This discussion is locked.
You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

AFDDs AMD 2

In response to the suggestion of separate threads for individual changes to the 18th I thought I would start this one for AFDDs.


So what are the forum members views on the new requirement for AFDDs?


What is the safety case for the change? E.g impact on public safety, fires etc.Evidence?


What is the impact on the installation industry? How easy to fit, cost advantages disadvantages etc?


Will you feedback to the BSI on the changes and what will you say?


  • Sparkingchip:
    mapj1:

    e797ab13a47df3e4b6b958ca09281f4b-original-eatonstackcu.jpg


     




    It only has three AFDD in it.


    All the MCBs need to be for lighting circuits or rated in excess of 32 amps.


    Andy B.






    The longest Eaton AFDD busbar is a four way and assuming you want a couple or more of no-AFDD ways for the lighting and a shower, I cannot see how it can be done using their products without using a multi row consumer unit, which I don’t have an issue with, but they are big.


    Siemens are going to have way more than 40% of the market.


     Andy B.


  • Wylex and Crabtree (same company) make a single module MCB , RCD and AFDD all n one unit. So if you have a Wylex board just remove an MCB and pop in the combined AFDD,simples. Only £120 plus VAT a go!
  • John Peckham:

    Wylex and Crabtree (same company) make a single module MCB , RCD and AFDD all n one unit. So if you have a Wylex board just remove an MCB and pop in the combined AFDD,simples. Only £120 plus VAT a go!




    Quite.


    Simens aka Wylex and Crabtree are going to end up with more than 40% of the market share and this surely should result in a Competition and Marketing Authority investigation to see if they are pushing the amendment to the regulations.


  • Sparkingchip:
    John Peckham:

    Wylex and Crabtree (same company) make a single module MCB , RCD and AFDD all n one unit. So if you have a Wylex board just remove an MCB and pop in the combined AFDD,simples. Only £120 plus VAT a go!




    Quite.


    Simens aka Wylex and Crabtree are going to end up with more than 40% of the market share and this surely should result in a Competition and Marketing Authority investigation to see if they are pushing the amendment to the regulations.




    Well, if they capture 99% of the market by virtue of squeezing all that is necessary into an 18 mm module, good luck to them! It does make me wonder, however, why Eaton, who are not exactly newcomers, find the need to take up 54 mm.


  • And it’s not a simple click out, in in upgrade to add RCBOs or AFDD to an older Wylex and Crabtree consumer units.


    The new Wylex RCBOs and AFDD don’t fit onto the comb busbar as they don’t have the slot behind the terminal screw, only the hole for a pin busbar.


    New Crabtree devices look like they should fit older consumer units, but don’t as they are not compatible. I replaced an entire Crabtree consumer unit because someone fitted a new split load RCD to replace an older one and the busbar overheated melting the shroud, the manufacturer said they should not have fitted the new device in the older CU.


    Andy Betteridge
  • Chris, if Siemens are lobbying for the inclusion of this regulation and end tup with 99% of the entire consumer unit sales in the UK it really should be subject to very through investigation by the CMA.


    Andy B.
  • Wylex MCB with slot for comb busbar




  • Wylex AFDD and RCBO without a comb busbar slot


    I am already having issues adding RCD protection to existing Wylex consumer units, because the current RCBOs will not fit onto a comb busbar.


    Andy Betteridge
  • Just to add, the incompatibility of new and older Wylex devices and comb busbars is clear and evident.


    However the incompatibility of new and older Crabtree devices and the plug-in busbars is not so apparent, resulting in devices being installed onto busbars resulting in arcing and heat damage resulting in a potential fire risk.


    Just what this regulation is supposed to prevent!


    Andy Betteridge
  • Folks, we have forgotten sight as to why these changes have come about.

    Once our minds acclimatize to the fact that these devices and the regulations governing (mandating even?) their installation have absolutely nothing to do with enhanced electrical safety for the consumer, then what are we left with that is driving this demand? It certainly isn't the consumer.

    Sometimes, the best thing in these instances is to do nothing and to carry on as before. I certainly shall not be recommending the fitting of these devices until there is inscrutible empirical evidence that they actually do what it says on the tin, and whilst we at it, just where is that evidence which is driving this new requirement?

    Where is it? And what is it? Where are the facts? the numbers? The numbers of negative incidences arising as a consequence of not having them fitted now?

    The stark absence of such information only serves to reinforce my belief that the change is purely profit-driven and has absolutely b***** all to do with stopping fire/saving lives etc.

    Your mileages may vary.