EIC for the new board covering the new tails as well as the board.
EICR for removed/replaced circuits and no minor works certificates unless you have modified a circuit.
 12 January 2015 01:51 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Paradigm

Posts: 853
Joined: 10 September 2010

Originally posted by: davezawadi

Thanks Paradigm, it good to hear that your jaw drops, at least that part of you is not dead.

Are you implying that I'm brain dead, well you should have no trouble dealing with me then should you!


Perhaps you would like to be a bit more specific as to which regs you think I have got wrong? Then at least we can examine your understanding.

Well, to throw that one back at you, if you would like to quote where I said you had any regs wrong, I will gladly try and accomodate you but I don't recall making any such claims, maybe you should re read what I wrote on this and other threads, now what was that you were saying about being brain dead?

Why don't you suggest a way out of Ampmans dilemma?

Ok, as you've asked, I read Ampmans question in the OP and the crux of it was that he wanted to know if he could install a DB on a minor works certificate, Spinlondon, Petetlm & Manxie all answered that he couldn't. What then transpired is that he really didn't want to hear that answer and the rest of the thread is about now how to carry out tests on work you have completed. These have been answered quite succintly and in a non patronising way by a few and in a condescending, pompous way by one other, I have no desire nor feel that there is any need to add anything to this.

As for that aetheist site and the rubbish on it, I can't be bothered. They have lost it anyway.

Well, you would say that wouldn't you! your argumentum ad verbosium didn't really work there did it.



I await your quote of mine about claiming you have regs wrong but if its anything like where I called you to cite a source about the 2391/2395 being an absolute for being able to do inspections, I don't expect to see anything soon.

All the best & the kindest regards

Nick

C&G 2360, don't ask its a result not an "answer"

-------------------------
"be careful of what you write"

Edited: 12 January 2015 at 01:59 PM by Paradigm
 12 January 2015 01:59 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



AJJewsbury

Posts: 15849
Joined: 13 August 2003

You main bonds to water etc. should not be more than 0.05 Ohm between any extraneous-conductive-parts and exposed-conductive-part.

Arghh! Please not that there is no requirement in BS 7671 for main bonding to have any particular resistance at all. Some earlier versions of GN 3 attempted to suggested a 0.05 Ohms as a rule-of-thumb for a quick test. If bonding was 0.05 Ohms or below you can safely presume it's OK without further ado. That's not the same as saying it's definitely a problem if it exceeded 0.05 Ohms - just that you would have to do some slightly involved checks - e.g. seeing if your reading was consistent with the length & c.s.a. of the bonding conductor. The 6th edition of GN 3 attempted to clarify this. 0.05 Ohms as a definite limit should only be taken as the resistance of the bonding clamp (the few mm between conductor and pipe) - not the entire bonding conductor.

- Andy.
 12 January 2015 02:39 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Zimmerman

Posts: 96
Joined: 31 July 2009

Andy, I see your point. I did not intend to imply that it was a max value. I should have said it was a suggested value and a good on come to that. A requirement it may not be but as good as anything I've seen.

You could try page 35 of the current GN 3 if you wish

As regarding length of rum, you'd be lucky to see that in a EICR in industry or commercial let alone in a domestic so you would have to guess at it. Therefore any value along the lines of 0.05 Ohm would be a good assumption as any. If I'm not mistaken
 12 January 2015 03:39 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Zoro

Posts: 300
Joined: 31 July 2011

Originally posted by: Ampman

Evening ,

I installed a extra 3 phase DB adjacent a exisiting one ,

I installed 2 x meters from henly blocks

I dragged some circuits out of the orginal D/B 7 installed into the new D/B . & reconnected .

Can i issue a minor works for this ?

Original install was completed in 2013

Cheers


Issuing a minor works certificate to reduce the amount of testing, is not recognised as being compliant with BS7671 requirements.

You became personally responsible for those circuits when you energised them.

If you did not want to fully certify your work, or be prepared to state why you did what you did, you should not have taken the job on.

.
 12 January 2015 04:19 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



leckie

Posts: 4329
Joined: 21 November 2008

Regarding the certificate type, page 394 of the BGB tells us that a MWC is not suitable for replacement DB's, so it's an EIC then.

I don't think you are responsible for the circuits just because you have swapped a DB. You are not required to carry out out a full EICR are you? You might, and it might be the best thing to do, but it's not a requirement. You take responsibility for what you have installed. It would be recommended to test the circuits, but that's not taking responsibility either. If you swapped a DB in a hospital would you then take responsibility for the entire installation? I wouldn't. When you tick the inspection schedule of the EIC, are you ticking for the entire installation or just the board you have fitted? Just the board. So fill in the extent of the work carried out box, that's what you are responsible for.
 12 January 2015 05:03 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



AJJewsbury

Posts: 15849
Joined: 13 August 2003

You could try page 35 of the current GN 3 if you wish

Indeed - I did say attempted to clarify Look further down under the 'Expected test results' heading.
- Andy.
 12 January 2015 05:31 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Ampman

Posts: 1264
Joined: 06 February 2006

Good Afternoon ,

Just as a random thing , changing a light fitting , & changing a socket front ,

Who on the forum go round & test every light on circuit for an earth after ?

Checks every socket on circuit for earth ?

Me i only check light / socket worked on .( Why should i go in every room or check 20 sockets on dado trunking etc .... )

Please be honest ( Whos been out today & change a socket or light ? )
 12 January 2015 07:02 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



peteTLM

Posts: 3715
Joined: 31 March 2005

Test at the light you've worked on- no problem.

Socket- while its off id check for ring continuity (if its a ring of course) and Zs once its back on.

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

Every man has to know his limitations- Dirty Harry
 12 January 2015 07:47 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Ampman

Posts: 1264
Joined: 06 February 2006

I agree Pete ,

But surely its still a disconnection & reconnection ,

Same as disconnecting a circuit & reconnecting it into a different board ?
 12 January 2015 09:45 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



leckie

Posts: 4329
Joined: 21 November 2008

Sorry Ampman, but how can disconnecting a circuit with say 12 sockets on it and reconnecting to a newly installed DB, be the same as swapping a socket faceplate?

I have given you the information direct from the regs about which certificate is to used and detailed what I think to be what you are taking responsibility for. It's written in black and white that a MWC is not permitted for a DB change, therefore you must issue an EIC. You have to attach an inspection schedule and a test schedule. The extent of the work carried out governs what is filled in on those schedules. For swapping a socket faceplate you could issue a MWC. Different form, different requirements.
IET » Wiring and the regulations » Test Cert ?

<< 1 2 3 Previous Next Last unread
Topic Tools Topic Tools
Statistics

New here?


See Also:



FuseTalk Standard Edition v3.2 - © 1999-2017 FuseTalk Inc. All rights reserved.

..