when is a ring main not a ring main

[Taylortwocities]

I think it is time for a photo of this "C50" device.

 

[EFLImpudence]

 

[EFLImpudence]

 

[JohnW2]

<pic of Crabtree C50 device & details>

How very very confusing!!

It seems that "C50" was just the name of the DB, and the associated range of components! It seems that, as he originally said, the OP's device is probably a 30A Type C 30mA RCBO. Why on earth do they put "RCCB" on the device when the description clearly indicates that it is an RCBO? ... and wouldn't one expect the 30A In to be more clearly/explicitly indicated than just by the "30" (not even 30A) on the lever? Was olden-day Crabtree always this confusing?!

Kind Regards, John

 

[securespark]

C50 does not refer to the amperage rating or type rating:

Crabtree C50 is a bit like saying Wylex NH or Wylex NN.

https://www.google.co.uk/?gws_rd=ssl#q=crabtree+c50

Sorry!!

What is it I always do and never learn from? Yup, posting a reply without reading the whole Fred...

 

[JohnW2]

C50 does not refer to the amperage rating or type rating: Crabtree C50 is a bit like saying Wylex NH or Wylex NN.

Indeed so - as I said

The combination of that, the fact than an RCBO is marked 'RCCB' and the fact that the 'MCB' part's In is not clearly indicated seem to be pretty ridiculous to me - and 'asking for trouble/confusion'!

Kind Regards, John

 

[securespark]

Yeah, the components in the range are a PITA to identify.

 

[EFLImpudence]

It seems that "C50" was just the name of the DB,

C for Crabtree ???

Why on earth do they put "RCCB" on the device when the description clearly indicates that it is an RCBO?

Before they decided on RCBO.

In my opinion RCBO isn't logical.

Either it should be RCCBO - or RCCBs should just be RCB.

The electrical trade doesn't seem good at names or abbreviations.

 

[JohnW2]

C for Crabtree ???

Probably. However, if "EFLImpudence Enterprises" made a sold a range of lamps/bulbs, with a wide range of bases, do you think it would be either reasonable or responsible for them to call the range "E27" and write that on all their products and packaging, regardless of what base the lamp/bulb had?

Why on earth do they put "RCCB" on the device when the description clearly indicates that it is an RCBO?

Before they decided on RCBO. In my opinion RCBO isn't logical. Either it should be RCCBO - or RCCBs should just be RCB.

I agree that the abbreviations are less than logical - but none of that excuses writing "RCCB" on something which never has been correctly described by that abbreviation, particularly when the text description you posted (presumably from a catalogue?) described it as an "RCBO" and indicated that it provided over-current protection.

Kind Regards, John

 

[deadshort]

escribed it as an "RCBO" and indicated that it provided over-current protection.

The item shown clearly does provide over current protection.

DS

 

[EFLImpudence]

However, if "EFLImpudence Enterprises" made a sold a range of lamps/bulbs, with a wide range of bases, do you think it would be either reasonable or responsible for them to call the range "E27" and write that on all their products and packaging, regardless of what base the lamp/bulb had?

No but they seem to do such things.
Trying to think of another.

Transformers

but none of that excuses writing "RCCB" on something which never has been correctly described by that abbreviation, particularly when the text description you posted (presumably from a catalogue?) described it as an "RCBO" and indicated that it provided over-current protection.

I agree - but it IS a Residual Current Circuit Breaker.

No less descriptive than Miniature Circuit Breaker.



Never assume those in charge know what they are doing.

 

[JohnW2]

The item shown clearly does provide over current protection.

As we now know, it does indeed. However, can you honestly say that (unless you were familiar with this particular range of components, or had some documentation) you would know that by looking at it (particularly given that it is clearly labelled "RCCB")? AFAICS, the only clue is the "30" on the lever - and (particularly given that it is not even "30A") that could merely be a reference to the 30mA IΔn of what is labelled as an "RCCB".

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

but none of that excuses writing "RCCB" on something which never has been correctly described by that abbreviation, particularly when the text description you posted (presumably from a catalogue?) described it as an "RCBO" and indicated that it provided over-current protection.

I agree - but it IS a Residual Current Circuit Breaker.

Part of it's functionality is, indeed, that of an "RCCB", but (IMO) that doesn't make it any less ridiculous to label it with an abbreviation which only indicates part of the functionality. It's like writing (just) "FREEZER" or "DRYER" in big letters on the front of something which is, in fact, a fridge/freezer or washer/dryer.

In the absence of the discussion here and the various bits of information which have provided, it definitely would NOT have occurred to me (just by looking at it and reading the labelling) that the device in question offered any over-current protection. That is wrong, and 'bad'.

Kind Regards, John

 

[deadshort]

You only have to look at the physical design to see it's a rcbo ? and 30 is a clue as it's located exactly where the current rating would be on a circuit breaker!

DS

 

[EFLImpudence]

That's all true - but 'normal' RCCBs have a current rating so even if it had said 30A in clear markings that would not have actually helped.