RCD socket outlet.

 

Posted by Alcomax on Nov 29, 2019 8:46 pm

John Peckham:

Andy


Thanks for the cue? Sockets with an integral RCD to BS7288 are not regognised in BS 7671, in fact they are excluded as BS 7671 only permis 3 devices for Additional Protection for use by ordinary persons.


SRCD sockets and FCU to BS 7288 can only be used where they have upstream RCD protection. I know that sparkles may think that is daft, wish it were not true or may disagree with me. If so I would commend they read BS 7288: 2016.


i would suggest Dave you fit an RCBO in the board, if it will not take one then fit an external RCD in an enclosure next to the board.

Us sparkles do read BS7671. I have no particular inclination to read BS7288. BS7671 does have mistakes and the omission of SRCDs is one of them this time round. As far as I am aware JPEL/64 have acknowledged the error and this will be addressed in a future amendment, probably March 2022.  So carry on fitting them. If you feel uncomfortable about the BS7671 typo, then you can always record it as a departure. Though, IMO, that is a bit pedantic for domestic works, but perhaps for non-dom, where there is an explicit contract to comply with BS7671:2018, it is maybe a good idea to record as a departure. You will still likely get a raised eyebrow from the more technically minded clients when trying to explain the reason for stating a departure.

 

John Peckham:

Alcomax


The omission of SRCDs I do not  think a mistake by JPEL it is a deliberate decision otherwise it would have been included in the recent corigendum.


You say you would fit these as a departure from BS 7671. A departure is a deliberate act and must be no less safe than the provisions of BS 7671.Have a look at the extract below from BS 7288:2016 and after careful reading tell me if you think they are suitable as a stand alone device for Additional Protection?


This British Standard applies to residual current-operated devices (RCD)

incorporated in, or specifically intended for use with, single pole and neutral

and single pole and switched neutral and double pole socket-outlets, with

provision of earthing of the socket-outlet for household and similar uses (SRCD:

socket-outlet residual current devices). SRCDs, according to this standard, are

intended to be used in single phase systems such as phase to neutral. SRCDs are

only intended to provide supplementary protection downstream of the SRCD.

SRCDs are intended for use in circuits where the fault protection and additional

protection are already assured upstream of the SRCD.

Nice try.


Just because something was deliberate does not indemnify it from becoming a mistake. It may have been well intentioned, but it may be found later to have some unintended consequences.

An omission is a mistake if it is later found to have adverse consequences .  In this instance the correction can wait until the next amendment as it is obvious that Electricians working to BS7671 can apply the application of RCDs correctly.

BS7288 is not some umbrella organisation over and above BS7671.

BS7288 relates to an accessory.

The scaremongering, with respect to SRCDs, is not helpful.

Not everyone engaged in electrical installation is a trade or business. For those that do so for a living, there is a wide range of experience. Some keep up to date and some do not, with plenty in between. Of course there is also an army of DIYers. These, in particular, are  more likely to have a go at changing accessories as replacement.

RCD application for "what is plugged into a 13 amp socket" is more widely appreciated than a specific type of  RCD  protecting buried cables, for example.

Somewhere along the line it has been decided to firm up BS7288 to reflect that an accessory [ an SRCD ] only provides protection downstream of the accessory-i.e. what is plugged in to it.

That is likely reflecting some erroneously thinking fitting an RCD socket as a replacement for an ordinary 13 amp socket is, by some means, bringing the whole circuit up to the later versions of BS7671. That is bananas thinking maybe, but someone, somewhere on some Committee thinks that is sufficient risk for the limitation of protection afforded of SRCD sockets to be spelled out in black and white in BS7288. Maybe the manufacturers of SRCDs feel they need to protect their liability also; these things are freely available to all to buy and fit them. That "risky feeling" has been transposed to BS7671  and now the unintended consequence is some espousing these safety devices are in some way not permitted to be used. Carry on fitting them.


For installation works  [ new circuit or adding to circuit ] , the application of a 30mA RCD needs to be considered. For those with sufficient up to date experience, that is no problem. You decide if you fit an SRCD socket or not. You are fully aware of the requirement or not to provide any RCD protection upstream of your new works, or downstream  for that matter.

So, if you had a surface wired 13 amp socket circuit in a domestic that is an existing circuit and it has no RCD  and has ordinary 13 amp socket outlet accessories, there is nothing wrong with continuing the surface wiring to provide an SRCD socket . There is "no departure". Your new wiring is surface, your socket that you have provided has RCD protection for what is plugged into it and everything is fine in BS7671 land. You could also have a new circuit, surfaced wired, to an SRCD socket. Happy days.


Any "departure" you decide to declare is pedantry, but may be more applicable in a contractual situation where some suit, in an attempt to justify there exorbitant fee, may later split hairs as a means to extracting more money out of the "undeserving" Sparkles. If you are to go down that route, you may require some further explanation that it is purely a notional "departure" as your aim is to have reasonable provision for safety for your client and your own cheeks.  Noting it as a departure is not what I would do, as in any event, you would have agreed in advance how your were going to undertake the works and apply the standard. That would be the place to highlight the omission in BS7671, as it is not really a departure.


This is all academic, as in a couple of years they will be re-listed in BS7671 with perhaps some new text underling the limit of their application. All this will then be what it is; huff and bluster.



