Extending cables

[EFLImpudence]

No. If I understood correctly.

Zones are created by accessories only for cables connected to them.

 

[sparkwright]

Ah.

And yet we can randomly put anything in a wall in zones 150mm from the ceiling or a corner??

 

[Taylortwocities]

@plugy nobody has mentioned this, but the zones only apply to cables that are concealed and less than 50mm from the surface. you haven’t mentioned how the cables are installed. Zones don’t apply if they are visible eg.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Ah.

And yet we can randomly put anything in a wall in zones 150mm from the ceiling or a corner??

Yes - to allow for a lack of connected accessories.

 

[sparkwright]

Ah. Where does it actually specify that only cables directly connected to an accessory can form part of that cable zone?

I have heard this before on this forum, yet never seen it written down in the book.

 

[JohnW2]

You mean, for example, the return leg of a final ring circuit cannot pass through the socket back box?

As you will realise from what I wrote earlier, I agree with EFLI that the strict/theoretical answer is that such is not 'allowed' (unless the cable is in a safe zone created by an accessory to which it IS connected.).

However, I would also agree that in the case of the pair of cables forming a ring final, it's pretty silly - but in other cases it is not. Consider, for example, some cable which (for reasons of convenience) 'passes through' a light switch (without being connected to anything at the switch). It is theoretically possible that someone might subsequently remove that light switch (and its connections, and 'plaster over' the back box through which the other cable was passing - leaving that cable NOT in a safe zone (unless in one created by something else).

Kind Regards, John

 

[EFLImpudence]

522.6.202

 

[JohnW2]

Ah. Where does it actually specify that only cables directly connected to an accessory can form part of that cable zone? I have heard this before on this forum, yet never seen it written down in the book.

Kind Regards, John
Typed too slowly again - but at least I posted the evidence as well!

 

[DetlefSchmitz]

This is a rule that I am very happy to ignore. So report me!

 

[sparkwright]

Thanks for that.

Not a rule I necessarily agree with either, but there you go.

The magic word here is 'connected'.

 

[JohnW2]

This is a rule that I am very happy to ignore. So report me!

I did once actually encounter the very issue I described in my recent post.

When drilling into a seemingly 'safe' part of a wall resulted in my being 'plunged into darkness', I had to excavate the wall to investigate. I discovered a cable, part of a complicated lighting circuit, going through a 'plastered over' metal back box - which I presume had once (before my time) had an accessory mounted on it.

Kind Regards, John

 

[DetlefSchmitz]

Oh that's not the same at all. My position is that a visible accessory creates a horizontal and vertical safe zone. If you open up the accessory and see a wire emerging to the left and right of the accessory which isn't connected in the box, and you decide to drill on the left or right - who is stupid?

 

[sparkwright]

As you will realise from what I wrote earlier, I agree with EFLI that the strict/theoretical answer is that such is not 'allowed' (unless the cable is in a safe zone created by an accessory to which it IS connected.).

However, I would also agree that in the case of the pair of cables forming a ring final, it's pretty silly - but in other cases it is not. Consider, for example, some cable which (for reasons of convenience) 'passes through' a light switch (without being connected to anything at the switch). It is theoretically possible that someone might subsequently remove that light switch (and its connections, and 'plaster over' the back box through which the other cable was passing - leaving that cable NOT in a safe zone (unless in one created by something else).

Kind Regards, John

Very true. Yet a blanking plate could be used - if it was technically allowed.

But it's the big MIGHT again, isn't it?

One could say you shouldn't run cables concealed in a zone 150mm from a corner, someone MIGHT remove the adjoining wall, thus making the cable s no longer in a safe zone.

 

[sparkwright]

Oh that's not the same at all. My position is that a visible accessory creates a horizontal and vertical safe zone. If you open up the accessory and see a wire emerging to the left and right of the accessory which isn't connected in the box, and you decide to drill on the left or right - who is stupid?

I agree, it's the safest place for all concealed wiring, including those not associated with that particular accessory.

 

[JohnW2]

Oh that's not the same at all. My position is that a visible accessory creates a horizontal and vertical safe zone. If you open up the accessory and see a wire emerging to the left and right of the accessory which isn't connected in the box, and you decide to drill on the left or right - who is stupid?

Yes, but you seem to have missed my point. I totally agree with you that so long as the accessory is visible, there's no problem. However, as I said, the issue is that (as per what I encountered) it's possible for the accessory to be removed (and plastered over, leaving no clue) whilst a 'not connected' cable is still travelling through the (now not visible) box.

Kind Regards, John