Fitting Different Make Mcbs Etc

[OnOff]

Was going to post on SBS Dave's thread but felt it might detract from his stuff. Anyway, sitting here going down with flu and thinking on all this. Here's one for you on the subject of "different" makes then which might put it into perspective a bit, of course the argument will go on forever. Anyway I noted a while back on a supplier's site that they were offering what looked like MK enclosures with I think the term was "MK replacement" RCBO's - they looked identical to MK RCBO's a far as I could tell save for the ***/MK labelling, so I wrote to them. They were straight up and honest with the comment:

Q: "Morning, I'm considering using your "own brand" *** enclosures and RCBO's - they look to me VERY like MK? Is there any link, same Chinese factory etc?"

A: "We buy from the same factory in China as MK so we currently supply an MK board."

I'd love to know what goes on with that. Is it that they make the kit on one production line but just stamp them up differently, again does the testing procedure vary i.e. is the QA/QC more in depth to justify the extra price of an MK one? Who knows. I'm guessing NOT. There is an element for me with the blatently Chinese stuff of it's so far away / what if they go wrong. A friend imports rechargeable batteries and chargers as his business from Hong Kong I believe. In the early days he had AA batteries coming over that were ever so slightly "fatter". They worked and fitted but you knew when you slid them in to the torch etc they didn't feel quite right. Another time he had X hundred chargers come over and they had made the plastic earth pins again ever so slightly oversize. He had to have EVERY pin machined down a tad to fit UK sockets! All sorted now, I guess teething problems with products.

After the Wylex/Volex/Crabtree recall / catching fire fiasco on the breakers a while back it gives me little confidence in the "names", most manufacture in the Far East anyway I believe. Saying that Wylex/Volex/Crabtree all come under the Electrium brand I can't believe that there isn't some common components shared! So I propose a Volex board fitted with a mix of Volex/Wylex and Crabtree breakers - if anyone queries it "It's all Electrium stuff mate!". :lol:

Not really, I've just fitted a Hager! Though where I've left space for future circuits I had to fit two Eaton banks in it and one Hager as I didn't have enough of the latter. I assume that's one for the leccy police too!

 

[Evans Electric]

You can be struck off for that Onoff!!

I'd like to know the secret behind some of these products too.      There are numerous products which are identical  , ie:  Crabtree grid range  = Volex grid range  etc .   Personally I find it annoying as sometimes we've waited for certain thing on order and found theres another brand on the shelf , obviously the same product.

I don't see the point .

I think back to the British car industry , specially when Austin Morris combined to become BMC  then British Leland .  They produced identical cars at Oxford and Birmingham  but badged up differently .   Costing a fortune !!!  How Ford must have laughed. 

The first Mini,s   , were produced as Austin , Morris, Riley , Wolsley , all with different front grilles  and badging .    A certain route to industrial suicide.  

 

[SLIPSHOD & SLAPDASH]

The guy recently sponsoring this site(Dave @ SBS) with the double pole Rcbo's has it clearly stated and displayed with pictures that his single pole stuff is identical to MK's & made on the same line.

The problem for us is it seems a different name appearing on the same stuff every week & all the Chinese factories are churning this stuff out so you will never know where it has come from. 

 

[SBS Dave]

Hi guys,

Just to clarify the situation with my Standard RCBOs. THey are a very popular design, probably designed in Europe and manufactured by an Original Equipment Manufacturer in China, who commissioned the design. The design is then commissioned out to dozens of Factories who manufacture under their own brand, or label them for Brand Owners, such as MK . My product is identical to the previous MK RCBO, which was the same as the previous Chint and is the same as the current Contactum. It is likely that the factory making the MK version, made it for them and nobody else. The original design was tested and CE certified in Corby, Northants.

The main reason others, like me, sell the MK range of enclosures, is that we can buy a basic enclosure, without main switch, so we can fit our own compatible main switch. Other UK brands sell switch units with their own switch, which quite often is not compatible with this particular design of RCBO. The bare MK enclosure is still built to BSEN60439 and there is nothing in the instructions to advise against using other brand devices. You might like to check out more info on my SBS Trade Sales topic.

Incidentally, if you check out the Sponsor Fastlec website, they are advertising a Wylex 8-way board, complete with 6 x Europa RCBOs.

This is exactly what I do, except using my own RCBOs. They sell it for £99.00 + VAT inc postage. My price is £83.45 + VAT inc postage. Cheaper if you pick it up from me.

SBS Dave

 

[Sidewinder]

Dave,

I'm not sure about the MK bit not stating that the enclosure is compliant with other brands etc.

There is a statement in their literature that it meets 60439 with their breakers, they do not even confirm compliance with 61439 yet.

Thus by default it does not meet it with others fitted.

