On 23/03/2019 09:53, ARW wrote:
On 23/03/2019 09:22, PeterC wrote:
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 19:19:04 +0000, ARW wrote:

On 22/03/2019 10:30, John Rumm wrote:
On 22/03/2019 08:50, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 21/03/2019 23:45, ARW wrote:
BTW what now requires YOU to use a 30mA RCD for the bathroom lights?
The regs are not retrospective so swapping a bathroom light should
not require you to install RCD protection.

The regs are retrospective to any 'material alteration'

Whether fitting a new bathroom light is 'material alteration' is a
moot point

Swapping a light fitting would be a like for like change and not an
alteration to the fixed wiring. Its not notifiable under part P
either -
even in a bathroom.


Moving a light or fitting an additional one in a bathroom would require
30mA protection in a bathroom under the 17th edition.

I'll have to check but I presume that now means in all rooms under the
18th edition.

You could argue that it would be good practice to fit the RCD protection
if the supplementary bonding is not present.

Interesting points, thanks.
Sopplementary bonding: er, well, there's no way to do that as all of the
water side is plastic and the incoming main is MDPE. CH is copper, but it
seems to me that creating an earth path where there's no earth is
pointless.

There's an old spur for the immersion heater. It was redundant so I
used it
for a couple of sockets in the loft. As it's on the 100mA RCD I've been
thinking of using a double socket with integral RCD but, for about the
same
money I could use an RCBO. I must measure a spare MCB to see if there's
space.


As a note it's worth mentioning that I spent most of a day bonding the
metal sinks at a school the other day. The hot and cold pipes were
already cross bonded and there was no way that a pd could be introduced
to the sink.

Bonding the metal sinks to what, the hot and cold pipes?

Schools must have money to burn.

I guess they had an inspection and this was an arse covering exercise.
H&S spending trumps teaching.