EICR - main earth and neutral

But split con is perfectly OK consumer side , in a route that does not need an SWA-like armour, like over the surface or in metal trunk -  and not being steel a damn sight easier to deal with than SWA in terms of bend radii, general flexibility and glanding.

A network operator (and the law is not clear if a BNO is included in that, but let us assume they are not) is allowed to consider neutral and earth to be at the same potential, the consumer is not. So for a DNO, split con has a surrounding earthed armour, while the other side of the meter it does not.

The situation is clearer with earthed concentric - all cores are bare, rather than the insulated neutral ones, so then it is clearer it is non ECSQR complaint consumer side, because of the PEN. That is not a BS7671 issue though so in far off lands that use BS7671 as a wiring standard but permit PEN consumer connections, I suppose earthed concentric may be used.

Mike.

But split con is perfectly OK consumer side , in a route that does not need an SWA-like armour, like over the surface or in metal trunk -  and not being steel a damn sight easier to deal with than SWA in terms of bend radii, general flexibility and glanding.

A network operator (and the law is not clear if a BNO is included in that, but let us assume they are not) is allowed to consider neutral and earth to be at the same potential, the consumer is not. So for a DNO, split con has a surrounding earthed armour, while the other side of the meter it does not.

The situation is clearer with earthed concentric - all cores are bare, rather than the insulated neutral ones, so then it is clearer it is non ECSQR complaint consumer side, because of the PEN. That is not a BS7671 issue though so in far off lands that use BS7671 as a wiring standard but permit PEN consumer connections, I suppose earthed concentric may be used.

Mike.