18th Edition regulation changes 

Ha! Well, I don't know if I'm one to distract anyone from leaf counting, but I know what you mean about being glued to irrelevant vids; many a time I find myself watching something on RU-vid, bleary-eyed, and wondering just.... why??!

Thanks Ricky. I missed a few things, so be sure to check the description!

Thanks Peter, I'm glad you found something of interest among all my waffle!

Good luck with the exam! Don't overdo the virtual Pimms the night before!

Electrical installation work in the UK is unregulated, so anyone can pop into Screwfix or B&Q and purchase a consumer unit. They can go ahead and install it into their own home if they feel confident and competent enough to undertake the task. There are three issues with this however. Firstly, they will lack the requisite test equipment to know that the installation is fit to be modified resulting in something which may be dangerous (especially in the event of a fault), or an installation that trips off and is unstable. Secondly, their home insurance will be invalidated, at least for electrical fire/shock incidents. Finally, they will be legally accountable for any incidents or accidents which may result in a fine or imprisonment if the severity of such is serious enough. The work is also legally notifiable to Local Authority Building Control under Part-P of the Building Regulations, so if the work was done without first submitting a planning application, then they may be required to have it professionally checked and any deficiencies made good. Of course, that last one is only if LABC get wind of unauthorised changes having been made. If Joe Bloggs the non-Electrician is buying a consumer unit to install for someone else, then he's liable for the safety of that installation going forward, the insurance is invalidated and the client he's doing it for may themselves be prosecuted in the event of an incident as they failed to appoint an appropriate person to undertake the work. A lot of my time is spent on installations meddled with by homeowners or other trades who have cobbled together the electrics into something that works on the face of it, but fails to meet the expected standard and is dangerous in the event of a fault (because of things like missing earths, undersized cables, etc.) Often, the cost and effort to put right is more than the original job would have been to do properly in the first place.

Thanks very much David for your detailed explanation. You have included extra info about home insurance clauses, which I wasn't aware of either. I also feel for your pain having to put right other peoples mess (qualified or not). Keep up the good work and my kindest regards.

@@retrocomputeruser Thanks Andy. Another point regarding insurance is that there is no legal requirement to have your electrical installation inspected and tested, but the recommendation is for checks up to every ten years (five years for rental). Many people don't bother of course, but if an electrical fire breaks out on an installation that has never been checked, or the date of last inspection has expired, then again the insurance company might get out of coughing up if you can't prove the installation was kept maintained.

@@dsesuk honestly I don't know of a living soul that has there electrical installation checked every ten years,. its just not a realistic scenario in the world outside your industry. People generally call electricians when they want work done or repairs made but if everything works people don't call electricians. Its just not the way people think.

@@cbcdesign001 This is true, if everything is working then it tends to be taken for granted. When we're called upon to undertake condition reporting, the driver is normally something like a house sale/purchase, conversion to rental, a result of a fault or known poor workmanship, or because significant alterations are planned. Few book in the work just because it's out of date since the last inspection, with the exception of landlords who want to cover themselves legally for their rental properties.

Good find, I stand corrected. It still won't stop me installing aerial amps from the lighting circuit though!

Whilst that's true about the minimum cable sizes for lighting circuits and power circuits, the fact remains that both "lighting circuits" and "power circuits" are actually undefined, so it could easily be argued that a circuit serving multiple luminaires which also had a TV booster connected to it was still, in fact, a lighting circuit and therefore could be wired in 1mm^2 cable.

The T&I labels were designed using GIMP (a free image editor) and were printed professionally (about £75 ex-VAT for 250 of them or something). Other labels such as RCD and two-colours I print using my Brother label printer. There's another video on that, it's a good bit of kit! ECA is expensive, same again as my NICEIC membership, but it has perks such as free events, reduced cost training and access to BS documents. They gave me an 18th Edition regs book for free at an event last week, so it has perks but probably doesn't pay it's way if you just do domestic work. For me it's more about trying to distance myself from local competitors and like 'em or loathe 'em names like NIC and ECA are recognised and bring in business!

Interesting. The problem at this end is the requirement for GFCI protection on cables buried in walls at less than 50mm, cables passing through a room with a bath or a shower, accessories in rooms with a bath or a shower, all socket outlets (no exceptions in dwellings from January 2019) etc. This means in most cases it's just easier to have the GFCI at source so that everything downstream is covered. Still, as I found when I got to play with an AFCI in a later video, there is visual indication to help you determine the nature of the trip, at least on the model I played with. I doubt AFCI's will see widespread adoption here until the regs tighten up their wording from 'recommended' to 'required', so that'll probably be in 18th Edition Amendment 1 which should be two or three years away... or longer (hopefully)....

