These training modules are great. Keep them coming 👍🏻

Thankyou for releasing this module, I haven't even watched it all and I going to urgently speaking with my Landlord about upgrading our consumer unit. I could I suppose take your course but I like to avoid anything over 12v. Against that, the course was well written & easy to understand and perhaps I should be remember that just because I will never use it professionally doesn't mean it isn't fascinating!!

It's true what you say about issues. Mostly down to cr*p accessories and rushing to get done and onto the next job . Shower pull cords are the most common cause of burnt connections in my experience but don't need an AFDD. Shower pull cords used to have 2 screws per connection, now have one . Cheaply made products cause issues not electricians .

@@dennisphoenix1 you are right about shower pull cords, work of art to get the connections in and in the confines of the back box .

@@raychambers3646 Especially with 10.0 mm.

Seen two burnt out electric shower isolators in my life; one never switched off, the other switched on and off for every shower. The often-operated one fooled the carpenter-owner into changing the electric shower for no good reason...

had to change many shower pull cord switches always the neutral that burnt out, tried using MK 50A switches on a 7Kw shower still had the same problem a year or so later 3 times on one customers ! luckly they moved house , I to was a sparky untill I retired after 50 years all these money making regs changes

Seem to recall similar arguments when RCD protection became necessary on most circuits. It'll come down. 👍

@@efixx Not with how afdds are currently constructed they won't, having microprocessors in each breaker will never be something that can be made cheap. And RCBOs are actually half the price that jim is saying as well, so the gap is even bigger.

@@AndrewStrydomBRP some early strip downs showed they use stm32 processors, these can be brought on development boards for under £10. At the moment the price probably covers a lot of development and tooling costs.

@@AndrewStrydomBRP simple microprocessors cost just a few pence, these days. You can buy powerful complete boards retail for well under £10.

just don't buy them and the price will come down then. they are in the pockets of iet and we all know it

Youv'e hit the nail on the head Rob! at the end of the day "You can't polish a turd" we are installing rubbish as EVERYTHING is made in China. It's been a bug-bear of mine for a while now since heads on screws broke off on jobs using a manual screwdriver! this caused more work and gave me less faith in the job I was signing off as good. This country is now built using piles of.....

So stick to well known brands. They have their reputations to protect. They are not going to use cheap fake caps made in China. And when buy the product, check the warranty , and formally record when you purchased the product, take photographs of the receipts, store them securely, and if the product fails and it is still in warranty, then call off against the warranty. And if there is no warranty , keep track of this information anyway because you could make a claim against the retailer for selling products which are not of suitable quality under The Sales of Goods Acts. Products are required to last a reasonable amount of time.

@@deang5622 Nothing to do with fakes. Electrolytic caps age, it's in their nature. Unlike resistors, diodes and transistors that can last indefinitely when treated correctly, the same is not true for those types of caps. Even the (expensive) "long life" types are only rated for 10,000 hours (416 days) at their rated temperature, standard ones at 1,000 to 2,000 hours. And while that can be increased by keeping them cool, even then, their failure rate is only guaranteed to be not worse than 0.5% per 1,000 hours (41 days). Usually, this is no issue, given the typical lifetime of a modern device. Most electronic devices nowadays are used for 5 years or less. But that's not really what people want from a consumer unit. Those should last for decades. My estimate is that AFDDs will have a usable lifetime of about 8 to 10 years before failure rates get high enough that people want them replaced because they don't want their circuits to randomly die. And I expect customers to be quite verbal about expensive stuff in their consumer units dying, that's something they are not used to. Another issue I see is that dead caps could silently disable the arc fault detection circuit by no longer supplying the microchips with power. Those LEDs are nice, but who checks if their breakers are still lit up when they haven't tripped? And who actually expects a consumer to know what a dead LED means?

