Rules and Guidelines
Want to participate in the discussions? Please read our Community Rules and Guidelines. Need some help? Visit Support and Answers.

  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 38 replies
  • Subscribers 32 subscribers
  • Views 8208 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in
This discussion is locked.
You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

EICR C3 mixed manufacturer breakers

Martyn
I know this will have been discussed in the past but we are on Amd 1 of the 18th now so I thought I would renew it.


The Best practice guides list mixed manufacturer breakers in a consumer unit or distribution board as a C3.


As far as I am aware Bs7671 does not have a Reg on it beyond manufacturers instructions and given EICR's are based on this standard perhaps it is justified on that basis.


Most on here will be familiar with the 16kA 'rule' in BSEN61439 Annex ZB or its predecessor BSEN60439 Annex ZA


I avoid C3's like the plague because they give all the wrong signals to a client and clearly by definition are for things which are a breach of the regs, I'm not too keen on the insurance risk of a C3 either.


My question here would be what fault rating can one apply to an enclosure where there are mixed breakers given a manufacturer will only have certified their equipment with their devices?


Enjoy!


Martyn
Parents
  • 0
    Um, I am rather confused by the reply, what are the two "standards"? EN60908 says nothing about all items selected must come from a single manufacturer, and in some cases cannot. A code 1 specifically says the installation is immediately dangerous to users. How is a CPD failure by disintegration immediately dangerous to anyone, it breaks the circuit by definition. It may cause other problems but you are now in "what if" territory, and you need to give an example of this happening under the discussed conditions. I am not getting at you personally, but EICRs depend on accurate assessment of risks, just like an MOT. It is part of the profession to do this without fear or favour, and I would uphold this requirement probably above all others. You and I both know that the EICR is often not done properly, and is often used as a pressure for more work. For landlords it is particularly important that it is both fair and accurate. That is why it should be the same for all sectors of rented property. The danger of a different make of equipment being used is a million miles from the real danger areas, like lack of Earth or bare wires.
Reply
  • 0
    Um, I am rather confused by the reply, what are the two "standards"? EN60908 says nothing about all items selected must come from a single manufacturer, and in some cases cannot. A code 1 specifically says the installation is immediately dangerous to users. How is a CPD failure by disintegration immediately dangerous to anyone, it breaks the circuit by definition. It may cause other problems but you are now in "what if" territory, and you need to give an example of this happening under the discussed conditions. I am not getting at you personally, but EICRs depend on accurate assessment of risks, just like an MOT. It is part of the profession to do this without fear or favour, and I would uphold this requirement probably above all others. You and I both know that the EICR is often not done properly, and is often used as a pressure for more work. For landlords it is particularly important that it is both fair and accurate. That is why it should be the same for all sectors of rented property. The danger of a different make of equipment being used is a million miles from the real danger areas, like lack of Earth or bare wires.
Children
No Data

Join us to get the best from IET EngX.

Joining EngX lets you personalise your experience so you stay up to date on the topics that interest you, plus you’ll be able to make connections who are looking to collaborate, exchange ideas and more.

Join us Not now

Community Rules & Guidelines