Can't resist making the 300th post on this subject. Clive is right of course booking on CC and C&CC sites will go down. It could be a good thing in one way as I am happy not to use EHU but to get a decent pitch I have to have a EHU post on it. perhaps there will have to be a rethink on the inclusive pitch feee and a reintrduction of charging for electric seperately.
Glenn I know of one mobile engineer who is equiped to test caravan RCD's at customers sites using their mains connection without bypassing the premises RCD as I arranged the purchase of the kit he needed to do it
I would be a bit worried where the mobile guys use generators as they can cause problems with the chargers if they are not properly regulated and spike free
I would be a bit worried where the mobile guys use generators as they can cause problems with the chargers if they are not properly regulated and spike free
George yes I also know a mobile guy (ncc approved) who uses a Honda eu20i to do his testing.that genny is also very easy to test the 500/1000/2000w setings on the heater because you can phyiscally hear the engine speed up as the load increases.
I bet now the original poster wishes he never started this thread.
Glenn
I bet now the original poster wishes he never started this thread.
Glenn
ok here goes..i can feel the guns being loaded.
I have new 2.8kv genny that i run for around 10mins before using and it is quite stable at 225-230v,and i can do all the RCD tests ok ( genny has been modified for earth) and as has been said i can load it up when testing the heater. I also have a short length of hook-up lead (2ft) that i insert between inlet socket and cable plug that has a window of outer sheath cut away and the live conductor exposed so i can use a clamp meter (Fluke 36 ac/dc) to check load on smaller draws like the fridge (.5a)and the water heater (3.5a) and i have another ac/dc clamp meter on the battery +ve to check input to the battery. So i know what each appliance is drawing. If i am at a place where i have mains i use the genny for RCD only and clamp meter every thing else.
Now a question for the proper sparks.
I use a laptop and printer in the van powered by a 600w inverter. Is it possible to use that as a power supply to do RCD tests? I use it for other tests but i m not sure if the RCD tester will upset the inverter.
I have new 2.8kv genny that i run for around 10mins before using and it is quite stable at 225-230v,and i can do all the RCD tests ok ( genny has been modified for earth) and as has been said i can load it up when testing the heater. I also have a short length of hook-up lead (2ft) that i insert between inlet socket and cable plug that has a window of outer sheath cut away and the live conductor exposed so i can use a clamp meter (Fluke 36 ac/dc) to check load on smaller draws like the fridge (.5a)and the water heater (3.5a) and i have another ac/dc clamp meter on the battery +ve to check input to the battery. So i know what each appliance is drawing. If i am at a place where i have mains i use the genny for RCD only and clamp meter every thing else.
Now a question for the proper sparks.
I use a laptop and printer in the van powered by a 600w inverter. Is it possible to use that as a power supply to do RCD tests? I use it for other tests but i m not sure if the RCD tester will upset the inverter.
Hello dougie,
I think that will depend very much on the particular model of inverter, It may also apply to generators;
The vast majority of inverters produce a modified sine wave output, which frankly if you look at it on an oscilloscope looks pretty horrible. The wave is basically a two or three stepped square waves. These are often used because they are more efficient at producing power, and 90% efficiency is not uncommon
They are fine for resistive loads like filament lighting, and the heater coil in the fridge and water heater, and for motors but more sensitive electronics may not function properly.
Putting these wave forms into inductance based circuits produces some HF ringing with high voltage spikes. the better inverters have clamping diodes to shunt the excessive peaks. Using this sort of wave form to test an RCD is likely to give unpredictable and variable results.
For more consistent results you need an inverter that produces a pure sine wave. these are usually only about 60 to 70% efficient, but they produce a much cleaner and smooth wave form. They are usually more resistant to ringing on difficult loads.
The same thing applies to generators with inverter outputs. Some better quality ones use full sine wave control, others may only produce a modified sine wave. Which type of inverter is fitted to the generator set is not always obviously stated or clear on the genny or in the instructions.