This would be an issue for the PII of the installer in the event of a fault & the timescale could be prolonged.

Whilst I do not doubt the quality of your breakers, it is the TTA & PTTA status I have to doubt, sorry to comply with several requirements.

 

[wozz]

60439 i do not have acess to this, is this all to do with the conditional 16kA rating of the whole board?

 

[SBS Dave]

Hi Sidewinder,

As you know, I didn't say that MK stated one way or another, I just said their instructions don't say at all. The only instructions that are relevant to BS7671 are the ones supplied with the enclosure. Other literature is informational only, but you claim that the literature you are quoting states quite clearly, that their enclosure cannot be used with other devices and still meet BSEN60439, which logically must be your default position. Would you like to quote verbatim from MKs literature? I have some passing interest, since if correct, it would effectively put me and several others out of business, as well as putting Fastlec in a tricky legal position.

As I have said previously, if you have doubts, don't do it.

The positive input you can make to this topic, is to explain the relevance of BSEN60439 / 61439 , not only to Wozz, but to the wider Forum membership, based on your obvious knowledge of the subject. I look forward to your contribution.

SBS Dave

 

[OnOff]

I was considering the whole type tested assemblies issue and came across an Interesting find on the Schneider site ref IEC 61439. No doubt there'll be various interpretations of this but I found the following extract interesting. To me it recognises that kit may incorporate elements from two different manufacturers. Gets a bit deep for me!

"The third change is the recognition of testing.For example:

• Designs are portable. For example: a type test certificate obtained in France for a design carried out in the UK, is valid for an assembly manufactured in Australia.
• Two manufacturers. Between concept and delivery of the assembly two manufactures may be involved:"

http://www.schneider-electric.co.uk/sites/uk/en/products-services/legislation/iec-61439/iec-61439-faqs.page

 

[steptoe]

makes one wonder,

will be now be made to mount them on a type tested backboard as well?

and will it have to be MK wood? or can I still use the bowed bit of BQ wood I have?

 

[OnOff]

"clarification" in the document is interesting..................

 

[Sidewinder]

OnOff,

The point you make about the "third change" is the crux of my point.

Basically the OEM is responsible for the design & testing.

If you have an enclosure designed & manufactured by one OEM, & breakers by another, which is responsible for the testing/certification?

SBSDave,

I will come back with some more info for you, well at least how I interpret the standards and the clauses etc. that I feel relevant, but, I'm pretty much doing 7 days 12 hours at the moment!

There is also a statement given by & on behalf of all the members of BEAMA that is relevant.

IIRC I have posted a link to this before, if not please let me know & I'll post it again.

Please keep this topic live, else I'll forget it and not be able to find it amongst the dozen or so pages of unread posts I have on the forum!

 

[OnOff]

In support maybe of using different breakers? On the assumption that the supplier - who has "accumulated" the parts to sell on can "compare":
 
"Design verification, however, uses a radical new approach. Where volumes justify it, type testing 
will remain the preferred option for design verification, since it can, and does, lead to material and 
labour optimization. When adaptations or bespoke arrangements are required, the standard 
offers other equivalent routes to design verification. 
These include comparison to a verified reference design, calculation, and interpolation from a 
verified design, measurement, etc. The ‘multiple option’ route to verification is strictly controlled. 
When, where and how each is used is defined. While it is possible to build a small assembly, of the 
order of 200A, with the only type tests being an earth continuity measurement and a dielectric test, 
the standard effectively limits the design verification of assemblies of the higher ratings to type test.
 
From here:
 
http://www.schneider-electric.co.uk/documents/legislation/IEC-61439_SE6461.pdf

 

[wozz]

I really hope we do get more info on this because its all a mystery to me still.  Maybe because i have no idea at what the standard is actually getting at.

If you have an enclosure designed & manufactured by one OEM, & breakers by another, which is responsible for the testing/certification?

I can sort of understand the above staement but can this be applied to more than fuseboards?

I have read a BEAMA document which went on about the 16kA conditional thing, what if we only have 3kA pfc does that change things?

 

[Sidewinder]

Link here, hope it helps:

http://www.beama.org.uk/download.cfm/docid/F24BF81E-39AC-41C6-9557E79834520533

 

[SBS Dave]

Hi Guys,

The reason I invited Sidewinder to contribute further to this topic,was for members to research the subject and start a debate, which is a much better system than me trying to answer everybody's questions.

BSEN 60439, which is still in force, was sufficiently flexible to allow PTT to be a way to meet the Standard. BSEN61439 seeks to address some of these issues, whilst recognising that it is impossible to Type Test every combination of enclosure and device.

The new concept is Verified Design and BSEN61439 offers many ways to meet the Standard, without having to repeat the full process for every combination.

There are 2 important provisions in this concept, that bear directly on so-called mix and match.

