Thats how you do it, I've put one of those 50mm desk tidy things in since.
Floating sockets..
- Thread starter robinbanks
- Start date
I think we're definitely going to have to 'agree to disagree' on this
Just to make sure I'm not doing you an injustice ... are you saying that a trailing socket lying on the floor, wired with flex that went through a hole in a shelf to a plug that was plugged into a wall mounted socket would be 'acceptable', whereas it would not be acceptable if, rather than having a plug on it's end, the flex was 'hard-wired' into a wall-mounted FCU, switch, outlet plate, connector block/Wagos (behind blank plate) etc. etc. ... and that, given that you have cited 134.1.1, you would actually give a C3 to the latter?
Last edited:
Yes C3...I think we're definitely going to have to 'agree to disagree' on this
Just to make sure I'm not doing you an injustice ... are you saying that a trailing socket lying on the floor, wired with flex that went through a hole in a shelf to a plug that was plugged into a wall mounted socket would be 'acceptable', whereas it would not be acceptable if, rather than having a plug on it's end, the flex was 'hard-wired' into a wall-mounted FCU, switch, outlet plate, connector block/Wagos (behind blank plate) etc. etc. ... and that, given that you have cited 134.1.1, you would actually give a C3 to the latter?
Whats 132.12 again?
No wrong one cant remember im out at the moment...
But still C3 yeah agree to disagree
132.12 is about 'accessibility of electrical equipment' - presumably no problem with either what you or I were describing. 134.1.1, which you previously mentioned, is about 'good workmanship', and hence is a 'catch-all' that can mean anything to anyone
I'm rather surprised. It might sound like a silly, maybe even facetious, hypothetical question to ask, but your answer might possibly help me to understand your thinking, so ....But still C3 yeah agree to disagree
... if you still regard the 'latter situation' described in my last post as not being acceptable, would that remain the case if I super-glued the plug to the socket?
And we are back to 134.1.1
Im never going to say an un-fixed socket is acceptable...it needs improving
...final answer.
Its obviously been discussed before....similar to our discussion actually....difference this socket has no gland but, im sticking to it. 
www.electriciansforums.net
Is it within the regs to fit sockets without securing them to a wall/cupboard? | Electricians Forums
, Is it within the regs to fit sockets without securing them to a wall/cupboard?, Electrical Wiring, Theories and Regulations on Electricians Forums
www.electriciansforums.net
May I just comment on siting reg 1341.1.1?
In many ways perhaps the most powerfull reg in the book or one of them and often overlooked in some respects.
However this often get thought of by the statement "Not as the manufacturer intended!"
In other words if we use something as it was intended then always OK but if we use it not as intended is never OK!
I strongly disagree with that interpretation.
Yes we are encouraged to trust those who made it, indeed until recently their design was "paramount" whereas nowadays that has been downgraded very slightly to "must be taken into account".
I do not disgree with putting a very large of amount of trust in the manufacturers as a gen rule of thumb no problem usually , it is their product, they made it, tested it, probably have extensive knowledge of what it can/can not do and can often be relied upon.
But always remember, new inventions, new ideas, are not forbidden and might sometimes actually be encouraged providing that due diligence and sound engineering judgement is always used.
New inventions, new ideas can include sometimes using an existing product in ways the makers might not have envisaged them.
Caution is always advised if you deviate from the original intention because you might not have some vital knowledge but it is never totally forbidden.
It is never always wrong in every case, it might or might not be a good idea.
That is how we progress (sometimes!).
To wander outside the design of the makers then you become the designer (of that idea) and you accept the responsibillity of so doing.
In many ways perhaps the most powerfull reg in the book or one of them and often overlooked in some respects.
However this often get thought of by the statement "Not as the manufacturer intended!"
In other words if we use something as it was intended then always OK but if we use it not as intended is never OK!
I strongly disagree with that interpretation.
Yes we are encouraged to trust those who made it, indeed until recently their design was "paramount" whereas nowadays that has been downgraded very slightly to "must be taken into account".
I do not disgree with putting a very large of amount of trust in the manufacturers as a gen rule of thumb no problem usually , it is their product, they made it, tested it, probably have extensive knowledge of what it can/can not do and can often be relied upon.
But always remember, new inventions, new ideas, are not forbidden and might sometimes actually be encouraged providing that due diligence and sound engineering judgement is always used.
New inventions, new ideas can include sometimes using an existing product in ways the makers might not have envisaged them.
Caution is always advised if you deviate from the original intention because you might not have some vital knowledge but it is never totally forbidden.
It is never always wrong in every case, it might or might not be a good idea.
That is how we progress (sometimes!).
To wander outside the design of the makers then you become the designer (of that idea) and you accept the responsibillity of so doing.
DIYnot Local
Staff member
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
