The situation is two adjacent DBs which are fed by different distribution circuits. If a final circuit is transferred from one DB to the other, is it a new circuit?
Following on from that, would the work be notifiable? Would you issue an EIC or a MEIWC?
I would use an eic, easiest way to make it clear how the circuit has been moved. That being said i would take a view on how much checking I would do on supply characteristics etc.
Then comes what is probably the crux of the matter I would hesitate but probably also want to bring rcds up to the latest standard.
That being said I replaced my failed washing machine over the weekend with one that includes a variable speed motor drive. I don't think the instructions mention it, but I know it should be on a type A rcd and so far I haven't done the required board swap.
It would be so much clearer if things like this were tied down more rigidly. Would stop people pushing perceived grey areas to the limit, probably make prosecution much simpler and easier.
The problem is that there simply aren't enough dead bodies around to justify a more legal apporach for this. Take AFDDs for example - how would even an expert witness declare with 100% confidence that a AFDD would have saved a life in the event of a fatality when all other protections were present? Similarly, there isn't much empirical evidence that type AC RCDs are actually the villains they are painted to be. The science is never settled because we are moving too quickly to gather enough historical evidence along the way, so the apporach has been more of a what if, rather than a definitive knowledge-based outcome.
Personally, I wouldn't bother with any of the formalities when simply transferring one circuit to a different board. Just do a couple of tests and sanity checks before restoring the supply and call it good.
The problem is that there simply aren't enough dead bodies around to justify a more legal apporach for this. Take AFDDs for example - how would even an expert witness declare with 100% confidence that a AFDD would have saved a life in the event of a fatality when all other protections were present? Similarly, there isn't much empirical evidence that type AC RCDs are actually the villains they are painted to be. The science is never settled because we are moving too quickly to gather enough historical evidence along the way, so the apporach has been more of a what if, rather than a definitive knowledge-based outcome.
Personally, I wouldn't bother with any of the formalities when simply transferring one circuit to a different board. Just do a couple of tests and sanity checks before restoring the supply and call it good.
Personally, I wouldn't bother with any of the formalities when simply transferring one circuit to a different board. Just do a couple of tests and sanity checks before restoring the supply and call it good.
No paperwork? It would seem foolish not to inspect and test the circuit, and record the findings.
Indeed, but if which forms those results get recorded on, and who needs to keep a copy alters the price and pain levels because it is a 'new circuit' and so notifiable, there might be an argument for recording it as some kind of reconfiguration of existing equipment , rather than a totally new installation. (after all a simple replacement of the submain cable would probably be minor.)
But, whatever it gets recorded as, there are some design dragons to avoid, as presumably there were two boards and two sub-mains for a reason, rather than one big one, so some thought about the new load balance and capacity of the sub mains is required, also Zs will change, PSSC will change and maybe VD as well. None of which is especially difficult, but the new conditions should be considered and checked against discrimination with upstream breaker operating times and so on.
Mike.
We're about to take you to the IET registration website. Don't worry though, you'll be sent straight back to the community after completing the registration.
Continue to the IET registration site