COMPARISON TO A REFERENCE DESIGN - which requires that the design is at least equivalent in all respects to a previously verified design. The phrase "equivalent to", implies a variation to the intial arrangement, but nonetheless, one that meets the original Design.

SIMPLIFIED VERIFICATION - For low rating assemblies, which is what I am involved in, and with the use of BSEN60439 rated enclosures, which mine are,

and provided the devices meet their own recognised standard (mentioned elsewhere in the standard), such as CE certification, which mine do, then the Design is deemed to be verified, provided the components are physically compatible and the assembly is electrically tested for Power Frequency Dielectric compliance and earth continuity( in the case of metal-clad enclosures). Where this information is not available from the OEM, then SBS has carried out the necessary tests, to achieve compliance with Standard.

My Certificate of Compliance  and related tests, including my own in-house tests would be as freely available as similar Certificates of Compliance from other manufacturers and specialist component distributors like me. I no longer intend to be the front-runner on this subject, so hopefully others will assess their own situation in respect of my products and those of similar companies to mine and to Fastlec with their Wylex / Europa mix and match CU. If you choose to stick with BEAMA's view on BSEN60439 / 61439, I will respect your views and not expect any business from you. Hopefully, that view won't become the collective view of this Forum. 

SBS Dave

 

[OnOff]

The BEAMA link is great but seems more directed more at the MIXING of devices.

"Although devices may appear similar; the dimensions, technical performance and terminations are not necessarily
compatible."
 
In the case of the SBS offerings then surely he covers all that by using the SAME devices so there is NO incompatibility? 
 
"A distributor or wholesaler also has a responsibility under the General Product Safety Regulations to act "with due care".
Distributors and wholesalers should be able to substantiate any advice related to interchangeability of devices in
assemblies."
 
Interchangeability; this can only apply in relation to how well the SBS devices fit the MK board, well the devices are the same size and spec so I can't see an issue.
 
Is the enclosure actually part of the assembly per se? It's a "cover at the end of the day. I don't see panel builders having this same grief when they fit a line of Merlin Gerin breakers onto a DIN rail in a SAREL cabinet that THEY have fitted where THEY see fit to a back plate etc. 
 
At the end of the day the BEAMA comments are an opinion and nothing more. Don't get me wrong in the case of bending/twisting busbar fingers or lumping in a piece of whatever copper's to hand to make it fit I can see where they're coming from. 

 

[Sidewinder]

There are only 3 parts to 60439 that are still current as of BSI tonight.

2 show current, revised, 1 shows current, superseded.

61439 shows as current.

It is a difficult situation, I'm not saying Dave is wrong, or his kit is not suitable, the issue lies in th,e IMHO inadequacy of the standards, and how the installer meets these.

No PII would leave you personally liable.

OnOff,

BEAMA speak on behalf of their members.

Schneider being one.

As far as panels go the whole unit would be built to the relevant standards and the complete unit must CE marked in accordance with the LVD so this would be down to then designer and manufacturer of the panel.

I've just pulled one on this & refused delivery of a £3k panel because it did not come with suitable certification amongst other things.

 

[OnOff]

A mate had a hot tub fitted. One of these companies at the local garden centre. The "installer" whacked in a different make breaker into the old flush mount council board. Testing? I think not. All we can be sure of is that when the bloke closed the clear lid over the breakers, he "verified" that the new one stuck out more he's SNAPPED the hinge lid off. Left it like it and pi$$ed off. I hear about this over the phone.........."Did he issue certs?...........No......right, because it's "in the garden"....and you paid CASH as well!".  headbang

Lucky he never paid just short of £8K I suppose..........Oh. he did! Receipt? What do you reckon?

Will try and get a picture for the Black Museum.

 

[Steve3948]

I think people worry too much sometimes, the reason why manufacturers would say you must fit our parts, is only because they don't want you buying anyone else's stuff. They are all safe and I don't think the mcb will know who's bus-bar he's sat on.

It's not dangerous it's all bull, I would not lose sleep over it. Fit what your happy with.

This country is becoming a joke worldwide, they see us as mugs, and they are right.

 

[SBS Dave]

Thanks Steve for your post, which at least is injecting some commmon sense into the topic.

As a member of TEF, I am happy to join in the academic debate about BSEN60439, with 100's of members looking at the topics to which I have contributed. On balance, it would appear that members would be wary of "mix & match".

On my SBS Trade Sales topic, which I am using as my trial Sponsor Advertising site, I have had more than 600 initial visits to site, then nothing for 2 weeks. I have had just 2 orders from new customers. I must assume that either nobody is fitting Consumer Units, or are continuing to fit 17th Edition Split Boards. Either way, it does not bode well for me as a potential Sponsor.

SBS Dave