That obviously makes some sense. However, although it's not something that anyone would normally need to do (unless they ran out of brown cable!), the regs do not seem to forbid, for example, the 'identification' of a blue single as line/live by just over-sleeving with brown at the ends - even though that raises exactly the same issue for anyone who was crazy enough to blindly break into the single somewhere along the length, assuming that blue meant neutral! It is only over-sleeving of a G/Y single (for use as something other than a protective conductor) that appears to be specifically forbidden.
I don't think that's the intention of the regulations. Granted I don't think I'd be happy with only a partial sleeving of G/Y cores (ie I'd want to cover all the way to the sheath as you'd suggested) but I believe the regulation may be more about ensuring clarification in the rest of the installation.
I have no idea which text you're referring to. I cannot find any text in 514 that would support your argument.
514.3.1 Except where idenification is not required by regulation 514.6, cores of cables shall be identified by:- (i) colour as required by Regulation 514.4 ...
I think we'll probably have to agree to disagree on this one.
Needless to say, I see nothing contrived - it seems to me to be a straightforward interpretation of the words. BTW, it was not originally 'my argument' - I 'learnt' it from someone here (can't remember who), and then decided that I agreed with it. Also, there is also the oft-quoted fact that at least one 'official body' (was it ESC? or NIC?) has given it's blessing to over-sleeving of G/Y cores in flex - so it's certainly not just me who might be 'misleading' people.
That would be interesting - although that will not, of course, alter the wording of BS7671.
Thank you, but I don't think that will stop him
I agree - and that's why, even for those comfortable to do it, the scope for over-sleeving G/Y's is pretty limited.
That's the point. These discussions commonly arise in relation to CH 'control centres' etc.. With multiple cables going to those places, the absence of a CPC in one of the cables presumably does not result in violation of 4113.1.1 or 412.2.3.2.
It doesn't need to, BS7671 is perfectly clear on this subject, unless you choose to contrive an argument that the colour of the conductor's insulation does not constitute the identification.
The cables in question (including the wiring centre itself) would be protected by double or reinforced insulation, so are fine.
That's not the point. 412.2.3.2 says "... a circuit supplying one or more items of Class II equipment shall have a CPC run to and terminated at each point in wiring and at each accessory" - so your double/reinforced insulation wiring centre therefore does require a CPC to be run to (and terminated within) it. However, if that requirement is satisfied by at least one cable entering it, that theoretically removes the need for CPCs in other cables going to the same place.
OK - so, to be sure I understand you ... do I therefore take it that your belief is that when the ends of a blue-insulated conductor are over-sleeved with brown sleeving that it is the blue insulation that is "the identification" of that conductor (identifying it as a line conductor)??
If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.
Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.
Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local
