Advertisement
Boards Golf Society are looking for new members for 2022...read about the society and their planned outings here!
How to add spoiler tags, edit posts, add images etc. How to - a user's guide to the new version of Boards

I.S. 10101 - The replacement for ET101:2008

12345679»

Comments



  • meercat wrote: »
    In 2016 Reci recommend switching showers by contactor

    When I discussed this with my inspector shortly afterwards he didn’t seem keen on the idea

    The control circuit also has to be rcd protected and a double pole switch outside the bathroom door.

    Page 6

    https://safeelectric.ie/contractors/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2018/09/2016dec_news.pdf


    My inspector also ruled out contactor isolation for kitchens

    You're just doubling up by adding a contactor

    The dials on the shower unit control the shower and the isolator provides isolation

    What has RCD protection of control circuit got to do with anything or what regulation is that, electrical equipment in bathroom zones is it ?




  • Henry.. wrote: »
    You're just doubling up by adding a contactor

    The dials on the shower unit control the shower and the isolator provides isolation

    What has RCD protection of control circuit got to do with anything or what regulation is that, electrical equipment in bathroom zones is it ?

    Just pointing out what Reci recommend at the time and the discussions I had.




  • meercat wrote: »
    In 2016 Reci recommend switching showers by contactor

    When I discussed this with my inspector shortly afterwards he didn’t seem keen on the idea

    As I said there is nothing wrong with switching a shower with a contactor. However this does not mean that a local isolator is not a requirement.

    I take it that you are referring to this text on page 6:

    As shower switches have been a common problem as regards to fires and contacts burning out, switching with a contactor is recommended.

    I would take this to mean that when switching under load conditions a suitably rated contactor is preferable, not that the contactor can be used as a substitute for the local isolator. The local isolator is still a requirement for compliance with IS10101.




  • Why would you need to switch a shower load though is the question ?

    The issues with isolators really comes down to the isolator being suitable for the task which they clearly weren't given the number of replacements needed regularly




  • Henry.. wrote: »
    Why would you need to switch a shower load though is the question ?

    Personally I wouldn't switch the shower via anything when under load conditions. However, some people do so frequently. I also tend to leave shower isolators and cooker switches on all of the time. I believe that these are only for maintenance, nothing else. This debate has occurred on this forum many times.
    The issues with isolators really comes down to the isolator being suitable for the task which they clearly weren't given the number of replacements needed regularly

    I think that too many people use low quality isolators.Crabtree and MK isolators tend to provide a lifetime of trouble free service particularly if they are not switched frequently or under load.


  • Advertisement


  • Well the regs in earlier post have copper fastened the topic I had, as such I don’t get involved in that domestic wiring too much just the smart side of it.
    For now showers will stay wired the way via a contactor, I can suggest fitting a double pole isolator at db after contactor. Again I know not compliant, but it’s a isolator for lock off for maintenance as well as lock off rcbo.
    We see more and more customers against using pull cords in bathrooms or the cooker switch beside the light switch.
    Regs are there but a lot are horse and cart generation, so much potential there if a common ground was found. Many the cooker switch or pull cord I have seen in worse wear in installations so getting too caught up in them just because it’s a reg isn’t the be all and end all.




  • Picture a scenario where there is major work ongoing in an installation

    Someone at the DB energizes the contactor while someone is simultaneously fitting a new shower

    That is the problem or most of it with the remote switching




  • The person working at the shower should have locked off and prove dead. They only have key to go live. Common sense.




  • Fils wrote: »
    The person working at the shower should have locked off and prove dead. They only have key to go live. Common sense.

    Yes, the circuit should be locked off, the protective device should be labelled correctly, the person working on the shower should verify that the power is off....

    Great in theory, but in the real world (especially in domestic installations) this does not always work. This is why IS10101 requires local isolation.

    If your argument was accepted on the basis that any circuit can be isolated at the distribution board, then there would not be a requirement for any local isolators (including cookers).




  • You need to be careful if you are depending on a local isolation point to 100% circuit dead. I have seen cooker switches used for showers and although they physically switched off the power was not interrupted through them. That’s why always lock of the mcb, rcbo of the circuit you are working on.
    If it were a lighting supply or socket supply you were working on in a domestic supply isn’t that what you would be doing anyway.
    Lock off kits are cheap.


  • Advertisement


  • Prove dead and isolate locally

    Avoid direct contact

    Not much else you can do


Advertisement