Cable sizing query - LV lights

[Taylortwocities]

Much earier today I did ask these questions

Questions

What is the voltage from the transformer?
How many lamps, and what wattage are each of these on the end of each piece of cable?
What is the distance from the transformer to the lamp(s)?

There has been no response but - like many of the topics on here - I'll bet the OP has just got tired of people trying score points off each other.

 

[bhm1712]

i agree, however i do feel that this forum as a DIY forum attracts many a person who is wanting to do DIY electrical, when these days DIY electrical in terms of installation and modification is not really applicable due to the relevant regulation and legislation.

How can we as qualified electricians - domestic and non domestic, give advice when we know that the OP will not be following those regulations and legislations?

Surely we can serve a purpose of informing people of what is really the acceptable ways and maybe even prevent somebody from doing themselves or others damage? hence why many of these topics turn into a slagging match of differing opinions. Really the only advice we should be giving to non qualified people is get the professionals in when they are trying to do installation or fixed wiring modification.

 

[jrinterfuse]

Thanks for the constructive items added to this post. Its just a shame that these were in the minority. Could i suggest setting up a forum titled 'up my own ###' and use it for your posturing rather than pollute the thread.

As there was no quick easy answer & I have not selected the lights I have just run in 1mm and will use a second transformer.

With regards to the installation it will be completed to 17th eddition & routing etc has allready been agreed. The electrican has signed off a number of other installtions I have done thus there is some trust & understanding. I was running the cable in conduit as a contingency however I still wanted to preinstall to save the hassle of having to swap later.

 

[SaladFingers]

My approach isn't flat out wrong, I'm just not in your clique.

Criminal mind? Get over yourself.

Just because you don't like/agree with a law doesn't mean someone is wrong if they point out that it applies. The law is fairly simple - if you are relying on the electrician self certifying the work through his scheme (which it sounds like you are) then what you propose requires him to make a false statement.

Hold on with the 'sounds like you are' ect - I am not. This thread is for someone else who is. I do my own work, no one elses.

So you don't think that reasonable provision for tool storage should be made in peoples gardens?

Well on a personal level it would be something that makes sense. However it is irrelevant because there isn't (AFAIK) a law requiring it.

Indeed, it makes sense to have at least a shed and it ought to be made law to have one.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

So you don't think that reasonable provision for tool storage should be made in peoples gardens?

I mean this:

not this:

Ban Part P

 

[SaladFingers]

We know what part P is.

Before Part P, BS7671 was still endorsed by electricians and still is. We don't need Part P being shoved down our throats as a measure to enure we follow BS7671.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

If you comply with BS 7671 you'll comply with Part P, so where's the problem?

Why is a legal requirement to make reasonable provision in the design and installation of electrical installations in order to protect persons operating, maintaining or altering the installations from fire or injury something you object to?

Do you think it ought to be lawful for people to design and install dangerous electrical installations?

 

[SaladFingers]

If you comply with BS 7671 you'll comply with Part P, so where's the problem?

Not necessarily...

...but indeed, what's the problem if BS7671 is complied with...

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Not necessarily...

So it's possible to comply with BS 7671 and yet end up with something which has not got provision in its design or installation in order to protect persons operating, maintaining or altering it from fire or injury?

...but indeed, what's the problem if BS7671 is complied with...

None, so why do you object to safety being legally required?

 

[SaladFingers]

Not necessarily...

So it's possible to comply with BS 7671 and yet end up with something which has not got provision in its design or installation in order to protect persons operating, maintaining or altering it from fire or injury?

I didn't say that. I said not necessarily to your assumption that following BS7671 is compliance with Part P. There's more to it than that.

...but indeed, what's the problem if BS7671 is complied with...

None, so why do you object to safety being legally required?

I don't object to safety.

You read me wrong Mr Sheds

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I didn't say that. I said not necessarily to your assumption that following BS7671 is compliance with Part P. There's more to it than that.

What more?

P1 Reasonable provision shall be made in the design and installation of electrical installations in order to protect persons operating, maintaining or altering the installations from fire or injury.

I don't object to safety.

So which bit of "Reasonable provision shall be made in the design and installation of electrical installations in order to protect persons operating, maintaining or altering the installations from fire or injury" do you object to?

 

[SaladFingers]

I didn't say that. I said not necessarily to your assumption that following BS7671 is compliance with Part P. There's more to it than that.

What more?

P1 Reasonable provision shall be made in the design and installation of electrical installations in order to protect persons operating, maintaining or altering the installations from fire or injury.

I don't object to safety.

So which bit of "Reasonable provision shall be made in the design and installation of electrical installations in order to protect persons operating, maintaining or altering the installations from fire or injury" do you object to?

I never said that I wouldn't make reasonable provision etc...eg, to comply with BS7671, which we always have done. Part P is entirely different, although they say what you say above, which is what every designer has said long before the invention of Part P.

You're reading far too much into this. Quite why we're even having this conversation is a mystery.

 

[Aragorn84]

Part P is entirely different

is it?

All Part P effectively says is "do it safely". Its quite simply one sentence, as BAS posted:

P1 Reasonable provision shall be made in the design and installation of electrical installations in order to protect persons operating, maintaining or altering the installations from fire or injury.

 

[SaladFingers]

Part P is entirely different

is it?

All Part P effectively says is "do it safely". Its quite simply one sentence, as BAS posted:

P1 Reasonable provision shall be made in the design and installation of electrical installations in order to protect persons operating, maintaining or altering the installations from fire or injury.

Yes, but there's 'more' to Part P.

Anyone 'can do it safely'.

But if I've just done the electrical work, made compliance with BS7671, have I complied entirely with Part P? Have I?

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Yes, but there's 'more' to Part P.

What more?

Here is is in full, exactly as it appears in the regulations:



Apart from the qualifiers defining when it applies, it is just that single sentence, as we keep saying:

P1 Reasonable provision shall be made in the design and installation of electrical installations in order to protect persons operating, maintaining or altering the installations from fire or injury.

Why do you think there is more?

What is the more? Where is it laid down?

But if I've just done the electrical work, made compliance with BS7671, have I complied entirely with Part P? Have I?

For the life of me I cannot begin to imagine how you might not have done.