True, it would seem that one needs to have gfci due to the installation means but... the idea, at least from some of those in the USA who are doing it, is to protect the cables using afci... then from the first outlet protect them using gfci, thus protecting with both yet using separate units. The advantage so far in the UK and Germany is one adds the afci as a module to the side of the breaker assemble or RCD assembly. Plus, RCD is being used here to cover several circuits where in the USA they only cover one branch or group of outlets, and usually no more than. Six outlets at a time. But,from reports from both sides of the pond, while gfci is reducing risks afci might actually not be doing as much as it could. There is a call that it might not detect many forms of arc fault simply due to its having to differentiate between actual faults and lighting, or cooking circuits. There are some calls that building a circuit 5hat fits into the outlets themselves would do more to detect and prevent damage from faults, with lesscost.

​@@brotheradam Apparently US AFDDs also contain 30 mA earth-fault protection, something previously almost unheard of in the US (there's been RCBOs for a while but they're rarely ever used, so most of the house wiring is only protected by a 15 or 20 amp MCB) and that's led to a remarkable drop in electrical fires. The actual series arc detection... not so much according to the figures I've seen. The Germans actually went from requirement to recommendation on the AFDDs after a few years.

You're right, it shouldn't be done, although someone crawling into the corner of the attic to plug in a high load appliance when the outlet has a label on it stating 'TV BOOSTER ONLY, MAX LOAD 3A' deserves to have to crawl back out to flick the tripped breaker back on. In all seriousness though, a fused connection plate and a chop of the booster's plug would be the recommended way to do it.

Good show sir! I fully endorse such action!

@@dsesuk any new videos on the horizon? I'm getting withdrawals!

@@jgraham3146 One on EICR's is in scripting, one on a couple of curious faults is in planning, one on PAT testing has been in editing hell since September and Manor House Part 4 is ongoing! I might try and get the EICR one up this weekend, but time is tight!

That's the kind of job a minor works is intended for: like for like accessory replacements or additions. It's your declaration that you've done the job properly and left it no less safe than before you started. Of course, BS7671 is non-statutory so you don't have to follow the format of the MW cert or even supply one at all. It depends on how you run your business and what your customer's expectations are. I'd be lying if I said I'd issued a MW cert for every piddly job I've ever done, but I do supply one for the most part as it gives me a record of what was done and what the test numbers were and it gives my client peace-of-mind that the job has been done professionally.

David Savery Electrical Services, I believe they should really bring out a maintenance certificate for like for like replacement in none special locations. It only needs to contain visuals on earthing/bonding, consumer unit etc, a ZE test at the item you're working on and an rcd test. The minor works was already over the top for replacing a light switch etc and now its going to be even more hassle!!! Whats your thoughts?

Personally I believe the certs are too much, and I agree that the minor works will be more of a headache. My opinion is that the paperwork should be simplified with less data included on the MW or EIC and a declaration for the installer to sign basically stating "I've done my job properly and I stand by my work in court if necessary". Am I going to go to the effort of checking the Ze at the consumer unit for the new minor works cert every time I do a pissy little job? No. I'll record the Zs for the circuit I'm modifying, and if that's good then I'll assume the Ze is okay and I'll put 'N/V' for Not Verified in the box. I understand that in the spirit of the wiring regulations I should be opening the CU, checking it over, verifying the supplier's earth and so on, but I'm running a business, there are only so many hours in the day and I'm being undercut by people who aren't accredited and who won't be wasting time on paperwork. If I worked exactly by the book all time time, my business would fail. Again, it's non-statutory; you don't have to abide by it, and I'll sleep at night if I know that on any given job I have left it no less safe than before I arrived and opened the toolbox even if some of the boxes on the cert have 'N/V' filled in them!

This is true, and since making this I've been able to play with one.

@@dsesuk Yeah I just realised how long ago you uploaded it. Anyways, just subbed enjoyed it all keep it up! 👍

Federal used to do that to differentiate between overcurrent and residual current in their RCBOs, very useful it was too

When Nige had his own business and subbied to me, I used to hand him a form 27b/6 which had his days work charted on it! He never got the reference.