@@HenryLoenwind I probably know more about caps than you do. They dry out. And drying out doesn't happen over a few years. It takes considerably longer. I used to work for a company that made equipment where the life time of the products were long and the caps were essential to the quality of the output signals produced. We had a cap replacement programme in place for our customers. If caps dried out after a few years we'd all be replacing most of our electronic equipment and that is just not the case, is it? Just apply a bit of logic to it please. I do get irritated when amateurs come along and try to out-do the expert thinking they know more. And your comments out semiconductor devices are incorrect too. And yes, I used to design them . But their failure modes are another story.

@@HenryLoenwind Your post needs a reply that is a little more constructive that the one already provided. Electrolytic caps are rated via 2 values - hours and temperature as you say, but the temp is the key value when it comes to service life. Often the quoted temp is 105C, but what is not made clear is what happens if the operational temp is lower. For many caps the operational life will double for every 10c drop in temp. So a 10,000 hour @ 105C cap will have an estimated life of 20,000 hours @ 95C, 40,000 hours @ 85C, 80,000 hours at 75C and so on. So you need a very poorly installed CU in a very hot location for any good cap to cause a problem.

Very True

Health and safety has no cost ceiling, Look how many people Died in glenfell started by a fridge fault, AFDD if fitted to the kitchen ring would of prevented this loss of life High rise , HMO, care homes & hospitals this is a no brained addition, £1500 for a DB that should last 25 years that not really a consideration when your the one signing off the work, and would ultimately be held responsible in a court, blaming the untrained customer as not wanting to pay, won’t wash away a manslaughter charge,

I only have 2 socket circuits in my house, my maths might be wrong but that equates to £310, not sure where you're getting £1500 from......unless you're wanting to put AFDD's on every circuit, which isn't the reg so I think the customer can make the decision on how much of their own money they want to spend on their own safety.

@@NicoleBritnell from experience I would fit them to lighting circuits as well as the amount of faults is high and also DIYers fit crap/ badly when it comes to lights

@@oiuslags No it would not. An AFDD does not protect a ring, ( series arc) because there is an alternate route.. Thats why I said earlier, that rings might be brought into question to be replaced by radials. So not only the extra cost, but extra work with radials together with possibly a larger board.

Had similar situations of afdd's tripping out. Upon testing all seemed ok. I asked if it was when something in particular was plugged in. 'No I don't think so' came back the answer. Turned out it was a dodgy extension reel used to plug a fan heater in the bedroom that the daughter was using but keeping quiet because the parents moaned at her for using too much leccy.

Legalese? Firstly IET regs are not the law. You should know that by now. Second, there is not uncertainty around the use of language. Shall and should are quite different and are often used in the legal profession and contracts. Perhaps you need to improve your understanding of English. Shall means you must implement it. Should gives you the option of not implementing it, but is preferred. So where there are scenarios described which say "shall", you do not have a choice. You must comply.

As I pointed out in a management meeting some years ago, when someone asked about A new DB and I recommend having all RCBO’s for convince and fitting a more expensive brand, they were not keen to spend the extra money, I pointed out that, your house could if there was a problem burn down while you were out at work, to which people in-the room were moaning about being a bit over the top, so I pointed out “ that their house could also burn down in the middle of the night while your asleep and when you’re putting out the flames on your children’s backs you’re think 3 or 4 hundred quid was a bargain “ The room fell silent and the colour drained from the faces sat around me and the lady from HR sat next to me was nearly sick, at the the potential consequences of a fire at home,

@@deang5622 Not so sure an Insurance inspector would agree after a fire in a new installation of yours-the whole thing needs clarification- the term "recommended" should read MUST!

​@@oiuslags Had the same response from an engineer on a big site, telling me he had just saved £80,000 on a switch room. Trouble was the busbars in the isolating switchefuse twisted( fed by 300mm 4 core) and blew out the isolating switch from the panel! Replacement was six weeks and the switch fuse served a huge trading floor! The out come was temp. solid bus bars to breach the gap- I informed him, it could have happen whilst the trading floor was in operation and the £millions liability claim made his £80,000 seem petty.

Don't forget about the appliances connected to the ring final though.... It was one of them that lit the touch paper there...

Yes I'm concerned about the continuously ratchetting up of BS7671. How often do you need an AFDD. Has someone done a cost benefit analysis? In safety the question isn't can it improve safety but is it worthwhile?

