Replacing an inline rocker on/off switch with a SCU or SFCU

[viewcode]

* I have a lamp like this one ( http://www.ikea.com/gb/en/catalog/products/00190458/ ), although it may not be that specific one.
* It has a flexible power lead.
* That lead includes an inline rocker on/off switch, and that lead has a 13A UK plug at one end.
* I want to remove the inline rocker on/off switch and replace it with a double-pole single-throw switched connection unit (like this one http://www.diy.com/diy/jsp/bq/nav.jsp?action=detail&fh_secondid=9289780 ), which I can then screw to the wall with a mounting box like this ( http://www.diy.com/diy/jsp/bq/nav.jsp?action=detail&fh_secondid=9289733 ).
* I have read "Approved Document P: Electrical safety - dwellings (2006 edition)" ( http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/uploads/br/BR_PDF_ADP_2006.pdf ), which I believe to be the current and relevant document of the Building Regulations.
* I believe that this work is non-notifiable work within the meaning of Section 0 ("General Guidance"), paragraph 0.7 ("When not necessary to involve building control bodies") of that document.
* I believe that this work is not in a kitchen, or a special location; does not involve work on a special installation; consists of adding light fittings and switches to an existing circuit, and/or adding socket outlets and fused spurs to an existing ring or radial circuit, and/or prefabricated equipment sets and associated flexible leads with integral plug and socket connections; and is therefore included in Table 1 ("Work that need not be notified to building control bodies") of that document.
* I have read the relevant part of the DIYnot wiki ( //www.diynot.com/wiki/electrics:part_p:diy_electrical_work_and_the_law ) and other parts ( //www.diynot.com/network/ericmark/albums/959/11895 ) and I believe it does not contradict my points above.
* I conclude that this work is non-notifiable.
* This posting constitutes a dated public notification of the above.

 

[westie101]

Assuming that you will be connecting the FCU to the socket and that the socket is not a spur from a ring and that the appropriate sized T&E will be used I can't see a problem

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I can see the problem of still having a cable dangling from it.

Why not chase the cable into the wall and put it on the lighting circuit?

 

[JohnW2]

I can see the problem of still having a cable dangling from it.

More of a problem than the intended use with the dangling cable and a plug on the end of it? Indeed, if one takes the OP literally (no mention of lengthening or replacing the flex after removing in-line switch), it would sound as if the intention is to mount the SFCU high up, close to the present position of the in-line switch, in which case there would be a lot less dangling cable, and none dangling low down.

Why not chase the cable into the wall and put it on the lighting circuit?

Certainly better, not the least aesthetically.

Kind Regards, John.

 

[PrenticeBoyofDerry]

I want to remove the inline rocker on/off switch and replace it with a double-pole single-throw switched connection unit.

You can do this, 30mm back box that you have linked is a bit on the chunky side for this application a 16mm back box is more suitable.
So you intend to cut in to the cable, remove the in-line switch and replace that for a 13A S/FCU(switched fused connection unit). That's fine but remember the 13A fuse in the S/FCU will be serving very little purpose, the plug supplied with this wall light may have a lower rated fuse installed, so I would replace the 13A fuse in the S/FCU for the same that is in the fuse holder of the plug.
Your dangling flex though not that pleasing to look at, can be clipped to the wall or even run within trunking, if chasing out is not an option.
If you did chase out for the cable, then it is likely that RCD protection will be needed if that circuit is not already protected by it, now that's a whole new ball game!

Also make sure the wall light is functioning correctly prior to your alterations to the switching/flex. Because once you make that alteration and if the light was/is faulty, you will have a problem with IKEA convincing them that it was not working prior to your alteration and getting it replaced.

 

[JohnW2]

You can do this, 30mm back box that you have linked is a bit on the chunky side for this application a 16mm back box is more suitable.

Can one sensibly get a SFCU into a 16mm backbox - I would have thought it would be very tight.

Kind Regards, John.

 

[PrenticeBoyofDerry]

Can one sensibly get a SFCU into a 16mm backbox - I would have thought it would be very tight.

Kind Regards, John.

Fair point. I was thinking ahead of myself, 25mm back box or the 30mm as linked.
But if the plug is rated at less than 10A, which I guess it will be for the wall lights, why not just use a 10A Switch plate instead of a S/FCU, then 16mm is okay!
I must have saved to OP about a fiver in materials there?