I think that will depend very much on the particular model of inverter, It may also apply to generators;
The vast majority of inverters produce a modified sine wave output, which frankly if you look at it on an oscilloscope looks pretty horrible. The wave is basically a two or three stepped square waves. These are often used because they are more efficient at producing power, and 90% efficiency is not uncommon
They are fine for resistive loads like filament lighting, and the heater coil in the fridge and water heater, and for motors but more sensitive electronics may not function properly.
Putting these wave forms into inductance based circuits produces some HF ringing with high voltage spikes. the better inverters have clamping diodes to shunt the excessive peaks. Using this sort of wave form to test an RCD is likely to give unpredictable and variable results.
For more consistent results you need an inverter that produces a pure sine wave. these are usually only about 60 to 70% efficient, but they produce a much cleaner and smooth wave form. They are usually more resistant to ringing on difficult loads.
The same thing applies to generators with inverter outputs. Some better quality ones use full sine wave control, others may only produce a modified sine wave. Which type of inverter is fitted to the generator set is not always obviously stated or clear on the genny or in the instructions.
I called at the NCC stand this morning,( Friday ) to ask a few question's, but the young girl told me the man i needed to speak to was in a meeting.. so i went back again later.. he was still no where to be found.
Glenn. The guy I know is in the NCC AWS he will not use his generator on caravans so as to avoid any arguement of damaging the electronics and electrical equipmen fitted in the caravan
The kit he uses plugs into the customers normal ring circuit and allows testing of the caravan RCD and equipment without tripping any of the other RCD's in the circuit
The OP probably didn't realise this would go on the way it has when prewvious threads on this subject on this and other forums have died early on
It is just a pity the NCC have not approached this issue in a more informative way for both the engineers and caravan owners
As you know the testing requirement has always been there in the the IEE regs but unfortunatly we are now in a blame / claim culture and everybody has to cover themselves
Sounds like the NCC are finding this potato to hot to hold
If they won't make people available to answer the issues that are being raised then it shows how rudderless this initative is
I would certainly like to know why the engineers training course is of such poor quality and lacks depth. From my experience for what the engineers are expected to do the course should be more like 5 days not 2
If they won't make people available to answer the issues that are being raised then it shows how rudderless this initative is
I would certainly like to know why the engineers training course is of such poor quality and lacks depth. From my experience for what the engineers are expected to do the course should be more like 5 days not 2
Hello Dean,
The NCC's own website states:
"The National Caravan Council ("the NCC") is the trade association for the UK caravan industry.
Our member companies come from all sectors of the industry, including manufacturers, retailers, distributors, park operators and specialist suppliers of products and services to the industry. We have a long history of experience - the NCC was formed in 1939 and became a company limited by guarantee in 1953.
"Our Mission
That the NCC is the recognised and respected, authoritative trade body for the UK caravan industry, providing leadership through a centre of expertise offering support, products and services to members for the successful evolution of their businesses."
They are only a trade body, they have no legal or regulatory responsibilities towards caravanning, and the only but most important sector they do not represent as part of their mission is the consumer.
Because they have been around for a long time they have been traditionally the common mouth piece of the manufacturing side of the industry. As such they have been invited to provide 'experts' to panels that draw up standards and regulations. So whilst they are not the enforcers they can influence the agenda.
Legislation calls for evidence that installations are safe to connect to the mains supply. The NCC have taken it upon themselves to interpret that requirement in the context of a caravans, and they have come up with the proposal that has been debated in this thread.
The NCC can only enforce it so far as they can threaten members of their own council with exclusion from the council if they don't comply.
As for the NCC's PIR its self, that is just one interpretation of how the legislation can be met. There have been other suggestions made in this thread that may meet the requirement.
The problem is that none of the suggestions including the NCC's is a guarantee of compliance. That will only be tested in the event an incident being investigated and prosecuted through the courts.
I consider the NCC's approach to the PIR is an effort to provide their members with a copper bottomed approach that will protect them from claims of incompetence. This is where their mission statement comes home to roost, they are not looking out for the consumer in this matter.
If you are a member of any caravan club, lobby the clubs managers to start to represent their members views on this matter.
The NCC's own website states:
"The National Caravan Council ("the NCC") is the trade association for the UK caravan industry.
