This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

RCBO's and IR testing

I have had a problem with 5 off Wylex RCBO's. These were bought by a houseowner and fitted by him as there was no RCD protection for some circuits requiring such. These Wylex RCBO's have a warning hidden on the body that connections should be disconnected for Insulation Testing ..........too late the man cried!. For expediency and availability, I have redesigned the arrangement to have MCB's with a common RCBO as a M.S..

I have been in contact with Wylex technical help, who say that they should have been OK to withstand 250V IR testing as in this case, but to return them to the dealer. Anyone else have had similar problems?


Jaymack .
Parents
  • I think that there is a serious problem lying hidden here. I do not like disconnecting anything for a periodic inspection, and there is a good case that anything that fails is unsuitable for further service anyway, because how do you know that it does not have an insulation fault inside which could cause a fire? The whole point of a 500 V test is that if two connections could spark between them the test will fail, and if passed the normal mains voltage will not form an arc. Perhaps we are told we need AFDDs because we cannot carry out an insulation test at 500 V? It is fairly easy to design electronics which will not be damaged by a range of mains connected voltages, from several kV transients to the insulation tester. The fact that it seems that these products cannot withstand 500V without damage says that they are not satisfactory or safe for use in the real mains system! It may well be that some items may show low IR test readings (the humble neon indicator for example) but that is something we can all cope with perfectly well. Total failure is completely unacceptable, particularly if that failure is not completely fire proof and safe. There is an IEC document on mains transient capability although I have forgotten what it is called or the number. Clearly the manufacturing standard is faulty in its specification, which should include both 500V DC test and transient resistance.



Reply
  • I think that there is a serious problem lying hidden here. I do not like disconnecting anything for a periodic inspection, and there is a good case that anything that fails is unsuitable for further service anyway, because how do you know that it does not have an insulation fault inside which could cause a fire? The whole point of a 500 V test is that if two connections could spark between them the test will fail, and if passed the normal mains voltage will not form an arc. Perhaps we are told we need AFDDs because we cannot carry out an insulation test at 500 V? It is fairly easy to design electronics which will not be damaged by a range of mains connected voltages, from several kV transients to the insulation tester. The fact that it seems that these products cannot withstand 500V without damage says that they are not satisfactory or safe for use in the real mains system! It may well be that some items may show low IR test readings (the humble neon indicator for example) but that is something we can all cope with perfectly well. Total failure is completely unacceptable, particularly if that failure is not completely fire proof and safe. There is an IEC document on mains transient capability although I have forgotten what it is called or the number. Clearly the manufacturing standard is faulty in its specification, which should include both 500V DC test and transient resistance.



Children
No Data