That’s not quite correct - watch 15:37 - 16:50. Also, “a standard two storey building” - is a bit vague - as you could have HMO’s of single / two storeys. If you mean a residential house of two storeys - open to debate as “other properties” mentioned - then it’s “recommended” which becomes you “should” - but you need to do “something” quoting the chap on the video!

This will promote large rings with some 4mm cable to the 1st socket on each leg of the ring to prevent overheating cable on an unbalanced ring - to save costs. One ring for a whole house, with hard-wired dedicated radials on: Oven, Hob, Immersion.

@@johnburns4017 Which is back to 1960s wiring, and they don't pick up a fault on line-line on rings because it's at the same potential. Basically only protecting against nail-in faults line/neutral or faults with plug in items.

@@effervescence5664 AFDDs highlight an advantage of a ring. If there is an arc, the arc creates a resistance, so the current will, go around the ring from the other direction, reducing any dangerous arcing.

_"AC final circuits supplying_ *_socket-outlets with a rated current not exceeding 32 A"_* So 13A sockets need AFDDs. If you get sockets on a final circuit capable passing over 32A then you are exempt from fitting AFDDs. Are they available in CEF? ;)

Move too quick for my wallet.

@@markrainford1219 😂 You’re right there!

I passed

Congrats!!

Yes I totally agree he's got recommend wrong. If he's clarified it with the IET, then they have got it wrong!

@@markrainford1219 I would clarify the meaning of _recommend_ with an Oxford English dictionary.

Yes using the word recommend in a pseudo-mandatory condition would both contravene the normal meaning and the practice of other regulations. If used in this sense its very stupid. Redefining the word in an annex doesn't really help!

Grenfell Tower

That wouldn’t have prevent Grenfil tower the problem was the dryer which caught fire not from the supply feeding it it was an appliance fault this then spread inside the room and to the outer building insulation also my issue is with AFDS there is no way of testing them apart from David saverys home made device. Not convinced by afds on lower loads , seen them in America and I’m not impressed .

The IET makes its money from the subscriptions of members and the publication and sale of books. It is a registered charity. It is not allowed by law to make profit like a conventional business. The IET does not make money from any suppliers of electrical apparatus. I am sick to death of hearing BS conspiracy theories about the IET that it is introducing regulations so that it can profit from them. *It is not allowed by law to make profit* . That last statement alone should be sufficient to silence you, and silence these mischievous and false assertions others like you make. Either put up the evidence to back up your wild allegations or shut up.

As for accessories. I think you will find there is a whole raft of British Standards the accessories must comply with. Those BS standards exist for safety and to ensure consistency of products made by multiple manufacturers.

I have been in the trade for 45 years and from my own experience I have seen a massive decline in the standard of material supplied, too many manufacturers have sent production to the Far East and the softer materials used for connections now require the use of torque tools. As for the BS standard mentioned in one of the comments, I know what BS used to stand for but these days it stands for something completely different and any experienced Electrician will know what I mean.

Certificate of Europe, CE, is a lot different than BS all geared for the ease of manufacturing cost, as you say anyone that can't see that is in denial, I stand by my previous comment

@@deang5622The 'profit' is a job for life, in swish offices on an excellent salary and a gold plated pension. It's very simple, if there were no new revisions to the 'regs' they would be out of a job. They've had one hundred and forty years and eighteen attempts plus lord knows how many amendments to get it right. You've obviously got a dog in this fight.

What you have to remember is that the Regulations originally were driven by Insurance companies annoyed at having to cover fire cost of poor installations. There might be more to this , than just electrical engineers wanting to change the regs.

The cost should come down over time as demand and supply increases. I think the current "must" requirements and recommendation is a fair balance. I wouldn't like to see it required for all circuits in the near future given the current cost!

Why was the earthing requirement for metal capping removed?

Oh and they don’t work on rings, the circuit that gets the most use in a house 😅

Possibly but it could lead to issues with unwanted tripping. 🤔

Where have you seen them tested please?