@@dsesuk :-)

That must have been it.

bring back buckle clips, satifies the regs, and I always thought they were neater than the plastic ones, particularly on multiple runs

I absolutely agree with everything you have said, especially as I am someone who once hit a hidden gas pipe buried in a wall with no indication as to its location! Companies like Certsure who run ECA, NICEIC and Elecsa are coining it in and doing very little for their money. There's a lot of talk on social media from people who are dissatisfied with the CPS setup, and even those who are planning on leaving it altogether which is fine so long as they maintain their standards and are up-front with domestic clients about not being able to provide a building regs cert (unless that client wants to pay for the planning application up-front of course!) Here's some food for thought too: BS7671 is only supposed to have up to two amendments per Edition, or so I am told. 17th was a fudge as they brought in A2 for things like car charging, then figured they wanted to bring in metal consumer units sooner than the 18th, so they came up with A3 which meant we all bought new books just three years ago. Also, only new Editions require a Draft for Public Comment, so anything that didn't get into the 18th because it got shouted down may still make it into 18th Edition Amendment 1 when it comes out (sooner rather than later probably), as they can stick whatever they want into A1 without asking those on the coalface if it's practical to work by or not! Word on the street is that A1 will move Arc Fault Detection from 'recommended' to 'required' and beef up surge protection which currently has a get-out clause for domestic installations. What it means for mandatory earth rods on TNCS installations, well God only knows! Maybe Amendment 1 will be the cause of my retirement!

Hi David, I would agree that the prompt move to steel consumer units was a good move; the plastic boxes were simply too cheap and not up to the task. On the subject of premature collapse, this was a good requirement for designated escape routes in public buildings and apartment blocks; to bring this now into domestic premises, well!! I read it differently to you in that you may continue to install plastic conduit or trunking so long as it is fixed with metal fasteners; this will indeed prevent premature collapse of cables and will continue to meet the requirement. Nobody is going to start cutting and threading steel conduit!! Finally, on another personal note: Six months after my 'first' retirement I kept getting calls for small jobs and although I had been an NICEIC contractor and had only been away from the trade 6 months NICEIC insisted that I pay for a full reassessment!! £600-£700. As a result I now do not do 'notifiable' domestic work and it amazing how good a living you can make fitting lights, minor works and inspections!! No more rewires or consumer units for me and even better, no more self certification schemes.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying you can't use plastic conduit or clips, just that you now have to fit additional metallic support to prevent collapse. DeWalt WallDogs are worth a look, albeit expensive, but they allow a metal screwplug to be inserted into a brick or plasterboard wall without a Rawlplug or such. Funnily enough, next year I'm planning on dropping rewires/refurb projects, so I may well join you on the non-notifiables and save the arsehole of NICEIC, ECA and annual assessments!

@@frankhayes1135 I am pretty sure if the NICEIC had their way it would be illegal for anybody that isn't assessed to do any sort of electrical work of any kind, including the simple stuff.

Reg 443.4 requires overvoltage control, or a risk assessment if omitted, but single dwellings are listed as an exception 'where the total value of the installation and equipment therein does not justify such protection'. Make of that what you will. At present, SPD pricing is high, and although I would always recommend protection for my clients, the reality is that a domestic client isn't likely to want to fork out for it on a CU change unless they've had previous experience of a lighting strike or other overvoltage event and want to ensure it doesn't happen again (that may be a requirement of their insurance who may pay out the first time, but insist protection is installed to ensure there isn't a second time). Remember that this industry is unregulated and when a client is shopping around for pricing for their CU upgrade, my price is already higher than some handyman who picks up a dual RCD board from B&Q and sticks it in with no testing, warranty or certification, so much as I would like to insist upon these things, I'd be out of business in short order if I did so. Also the SPD's I've seen are one-shot devices, when they're blown they need replacing, so that makes it a harder sell again as the client may not appreciate all their expensive household gadgets have been saved, but they are pissed that they're having to hire an emergency electrician to come in and replace their blown SPD to get the juice back on after an overvoltage event. What the 18th is doing is making we designers/installers responsible for thinking about the use of SPD's. It's up to us to weigh up the pros and cons for any given installation, discuss it with our clients, insist on it if required, produce a risk assessment if needed, omit it if the client agrees that the risk is low and they're happy to be without it. After January, when 18th Ed is fully live, you'll still see the usual CU enclosures on the market without the SPD. When it becomes mandatory for everyone, they'll come factory fitted.

Me too!

I've seen dual module offerings without the RCD element, but I'm having trouble getting hold of any AFDD device at present. I've been chasing Eaton, Schneider and Wylex, but I'll see if I can find part codes for Hager and Crabtree; maybe they'll have something they can actually sell to me!

www.electrium.co.uk/media/20180709153811_0_StarbreakerProtectiveDevices.pdf No idea if , when and who are stocking them yet but the crabtree ones are RCBO & AFDD Combo 2 moduels wide. Wylex have a simular one again just 2 moduels wide, no idea how we are going to find space to fit them all into the boards tho!

Excitingly enough, Electrium have been in contact with me and I am meeting their representative on Monday to get hold of one of their Starbreaker (Crabtree) AFDD devices for review! As you say, at two-modules wide it's a smaller footprint than the equivalent Eaton model, yet still provides overcurrent and earth leakage protection. Also, the unique Starbreaker board allows flexible connection unlike other makes where the busbar needs significant modification to get 'em shoehorned in! I'm very much looking forward to playing with it and hope to have something to put on this channel early next week!

