Adding socket to Consumer Unit - notifiable?

[securespark]

Some you can have sex with.

fulfilled my needs and desires

I've heard of electric porn but this is getting out of hand now.

 

[securespark]

Ban, is Andy implying that running a socket off a ring final at the board does not need notifying, but putting it on its own MCB does?

 

[JohnW2]

Ban, is Andy implying that running a socket off a ring final at the board does not need notifying, but putting it on its own MCB does?

Exactly - as I wrote .... [referring to putting the socket on its own (previously unused) MCB]

I presume you mean '(physically) existing but unused'? I think the point is that it is not (if done properly) against any regulations, nor against any laws, but the law does require notification, which it wouldn't if the new socket were connected to an existing MCB (even a 32A one) which was already supplying a ring or radial circuit.

Kind Regards, John

 

[PBC_1966]

Then you are a liar, and a cheat, and you should try to get a new moral compass because yours is broken.

Who said anything about lying? Statng that you had not carried out notifiable work when you know that you had would be lying. Simply not notifying notifiable work is not lying, it's merely failing to comply with the regulations.

A consumer unit is a thing which contains both a main switch and the fuses or breakers.

So a Distribution Board is not a consumer unit, and a Main Switch is not a consumer unit.

I have heard the idea mused that you could wire your house without a consumer unit, if you wanted to avoid the rules.

You are forgetting the vitally important type approval.

And where is the definition to be found? Do the Building Regulations either define a consumer unit directly or refer to a definition of such elsewhere? No. So it's another issue which could be open to argument.

I think I'll spur my new socket off the 32A ring and be done with it.

Speaking realistically, how likely is it that the ring MCB will trip? Unless there's a fault which keeps tripping it or you have so much load on the ring regularly that it keeps tripping (which in either case is something which should be addressed), it's likely a pretty rare occurrence. I'd wager that in most homes power is lost due to outside faults on the network far more often than a ring MCB trips, which obviously would be just as much of a problem on a dedicated circuit.

 

[paulg1]

Speaking realistically, how likely is it that the ring MCB will trip?

Well I've only been in the house 6 months, but so far it's tripped a grand total of 0 times...

 

[DetlefSchmitz]

Let's see: Hand over a couple of hundred pounds to get a piece of worthless paper from the local authority (or more likely to argue about whether they would issue it), or keep the money and actually have enough to pay the food and heating bills at the end of the month. I'm quite happy that when in England my choice was quite moral and decent, thank you.

Then you are a liar, and a cheat, and you should try to get a new moral compass because yours is broken.

PBC: I suggest you ask BAS whether he has ever performed any notifiable electrical work in his own home/garden without notifying.

 

[stillp]

A consumer unit is a thing which contains both a main switch and the fuses or breakers.

So a Distribution Board is not a consumer unit, and a Main Switch is not a consumer unit.

I have heard the idea mused that you could wire your house without a consumer unit, if you wanted to avoid the rules.

From BS EN 61439-3:2012:

3.1.101
distribution board intended to be operated by ordinary persons
DBO
ASSEMBLY used to distribute electrical energy in domestic (household) applications and other
places where operation is intended by ordinary persons
Note 1 to entry Switching operations and replacing fuse-links are examples of operations intended to be carried
out by normal persons.
3.1.102
type A DBO
DBO designed to accept single pole devices
Note 1 to entry In the UK, a type A DBO used principally for domestic (household) installations and having a
maximum incoming unit rating of 100 A and a maximum outgoing circuit rating of 63 A, is known as a "consumer
unit" or "customer distribution board".

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I might have the whim to install a consumer unit, but instead, install some other items that were not consumer units and were therefore not notifiable, but which, together, fulfilled my needs and desires to the same extent.

Describe what these items would be, where they would be in the installation, and what function they would perform.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

PBC: I suggest you ask BAS whether he has ever performed any notifiable electrical work in his own home/garden without notifying.

I suggest you consider the attitude he displays.

 

[JohnW2]

3.1.101 .... distribution board intended to be operated by ordinary persons
DBO ASSEMBLY used to distribute electrical energy in domestic (household) applications and other places where operation is intended by ordinary persons

Is "ASSEMBLY" defined in the Standard in such a way as to require the presence of certain components (e.g. switches, protective devices)? If not, that definition above could obviously include things (e.g. an enclosure containing a number of Henley' blocks) which most of us would probably not regard as a DB.

3.1.102 type A DBO DBO designed to accept single pole devices
Note 1 to entry In the UK, a type A DBO used principally for domestic (household) installations and having a maximum incoming unit rating of 100 A and a maximum outgoing circuit rating of 63 A, is known as a "consumer unit" or "customer distribution board".

Interesting. What is a 'device' as far as the Standard is concerned? All CUs have 2-pole switches and/or 2-pole RCDs, and I didn't realise that they "were not designed" to take 2-pole MCBs or RCBOs.

Kind Regards, John

 

[stillp]

There are also Type B DBOs, that are designed for two-pole devices.

It is not really practicable to answer your other questions without a long interpretation of IEC 61439-1 and -3. Your local library should have access to the BS ENs.

 

[JohnW2]

There are also Type B DBOs, that are designed for two-pole devices.

Fair enough, but I can but presume there is something within the totality of the Standard which does not render Type A ones non-compliant with the Standard if they contain, say, 2-pole switches and/or RCDs (which all recent/current domestic CUs do contain).

It is not really practicable to answer your other questions without a long interpretation of IEC 61439-1 and -3. Your local library should have access to the BS ENs.

Again, fair enough, but I don't really have the time to pursue that! I thought there might be simple answers which you might be able to provide!

It just seems to me that if BS7671 is to contain regulations which apply to "Consumer Units", and if the Building Regulations are to contain (notification) requirements which apply to "Consumer Units", then it really should be incumbent on the authors of both of those documents to provide very clear and easy-to-understand definitions of what they mean by "Consumer Unit" in relation to their requirements - just as, for example, the authors of BS7671 should also provide a clear definition of "non-combustible" and the authors of the Building Regulations should also provide a clear definition of "a new circuit".

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnD]

in the absence of an established definition, you would use the "reasonable man" test.

So "new" does not mean "altered".

 

[ban-all-sheds]

It just seems to me that if BS7671 is to contain regulations which apply to "Consumer Units", and if the Building Regulations are to contain (notification) requirements which apply to "Consumer Units", then it really should be incumbent on the authors of both of those documents to provide very clear and easy-to-understand definitions of what they mean by "Consumer Unit" in relation to their requirements

Does not BS EN 61439-3 define the term?

And do you intend to claim that a reasonable person, doing electrical work, would not know if what he had installed was a CU?

 

[JohnW2]

in the absence of an established definition, you would use the "reasonable man" test. So "new" does not mean "altered".

I fear its far from being as simple as that. The "reasonable man" might well say that a circuit was 'new' if one had replaced every component (OPD, cables and accessories) of a pre-existing circuit - but many (or most) people would probably regard that as non-notifiable. Similarly if a house-wide multi-socket circuit was added to what started as one socket (or even JB) connected by a few inches of cable to an OPD in a CU. Conversely, he might well say that a circuit was 'not new' just because the OPD had been changed to one of a different (but appropriate) rating - but at least some would say that constitutes creation of a 'new circuit'.

Kind Regards, John