Great info thanks 🙏

@@efixx all the internals showed signs of thermal degradation but the multifunction tester just saw no problem. Obviously when the fittings had been on long period time something was causing the arc within the gearing. Let alone all the heat degraded wiring within old fluorescents. Also provided good enough evidence that all the lights needed to go.

@@Beariam24 That's why you do periodic test and inspection but nobody wants to pay for that any more, lack of maintenance.

@@leewinters606 100%.

@@Beariam24 just bare in mind when new devices or any other electrical equipment is new on the market you tube channels might be getting a paid promotion the old saying (back handers).shop around and do your research.

You are correct they have a microcontroller / DSP inside to detect specific arc waveforms.

He only does £1 LEDs.

Yes that will decide if it's useful or save 1 in 1,000,000,000, 000 000 and if it worth the cost. or a rip off designed by an office guy with spare time

John Ward has done some tests

i would like to know how much you paid for that

@@OnlyUseMeEquip £2580 including VAT/ fitting/ testing etc. in 2021 in Bedfordshire (near London). Not cheap I admit but where safety is involved I would rather spend the money to get decent protection. Maybe not your average consumer.

Screwfix have stock of AFDDs. You won’t see them in prebuilt consumer units as AFDDs are only required on socket circuits in certain types of installations such as care homes, student accommodation etc. You can of course go beyond the basic requirements and fit in any installation.

@@efixx Thankyou for the reply. After watching your video I was thinking about attempting to comply with the 'recommended' rules. But seeing that RCBOs with afdd are £150 for a single unit, I think I'll stick with basic RCBOs and buy a new induction HOB instead....

AFDDs are to be on final circuits with sockets drawing 32A and below - UK is typically 13A, but higher is permissible in certain situations. An arc welders will have a socket draw over 32A, is not a problem. I would assume an AFDD would detect an arc on an arc welder.

AFDD mandatory from September 28 for HMO thatched and wooden buildings

Well you would if you were changing the board or adding sockets

Does not with an HMO next inspection in 4 years for me and I will close as it will then

Although not mentioned in the video I would assume that the fitting of AFDDs is only required on a new installation or an addition to an existing circuit, when carrying out an EICR you could inform the customer about AFDDs but at £150 each plus labour it might be a hard sell but, in any event when carrying out an EICR, if AFDDs are not fitted it is not a retrospective requirement that they must be fitted.

@@andyg1645 Are you sure? You do say _assume._

@@andyg1645 and this is why I'm asking the question, since the requirement of RCD's were written in the same context as what this new regulation states, I would "assume" its to be mandatory on all installations, previous and new... I'm just looking for clarification as I can not seem to find a reputable one from any source without reaching out to IET.

You simply spend the day removing everything and finding no visible signs of any arcing before handing the customer a big bill and telling them that it must have been a freak event and to give you a call if it happens again.

Yes, lawyers will always say to use must as shall is antiquated, but enginers are set in their ways I find.

@@jay-em The wording is such that a 7th floor flat in a block having a new socket circuit does not need to fit an AFDD.

There is, but for BS and ISO, “shall” is used for a requirement (mandatory provision in a standard) and “must” is reserved for external constraints (eg “eggs must be kept warm to hatch”) included for information. Permission (you can, but don’t have to in order to comply with a standard) is always “may”. “Should” is a recommendation; something that is not required for compliance with a standard, but ought usually to be done unless there’s good reason otherwise. If compliance is independently assessed, assessors will usually ask why a “should” provision is not being followed.

@@slrellison It seems they have their own definitions then. But do not tell us what they are. So go by the official dictionary definitions. _[shall] is often found in_ *_suggestions,_* _such as "Shall we go?" "Shall" is also frequently used in promises or_ *_voluntary actions._* Must is well .... _must._ We all know what that means. No ambiguity. Anything else besides _must,_ does not have to be done.

M&Q electrical regulations (actual statute law) always use 'shall', when there is absolutely no excuse in law not to do something.