 

[JohnW2]

Can one sensibly get a SFCU into a 16mm backbox - I would have thought it would be very tight.

Fair point. I was thinking ahead of myself, 25mm back box or the 30mm as linked. But if the plug is rated at less than 10A, which I guess it will be for the wall lights, why not just use a 10A Switch plate instead of a S/FCU, then 16mm is okay! I must have saved to OP about a fiver in materials there?

If, as I understand it, the OP intends to wire the SFCU (or whatever) as a spur off a ring final circuit, having just a switch would mean that the light's flex (and, indeed, the light fitting itself - although some people don't think that's an issue) was only protected by a 32A MCB. He surely has to have an FCU?

Kind Regards, John

 

[viewcode]

Thank you for the replies above: I appreciate the quick response. The proposed changes are very simple and are illustrated in this diagram

Untitled

• viewcode
• 7 Oct 2011
• 1

I appreciate that other techniques would be much better looking for only marginally more effort, but as I am not a "person registered with an electrical self-certification scheme" within the meaning of the Building Regs, I thought the minimal possible change would be best.

 

[JohnW2]

Thank you for the replies above: I appreciate the quick response. The proposed changes are very simple and are illustrated in this diagram

Untitled

• viewcode
• 7 Oct 2011
• 1

Oh - I didn't realise you intended to retain the plug; I thought you were going to wire it into the ring circuit. If you're keeping the plug, then PBoD's sugegstion of just having a switch (and a neater 16mm box), rather than a SFCU, would be fine, since there's a fuse in the plug.

Kind Regards, John.

 

[viewcode]

Thank you for the replies above: I appreciate the quick response. The proposed changes are very simple and are illustrated in this diagram

Untitled

• viewcode
• 7 Oct 2011
• 1

Oh - I didn't realise you intended to retain the plug; I thought you were going to wire it into the ring circuit. If you're keeping the plug, then PBoD's sugegstion of just having a switch (and a neater 16mm box), rather than a SFCU, would be fine, since there's a fuse in the plug.

Kind Regards, John.

It's OK. Replacing the plug and wiring it directly into the socket *is* an option for the future (as is sheathing the wiring in trunking). But the above are changes I can implement right now without worrying about breaking the law

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Thank you for the replies above: I appreciate the quick response. The proposed changes are very simple and are illustrated in this diagram

Untitled

• viewcode
• 7 Oct 2011
• 1

As John said - there's no need to have an FCU.

I appreciate that other techniques would be much better looking for only marginally more effort, but as I am not a "person registered with an electrical self-certification scheme" within the meaning of the Building Regs, I thought the minimal possible change would be best.

You really ought to read up on that.


//www.diynot.com/wiki/electrics:part-p

 

[JohnW2]

It's OK. Replacing the plug and wiring it directly into the socket *is* an option for the future (as is sheathing the wiring in trunking). But the above are changes I can implement right now without worrying about breaking the law

Fair enough, but for your 'right now' solution, you could, if you wish, just use a switch and a 16mm box. You can always change that to a SFCU (and probably deeper box, maybe even a 'flush' one) if/when you decide to wire it in (or have it wired in) directly.

Kind Regards, John.

 

[viewcode]

Thank you for the replies above: I appreciate the quick response. The proposed changes are very simple and are illustrated in this diagram

Untitled

• viewcode
• 7 Oct 2011
• 1

As John said - there's no need to have an FCU.

I appreciate that other techniques would be much better looking for only marginally more effort, but as I am not a "person registered with an electrical self-certification scheme" within the meaning of the Building Regs, I thought the minimal possible change would be best.

You really ought to read up on that.

//www.diynot.com/wiki/electrics:part-p

Thank you: I have already read it

 

[viewcode]

It's OK. Replacing the plug and wiring it directly into the socket *is* an option for the future (as is sheathing the wiring in trunking). But the above are changes I can implement right now without worrying about breaking the law

Fair enough, but for your 'right now' solution, you could, if you wish, just use a switch and a 16mm box. You can always change that to a SFCU (and probably deeper box, maybe even a 'flush' one) if/when you decide to wire it in (or have it wired in) directly.

Kind Regards, John.

Thank you