Our member companies come from all sectors of the industry, including manufacturers, retailers, distributors, park operators and specialist suppliers of products and services to the industry. We have a long history of experience - the NCC was formed in 1939 and became a company limited by guarantee in 1953.
"Our Mission
That the NCC is the recognised and respected, authoritative trade body for the UK caravan industry, providing leadership through a centre of expertise offering support, products and services to members for the successful evolution of their businesses."
They are only a trade body, they have no legal or regulatory responsibilities towards caravanning, and the only but most important sector they do not represent as part of their mission is the consumer.
Because they have been around for a long time they have been traditionally the common mouth piece of the manufacturing side of the industry. As such they have been invited to provide 'experts' to panels that draw up standards and regulations. So whilst they are not the enforcers they can influence the agenda.
Legislation calls for evidence that installations are safe to connect to the mains supply. The NCC have taken it upon themselves to interpret that requirement in the context of a caravans, and they have come up with the proposal that has been debated in this thread.
The NCC can only enforce it so far as they can threaten members of their own council with exclusion from the council if they don't comply.
As for the NCC's PIR its self, that is just one interpretation of how the legislation can be met. There have been other suggestions made in this thread that may meet the requirement.
The problem is that none of the suggestions including the NCC's is a guarantee of compliance. That will only be tested in the event an incident being investigated and prosecuted through the courts.
I consider the NCC's approach to the PIR is an effort to provide their members with a copper bottomed approach that will protect them from claims of incompetence. This is where their mission statement comes home to roost, they are not looking out for the consumer in this matter.
If you are a member of any caravan club, lobby the clubs managers to start to represent their members views on this matter.
John, In this blame/claim society in which we currently live it is understandable that people want to cover their backs
The NCC approach of a complete strip down of the electrics for a PIR is like saying your caravan needs a rewire instead of a PIR at whatever 1 - 3 year interval is deemed necessary by an engineer trained in the NCC supported CITO competant persons scheme to provide a guarantee that there is no damaged wiring
While all the electrical professionals on here will have their own horror stories of faults they have found on installations I am sure there are a lot still waiting to be found. These will only ever be found if PIR's become a legal requirement in all installations.
In my opinion the NCC's current stance could only be supported by the Electrical at Work Act which is a legal document and as a caravan site is a workplace for those who are employed there the employer is required to ensure there safety under the act
The NCC approach of a complete strip down of the electrics for a PIR is like saying your caravan needs a rewire instead of a PIR at whatever 1 - 3 year interval is deemed necessary by an engineer trained in the NCC supported CITO competant persons scheme to provide a guarantee that there is no damaged wiring
While all the electrical professionals on here will have their own horror stories of faults they have found on installations I am sure there are a lot still waiting to be found. These will only ever be found if PIR's become a legal requirement in all installations.
In my opinion the NCC's current stance could only be supported by the Electrical at Work Act which is a legal document and as a caravan site is a workplace for those who are employed there the employer is required to ensure there safety under the act
In my experience over testing can introduce more faults, what i would say is practical for testing purposes would be the mains lead, and the RCD.
While recently tiling my kitchen i had removed all the socket outlets, placing the wires into block connectors, all the connections as a matter of course were "pull" tested, still on refitting the sockets after tiling i was a bit put out to find a neutral wire had worked loose.
I find no fault with testing for ring main continuity for eg, but don't really go for removing every socket to check the wiring/connections. No doubt others will have their own ideas.
While recently tiling my kitchen i had removed all the socket outlets, placing the wires into block connectors, all the connections as a matter of course were "pull" tested, still on refitting the sockets after tiling i was a bit put out to find a neutral wire had worked loose.
I find no fault with testing for ring main continuity for eg, but don't really go for removing every socket to check the wiring/connections. No doubt others will have their own ideas.
Ray I would agree with your comments on testing but would also include the earth bonding
Unfortunatly the CITO course does not teach the caravan engineer how to use the various meter settings and understand the meter readings obtained and thus installations that may require further investigation without the need to initially dismantle the installation
George. if what you are saying about the CITO course does not train the caravan fitter to read and understand the meter readings on a multifuction tester or seperate insulation resistance/low resistance , loop impedence and rcd tester. Then this person Cannot be classed as competant or qualified.
