Wago connectors in plaster

[JohnW2]

You posted that the OP could leave existing sockets and spur off them (Addition)......

I did. I forgot that was the context of the most recent exchanges Does that mean that if the existing socket was turned into a blank plate, with joints behind it feeding athe socket in a slightly different position,you would not say that an 'RCD upgrade' was required?

However, as I implied, if you feel that adding an additional socket triggers the need for an RCD upgrade, then I would expect you to think that adding a new circuit (with new OPD in CU) triggers the need for a 'CU upgrade'. Is that the case?

 

[markyd1]

Maybe it is, but BS7671 doesn't make a distinction (between the types of certificate) based on that phrase. do they actually define what they mean by it? In fact, what BS7671 says about MEIWCs is:

... which appears to cover a lot more things than just "like-for-like" replacements, doesn't it?

More interesting, does any of this guidance on their website say that adding a socket to a circuit triggers a requirement to upgrade a Type AC RCD to a Type A one?

Kind Regards, John

Maybe it is, but BS7671 doesn't make a distinction (between the types of certificate) based on that phrase. do they actually define what they mean by it? In fact, what BS7671 says about MEIWCs is:

... which appears to cover a lot more things than just "like-for-like" replacements, doesn't it?

More interesting, does any of this guidance on their website say that adding a socket to a circuit triggers a requirement to upgrade a Type AC RCD to a Type A one?

Kind Regards, John

 

[markyd1]

I did. I forgot that was the context of the most recent exchanges Does that mean that if the existing socket was turned into a blank plate, with joints behind it feeding athe socket in a slightly different position,you would not say that an 'RCD upgrade' was required?

However, as I implied, if you feel that adding an additional socket triggers the need for an RCD upgrade, then I would expect you to think that adding a new circuit (with new OPD in CU) triggers the need for a 'CU upgrade'. Is that the case?

Can additional circuits be added onto an existing plastic style consumer unit?​

Yes, providing the consumer unit is in good condition. However, do check for the consumer unit for cracks, or any other sign of damage, such as scorching, as it may need replacing

 

[markyd1]

I did. I forgot that was the context of the most recent exchanges Does that mean that if the existing socket was turned into a blank plate, with joints behind it feeding athe socket in a slightly different position,you would not say that an 'RCD upgrade' was required?

It doesn't matter if its a slightly different position or 20ft away....Addition so yes Type A rcd

 

[ebee]

Where do you think that an addition to existing circuit requires an update? If you extend to a new socket position and blank off the old position then you have merely altered where it is sited. If you add a spur to have a socket at your new site on the wall but still leave the existing in place then yes you have added. But in either position the potential danger by a AC RCD instead of a new fangled type A RCD is purely the same consideration "Do I consider it Satisfactory or not?". If it`s pretty much the same as it has been since the year dot then you will probably feel that leaving the Type AC in place is reasonable. However, if you realise that you have added loads of electronics, even slowly over a long period, you might reasonably decide "Oh better put a type A in place".

It is called, using sound engineering judgement. It is not called "Pedantically & slavishly following what I think the rules might mean I must do"

 

[ebee]

I could not say, without further information, if in you house it is really a must do or need not. In either event it is worthy of consideration I agree.

Anyway, Merry Xmas everybody. Whoops, I mean Happy Easter everybody (or did that actually start on good old Friday?)

 

[JohnW2]

It is called, using sound engineering judgement. It is not called "Pedantically & slavishly following what I think the rules might mean I must do"

Very much so. One can, indeed, call it "using sound engineering judgement" - or, alternatively "using (electrical) common sense".

Ironically, he has accused me of pedantry, and has still not told me what in the regulations (rather than other third-party opinions) supports his assertions.

Kind Regards, John

 

[ebee]

Agreed John

How many times do we come across "Electricians" who state "This does not comply because it is not in the On Site Guide".
They do not seem to understand, as one great man told us - The OSG is a recipe book, it is not the bible - I would just add to that - BS7671 (IET Wiring Regs) IS THE BIBLE, in so far as we are concerned.


The OSG is a guide, a pretty good guide, to give us a ready, standardised way of achieving a Regs compliant result in a reasonably economic way. Of course there are different ways we can achieve our results by using our knowledge (Sound Engineering Judgement, if you like) and still be Regs compliant.

Of course there is not really a legal compulsion to obey BS7671, it is not statute law and you are free to do otherwise providing you achieve a safe working design. It often is governed by contract law though and you would really be very qualified an extremely experienced to wander away from BS7671 in reality. So sensibly we treat it as if it is actually the law to comply at all times. In fact the HSE state that using BS7671 means we are likely to achieve all legal requirements.

Note - although BS7671 isnot law in itself, recent rental legislation (which is law) does refer to using one particular edition of BS7671 as to be the reference for testing installations are safe.