 

 

Posted by Alcomax on Nov 29, 2019 8:46 pm

John Peckham:

Andy


Thanks for the cue? Sockets with an integral RCD to BS7288 are not regognised in BS 7671, in fact they are excluded as BS 7671 only permis 3 devices for Additional Protection for use by ordinary persons.


SRCD sockets and FCU to BS 7288 can only be used where they have upstream RCD protection. I know that sparkles may think that is daft, wish it were not true or may disagree with me. If so I would commend they read BS 7288: 2016.


i would suggest Dave you fit an RCBO in the board, if it will not take one then fit an external RCD in an enclosure next to the board.

Us sparkles do read BS7671. I have no particular inclination to read BS7288. BS7671 does have mistakes and the omission of SRCDs is one of them this time round. As far as I am aware JPEL/64 have acknowledged the error and this will be addressed in a future amendment, probably March 2022.  So carry on fitting them. If you feel uncomfortable about the BS7671 typo, then you can always record it as a departure. Though, IMO, that is a bit pedantic for domestic works, but perhaps for non-dom, where there is an explicit contract to comply with BS7671:2018, it is maybe a good idea to record as a departure. You will still likely get a raised eyebrow from the more technically minded clients when trying to explain the reason for stating a departure.

 

John Peckham:

Alcomax


The omission of SRCDs I do not  think a mistake by JPEL it is a deliberate decision otherwise it would have been included in the recent corigendum.


You say you would fit these as a departure from BS 7671. A departure is a deliberate act and must be no less safe than the provisions of BS 7671.Have a look at the extract below from BS 7288:2016 and after careful reading tell me if you think they are suitable as a stand alone device for Additional Protection?


This British Standard applies to residual current-operated devices (RCD)

incorporated in, or specifically intended for use with, single pole and neutral

and single pole and switched neutral and double pole socket-outlets, with

provision of earthing of the socket-outlet for household and similar uses (SRCD:

socket-outlet residual current devices). SRCDs, according to this standard, are

intended to be used in single phase systems such as phase to neutral. SRCDs are

only intended to provide supplementary protection downstream of the SRCD.

SRCDs are intended for use in circuits where the fault protection and additional

protection are already assured upstream of the SRCD.

Nice try.


Just because something was deliberate does not indemnify it from becoming a mistake. It may have been well intentioned, but it may be found later to have some unintended consequences.

An omission is a mistake if it is later found to have adverse consequences .  In this instance the correction can wait until the next amendment as it is obvious that Electricians working to BS7671 can apply the application of RCDs correctly.

BS7288 is not some umbrella organisation over and above BS7671.

BS7288 relates to an accessory.

The scaremongering, with respect to SRCDs, is not helpful.

Not everyone engaged in electrical installation is a trade or business. For those that do so for a living, there is a wide range of experience. Some keep up to date and some do not, with plenty in between. Of course there is also an army of DIYers. These, in particular, are  more likely to have a go at changing accessories as replacement.

RCD application for "what is plugged into a 13 amp socket" is more widely appreciated than a specific type of  RCD  protecting buried cables, for example.

Somewhere along the line it has been decided to firm up BS7288 to reflect that an accessory [ an SRCD ] only provides protection downstream of the accessory-i.e. what is plugged in to it.

That is likely reflecting some erroneously thinking fitting an RCD socket as a replacement for an ordinary 13 amp socket is, by some means, bringing the whole circuit up to the later versions of BS7671. That is bananas thinking maybe, but someone, somewhere on some Committee thinks that is sufficient risk for the limitation of protection afforded of SRCD sockets to be spelled out in black and white in BS7288. Maybe the manufacturers of SRCDs feel they need to protect their liability also; these things are freely available to all to buy and fit them. That "risky feeling" has been transposed to BS7671  and now the unintended consequence is some espousing these safety devices are in some way not permitted to be used. Carry on fitting them.


For installation works  [ new circuit or adding to circuit ] , the application of a 30mA RCD needs to be considered. For those with sufficient up to date experience, that is no problem. You decide if you fit an SRCD socket or not. You are fully aware of the requirement or not to provide any RCD protection upstream of your new works, or downstream  for that matter.

So, if you had a surface wired 13 amp socket circuit in a domestic that is an existing circuit and it has no RCD  and has ordinary 13 amp socket outlet accessories, there is nothing wrong with continuing the surface wiring to provide an SRCD socket . There is "no departure". Your new wiring is surface, your socket that you have provided has RCD protection for what is plugged into it and everything is fine in BS7671 land. You could also have a new circuit, surfaced wired, to an SRCD socket. Happy days.


Any "departure" you decide to declare is pedantry, but may be more applicable in a contractual situation where some suit, in an attempt to justify there exorbitant fee, may later split hairs as a means to extracting more money out of the "undeserving" Sparkles. If you are to go down that route, you may require some further explanation that it is purely a notional "departure" as your aim is to have reasonable provision for safety for your client and your own cheeks.  Noting it as a departure is not what I would do, as in any event, you would have agreed in advance how your were going to undertake the works and apply the standard. That would be the place to highlight the omission in BS7671, as it is not really a departure.


This is all academic, as in a couple of years they will be re-listed in BS7671 with perhaps some new text underling the limit of their application. All this will then be what it is; huff and bluster.