Good question. We'll look into it. 👍

@@efixx I would imagine it applies to all floors in an 18m+ building, if there was a fault in a ground floor flat that caused a fire there is a strong likelihood that it would affect the floors above.

When I read the wording of the regulation, I interpreted as applying to the whole building.

Interesting that council flats do not have to comply with regulations mandatory for private landlords

Well, I guess it's similar to an MCB, there's no way to functionally test one of those either. I don't know for a fact but I would imagine it fails safe.

does the afdd drive a mechanical or solid state contact to do the switching?

A new very expensive piece of test equipment will no doubt be the next expensive requirement for Electricians to own when the 19th edition comes out.

That’s my question also, he talks about the use of the word recommended in the regs but didn’t clarify if this was referring to all domestic ring circuits. If the regs want AFFDs fitted in all domestic properties it will be an uphill battle trying to convince householders that you are not trying to rip them off, especially when they know a guy called Bob in the pub who said he can do the job for a fraction of the quoted price. It was however an otherwise informative video.

@@andyg1645 It's another one of those grey areas. It's recommended rather than optional. As Joe said, if you don't fit them, you need to do SOMETHING which I imagine will be some other form of protection from the same potential danger. AFDD's are the regs PREFERRED option. It's not just ring circuits but all socket circuits. The average domestic property has three socket circuits. Thankfully the regulation doesn't apply to all circuits! I need to replace my parents DB at some point and that has SIX socket circuits! Mike.

Depending upon the nature of the electrical fault then yes. We discuss the topic in this video - ukposts.info/have/v-deo/poaJdp2je5tnsZc.html

I suspect that Grenfell Tower had a bad neutral connection somewhere, so that the voltage received in individual flats could deviate considerably from 230v if the loads on each of the three phases supplied to the whole building were not equal. Before the fire the tenants' organisation Grenfell Action Group had been complaining for a couple of years at least about voltage surges that were destroying electrical appliances.

nothing to with that it was the external insulatiion,

​@@alanreid3063I thought the Report determined that an electrical appliance caused a fire which then spread to the cladding.

That's because you reside in a residence.

@@markrainford1219 i understand this which is why i seek clarity, with reference to the statement at about 1525 on the video where he says ‘residential in this context doesn’t just refer to where people live or sleep, but also includes areas where people may RESIDE during the day for work. So office blocks could be included under these circumstances as well’

They are waiting to see how much of a stink this causes, before they roll out 'every circuit' in the nineteenth edition.

Good question, the answer is I have no idea! I'll make enquiries. 👍

I watched that webinar also and what was suggested just sounds insane and unmanageable. Imagine trying to explain and get the go ahead to do that from a customer, let alone execute the installation- to me that would mean fitting an unsightly enclosure at eye level at 10m intervals, fine in a new build or rewire in some respects but on an existing installation how do we know the routes if we didn’t install the cables to know these lengths I’m unsure of also. It just sounds crazy. If this is the case I do not know why they are putting the responsibility of dealing with this on us - bearing in mind we are dealing with the type A situation also, and not onto the manufacturer’s? Why can they not be charged with designing and manufacturing accessories (smokes, heats, c02 etc.) with SPD built in? Surely that is a more sensible idea? The other thing that struck me also was that there has been no mention of this in the limited material on SPD’s that I’ve seen over the past year or so.

*Dual RCD is against the regs.* They are clear that a fault on one circuit *must not* affect another circuit. So RCBOs it has to be. I do not know anyone who fits dual RCDs any longer.

Mandatory since September 28 for HMO,no insurance cover now unless retrofitted I am advised

Afdd includes an RCBo function

@@efixx thanks

A lot of updates to the regs like the use of AFDDs are required to counter the the poor quality materials that we get now and because too many Electricians fail to ensure a good mechanical connection.

Come on. You Can't expect people to honour 60950 ... Thousands of Chinese manufacturers would go bankrupt. All HAIL the MRA !

More education for customers required. 👍

@@efixx you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink.

Only new installations and additions.

My HMO insurance says not covered unless retrofitted with AFDD so will carry the risk until I close the business when next five year test required for a licence