Your point around fault finding is correct. As devices get smaller, will manufacturers still be able to provide enough information out of them to allow the reason for the trip to be seen visually?

The AFDD's I've seen have a LED status indicator which may tell you want kind of trip has occurred by the colour of the light and/or the pattern of flashing, but I haven't had a go on them yet to see what kind of visual feedback is actually given. I'm hoping to have an AFDD on Monday though, so I'll get to have a proper play and will upload something on this channel to help answer some of the questions about them! Any kind 3-in-1 device such as the AFDD/MCB/RCD combo will need some kind of indicator or flag though, even if they do shrink them down. Time will tell I guess.

Seems you only have to pretend to be!

Good informative vid though,,,, 40 years under my belt means nothing it seems these days

@@MikeG-fo1lb And neither should it. You should be judged solely on the quality of your work, not how long you've been doing it for.

Actually, that's wrong on two counts. Firstly, 1.0mm cabling can be used for power (socket outlet) circuits. Table F5(i) of OSG (p.158) rates 1.0mm cable at up to 15A clipped direct, so if you were running off, say, a 13A fuse for a short socket run clipped to the wall, then you could do it in 1mm. Personally I wouldn't, but it would be permissible and certifiable with that upstream protection and so long as the EFLI at the far end was within 1.84 Ohm (in the case of a 13A BS1362 fuse). Secondly, adding a socket to a lighting circuit is fine in order to connect a small load. A good example is the TV booster traditionally fitted in the loft where the only circuit available is lighting. As the booster only needs a few milliamps and comes with a plug that has a 3A fuse fitted, then there is no danger of it overloading the circuit, at least not unless the circuit already has a maxxed-out demand on it! In the unlikely event that the homeowner one day unwisely decides to plug an electric heater into that (not very accessible) socket, then the breaker will trip so the wiring will be protected. When I install such a socket, I label it as being for the 'TV booster only', and 'max load 3A'. 1.0mm is used in many socket applications already: a lot of extension leads only have 1.0mm cores, but because they have a 13A fuse in the plugtop, they're in no danger of overloading. You won't find anything in the wiring regulations to say 1.0mm can't be used for sockets or that sockets can't be added to a lighting circuit to drive small connected loads. What you will find are regulations telling you not to exceed the current carrying capacity of the cable regardless of the application you're installing it for, but that is all.

@@dsesuk I did slap a socket in a loft space but did use a fused switched spur. It is for a WiFi booster I did recall reading about it some were in the on site guide.

Firemen have enough to do without reaching for a pair of snips. There are good reasons for fixings designed to prevent premature collapse in escape routes and that was absolutely the right thing to do (google Shirley Towers fire investigation report for details). But for surface mount on a wall behind the washing machine (which these regs mandate) is somewhat extracting the urine.

Here’s an idea, you could house the electric meter and main fuse in an exterior plastic box, so both the fireman and meter reader could access it without entering the property. Wonder why no-one has thought of that before...

Yeah, sorry for the language. I watched it back and realise now that I sound like a petulant child!

Yes, there are butterfly clips that fit in the trunking, but the talk is that if you're holding the metallic supports up by screwing into plastic Rawlplugs, then you still won't comply. I see DeWalt have brought out a metal screw solution that screws directly into a hole drilled into brick/block with no plug required so that's probably the way forward. It's all extra fiddliness though, and will add to time on site!

David Savery Electrical Services true. The stuff will become more fiddle but yet, the use of the newer concrete screws rather than the plastic rail plugs using a smaller drill bit for the pilot hole means you can, and I have, drill right through the plastic into the wall, then screw the thing into place. I personally am waiting for them to explain if these plugs could replace the staples that are damaging the nm cables and causing a large percentage of the arc faults that are not at the actual outlets. But, I still am studying the codes, having been a handyman and never certified. I understand that we want the wires fixed into place and supported so we have a general idea where to look for the wires in the walls... but does fixed mean tight? Or held in place rather than flopping around the cavity? Think that is the next big change to come, and the same clips one manufacturer has made for the pvc clips could just as easy be used in the wall cavity to hold the wire in place away from the wall surface.

I may have misread what that change was about; someone else said it was to prevent devices coming on the market which would force an RCD trip as a safety measure (the problem being you can't rely on any electromechanical device to be serviceable in the event that it's needed). I don't think it's actually to do with using test equipment to trip an RCD or being out in the field and tapping neutral to earth to figure out which RCD you're connected to.

Quite right, BS7671 is non-statutory, although compliance is the best way to defend yourself under EAWR which is statutory, but then I doubt my smaller stickers will lead to a prosecution under that, or at least my mental risk assessment says that the likelihood is low enough not to trouble myself with it!