EICR C3 mixed manufacturer breakers

I avoid C3's like the plague

Personally this always gets a C1 from me for the simple reason that PFC will always be greater than zero kA and the only rating I can apply to the enclosures and devices is zero kA

I'm a little puzzled... for me:


C1 = actual danger present now (with no additional faults) - e.g. bare line conductors, easily touched.

C2 = danger would be present if a single fault ocured in the future - e.g. broken c.p.c. or Zs too high.

C3 = danger would be present if two faults occurred (and the current regulations provide some protection under those circumstances) - e.g. lack of additional protection.

no code (old code 4) for things that although don't comply with the current regulations pose no additional hazard to users of the installation - e.g. old (or incorrect) core colour codes.


and then following the same weightings as it were for hazards other than shock. So say for example, lack of overload protection but no evidence that anything actually has ever been overloaded might be a C2, evidence that insulation had been melting a C1.


So for me a CU with an inadequate fault breaking capacity would be perfectly safe under the current conditions - any problems would only arise on the future occurance of a future fault - so that couldn't be higher than a C2 for me.


Likewise C3 seem ideal to me for things like lack of 30mA RCD protection to internal sockets etc.


  - Andy.

I avoid C3's like the plague

Personally this always gets a C1 from me for the simple reason that PFC will always be greater than zero kA and the only rating I can apply to the enclosures and devices is zero kA

I'm a little puzzled... for me:


C1 = actual danger present now (with no additional faults) - e.g. bare line conductors, easily touched.

C2 = danger would be present if a single fault ocured in the future - e.g. broken c.p.c. or Zs too high.

C3 = danger would be present if two faults occurred (and the current regulations provide some protection under those circumstances) - e.g. lack of additional protection.

no code (old code 4) for things that although don't comply with the current regulations pose no additional hazard to users of the installation - e.g. old (or incorrect) core colour codes.


and then following the same weightings as it were for hazards other than shock. So say for example, lack of overload protection but no evidence that anything actually has ever been overloaded might be a C2, evidence that insulation had been melting a C1.


So for me a CU with an inadequate fault breaking capacity would be perfectly safe under the current conditions - any problems would only arise on the future occurance of a future fault - so that couldn't be higher than a C2 for me.


Likewise C3 seem ideal to me for things like lack of 30mA RCD protection to internal sockets etc.


  - Andy.