Extension Wiring

[i_am_fubar]

So, I've gone from this sort of wiring:

Untitled

• i_am_fubar
• 30 Apr 2013
• 3

Ripped it all out and am now doing my own install (First fix only so far)

Untitled

• i_am_fubar
• 14 Apr 2014
• 1

Untitled

• i_am_fubar
• 14 Apr 2014
• 1

Untitled

• i_am_fubar
• 14 Apr 2014
• 1

I do feel so much better about it

 

[PrenticeBoyofDerry]

I assume these cables are to be covered up (ceiling)?.
How do you intend to comply to the regulations concerning cable protection from mechanical damage?

 

[i_am_fubar]

50mm batons installed at 90 degrees to joists with plasterboard over the top.

Though I wasn't aware the ceiling was an area that is deemed susceptible to damage. Especially considering the number of cables I've seen just fed down between joists during re-wires.

Fubar.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Ripped it all out and am now doing my own install (First fix only so far)

Did you apply for Building Regulations approval?

Untitled

• i_am_fubar
• 14 Apr 2014
• 1

Untitled

• i_am_fubar
• 14 Apr 2014
• 1

Hope you never need to do anything to those cables ever again.

And what's above the ceiling?

Untitled

• i_am_fubar
• 14 Apr 2014
• 1

How far are those buried cables from the corner? They don't look to be within 150mm.


And what's going on here:

?

 

[WabbitPoo]

Apart from that, its great!

 

[i_am_fubar]

In order of address.

Nope, as the work is all getting inspected before cover up by a qualified spark, along with second fix, final testing and sign off.

I agree, hope I never have to change anything. But I've got around a 50% redundancy with the cables, so I can change quite a bit without needing to re-run anything (all run back to a central, accessible, distribution point)

No where near 150mm from corners. All buried cables in the wall are a vertical drop to an accessory point though.

Yea, that's the toe of a boot lintel I hate those things. Thankfully, it's not directly carrying the weight of the roof any more.

Fubar.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Nope, as the work is all getting inspected before cover up by a qualified spark, along with second fix, final testing and sign off.

You found one prepared to lie and say he did it all?

No where near 150mm from corners. All buried cables in the wall are a vertical drop to an accessory point though.

Serving that point, or just passing through?

And what's above? You say this is an extension, so if that's a flat roof what about insulation and VCL?

 

[i_am_fubar]

This whole 'did it all' thing is a pain, and just plain daft. Where is the limit.

If a spark sees you've run a cable from point A to point B, and can see all of it. To correctly 'do it all himself'. He would have to remove it, and then replace it exactly as it was before. Providing 100% observations can be made of the install, there is no difference between a spark hammering clips in and cutting cable, or the home owner (Apart from the litigious nature of our country).

Similar to when I had the gas done. I cut and dry fitted the whole lot, then had a gas engineer solder it up and commission it. Yet it's signed as his install.

Allowances MUST be made for common sense, else we will grind to a halt where you won't be allowed to do anything yourself... Rant over.

But in the exact case of your question, I guess so.

One piece of conduit per accessory box. No pass throughs. All run as spurs to a common distribution point.

It is a warm deck flat roof with 120mm rigid foam insulation, 2 layers of 18mm OSB3 inc. a VCL. Topped with EPDM and bird cr*p. All new, and a damn site better than what was there.

Are you trying to find holes in my work Sheds?

Fubar.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

(Apart from the litigious nature of our country).

And what the law says.

One piece of conduit per accessory box. No pass throughs. All run as spurs to a common distribution point.

OK - it just looks like a lot of cables, that was all.

Are you trying to find holes in my work Sheds?

No - just wondered if you were planning on putting insulation between the joists.

 

[PrenticeBoyofDerry]

Though I wasn't aware the ceiling was an area that is deemed susceptible to damage.

Well I assume you will be fitting plasterboard, therefore screws every 150-200mm, doubled up where boards a butted up. That is about 15-20 screws per square metre. So taking that into consideration if the screws are of a length that can cause damage to the cables, I think there would be a good chance that cables will be damaged. The regulations state no less than 50mm form top and bottom or must be mechanically protected, it does not matter what the state of the cabling and routing was previously, you are installing new cables so needs to satisfy the regulations.

 

[i_am_fubar]

A lot of that cable is network, alarm and speaker. Most T&E is for the lighting.

As to the law of it, that's what I was referring to. You can have two identical things, and yet one of them is illegal, and one totally acceptable. Ideologically, this is just plain wrong.

PrenticeBoy, I highly doubt I would have a problem with a screw hitting, even without the extra 50mm. But that's only because I'll know exactly where every mounting point and cable is. Though it's an appreciable concern of someone over boarding in the future. I may look at armouring them up regardless. Never know when someone is going to get overly zealous with a hole saw

I could have drilled the joists, but I would have needed a lot of holes, and would rather not impact the strength of them.

It annoys me that, legally speaking, it's more acceptable to leave dangerous work alone and ignore it. Than make it safe / correct it. But, being a law, it's a line that needs to be towed in public I guess.

 

[PrenticeBoyofDerry]

I may look at armouring them up regardless. Never know when someone is going to get overly zealous with a hole saw

metallic capping would not be considered suitable, at least 2mm gauge would be required to deem it as mechanical protection.

It annoys me that, legally speaking, it's more acceptable to leave dangerous work alone and ignore it. Than make it safe / correct it. But, being a law, it's a line that needs to be towed in public I guess.

The requirements of the years have changed and when you come across existing installation they do not require to be retrospectively brought up to the new standards, that does not mean that you can walk away from a dangerous or a potentially dangerous situation, they should be dealt with 9/10 that is down to whether the property owner is willing to pay for the remedial work. I find often they are not!

 

[ban-all-sheds]

As to the law of it, that's what I was referring to. You can have two identical things, and yet one of them is illegal, and one totally acceptable. Ideologically, this is just plain wrong.

You have not shown where two identical things can be like that.

It annoys me that, legally speaking, it's more acceptable to leave dangerous work alone and ignore it. Than make it safe / correct it.

It isn't.

 

[i_am_fubar]

I thought it was 3mm for armored protection?

 

[PrenticeBoyofDerry]

Heavy gauge conduit is usually specified at around 2mm, this product is deemed suitable as mechanical protection, so with that I would say 2mm is adequate. I all once on a job with a rather awkward building controls office asked what their opinion/instruction was on the gauge used as mechanical protection, they also stated 2mm. BS7671 does not actually specify a gauge size. I think in these cases an assessment should be made and common sense used.