HSE would love that if the EAW regs were appplied
HSE would love that if the EAW regs were appplied
Glenn my mobile mate came away from the course competant to know that it was useless, because he did one of the early courses I believe he has been offered the updated course FOC recently because of the discrepancies in the original course.
The course is run by Skils Active/CITO I think the course content is/was published somewhere on the web
I have spent some time actually getting him up to a level that he is happy with since that course and sorting test equipment so he can test caravans without tripping RCD's that he is not testing that are in the same circuit.
He also has the "millionaire option" .....he can phone a friend with any problems he encounters, this is a facility many engineers won't have
I don't agree with the dismantle everything approach and so does he so his testing only covers the points discussed in an earlier post with further investigation if the meter readings suggest it is required
The course is run by Skils Active/CITO I think the course content is/was published somewhere on the web
I have spent some time actually getting him up to a level that he is happy with since that course and sorting test equipment so he can test caravans without tripping RCD's that he is not testing that are in the same circuit.
He also has the "millionaire option" .....he can phone a friend with any problems he encounters, this is a facility many engineers won't have
I don't agree with the dismantle everything approach and so does he so his testing only covers the points discussed in an earlier post with further investigation if the meter readings suggest it is required
Agreed on that George. Hey Mr Sproket I have read that document it would be imposible to get that all across in 2 days? I have been an electrician 39 years and In am still learning.
Also to read there definition of a code 2 defect Makes them a laughing stock. Because any code 2 makes a pir report unsatsfactory so therefore all caravans are like this,so they are all unsatisfactory then? Running 12v and 230v cables together any competant person would give a code4.
NCC what a load of Numptys. They would be better concentrating on getting the manufacturers to make caravans that dont leak and leave electrics to electricians.
Also to read there definition of a code 2 defect Makes them a laughing stock. Because any code 2 makes a pir report unsatsfactory so therefore all caravans are like this,so they are all unsatisfactory then? Running 12v and 230v cables together any competant person would give a code4.
NCC what a load of Numptys. They would be better concentrating on getting the manufacturers to make caravans that dont leak and leave electrics to electricians.
Glenn not far behind you on the experience front.
The actual 34 page course document is good reading, it gives a good insight into how poor the training is
With regard to the competant person thing I have never understood how you can be classed as "competant" and not have your ability formally tested or examined
The actual 34 page course document is good reading, it gives a good insight into how poor the training is
With regard to the competant person thing I have never understood how you can be classed as "competant" and not have your ability formally tested or examined
I have just been reading that link Hahahahaha !
""""" A PIR, like a vehicle MoT, is valid for one year, provided that nothing changes that substantially affects the condition of the system which was reported on. """""
So what happen's next year ???
They are just after the money every year by the look of that.
""""" A PIR, like a vehicle MoT, is valid for one year, provided that nothing changes that substantially affects the condition of the system which was reported on. """""
So what happen's next year ???
They are just after the money every year by the look of that.
Where have all the caravan engineers gone?
I too would be upset having paid for that course to be told it was a waste of time.
But it would be intresting to hear their thoughts now the qualified sparks have commented.
I too would be upset having paid for that course to be told it was a waste of time.
But it would be intresting to hear their thoughts now the qualified sparks have commented.
Seems that the NCC have not been able to offer a conculsion to this thread and every oen is left in the dark.
These are the same people who are against allowing 2.55m caravans on our roads due to the local manufacturers not being geared up to make them.
What a load of tosh as overseas on the continent they still make the 2.3m caravan in bulk as not every one wants a 2.5m caravan.
These are the same people who are against allowing 2.55m caravans on our roads due to the local manufacturers not being geared up to make them.
What a load of tosh as overseas on the continent they still make the 2.3m caravan in bulk as not every one wants a 2.5m caravan.
There have been several references in this thread about the EU forcing MOT's to be carried out on braked trailers. This cannot be so because there is no EU-wide standard for MOT's (or their local equivalent). If there is no standard there is nothing to define as a requirement. The T
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
Trouble with static caravan insurance quote
- Started by Hipflask
- Replies: 4
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter