Safe zones and skirtings

[holmslaw]

..

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I'm not confused, but the only zones mentioned are top of a wall and corners of rooms. So all cables should emanate only from those zones and not from under floor to above. And the accessory does only sighifies a possible cable route to above, to a corner or vertically and horizontally to another accessory.

So how did it come about that cables can drop behind skirting boards?

Give it a rest, I've had jokes in Christmas crackers which are funnier than this.

 

[chapeau]

So how did it come about that cables can drop behind skirting boards?

I will not mock you as I consider that offensive and it's a reasonable question.

The answer is because 522.6.6(v) allows it.

Cable is <50mm from surface.

Case 1. Cable not connected to point/accessory/switchgear on surface: Cables permitted if in a zone 150mm from corner.

Case 2: Cable is connected to point/accessory/switchgear on surface:
Cables permitted if in a zone vertically to that point/accessory/switchgear.

Zones on other side of wall also extend to this side of wall if wall <=100mm thick.

Naturally if any of (i) through (iv) apply then zones do not apply and the cable can go behind the skirting along its length.

 

[GaryMo]

It states that a cable can run horizontally or vertically to an accessory.
It doesn't mention that the cable has to originate from a safe zone or another accessory so runing from floor vertically to an accessory is fully compliant.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

it's a reasonable question.

Don't be ridiculous - of course it's not.

522-06-06 (iv) was perfectly clear, and the words survive unchanged in 522.6.6 (v).

The 16th OSG had a drawing which showed exactly what the regs described, as does the 17th OSG, and as does every other guide to the wiring regulations (at least, all the ones I have seen do).

To ask "So how did it come about that cables can drop behind skirting boards" is anything but reasonable.

 

[holmslaw]

..

 

[holmslaw]

..

 

[GaryMo]

So they published the OSG's to cover up their mistake.

There's no mistake.

522.6.6 (v) states that a cable can run horizontally or vertically to an accessory.
It doesn't mention that the cable has to originate from a safe zone or another accessory so running from floor vertically to an accessory is fully compliant.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

"be installed in a zone within 150mm from the top of the wall or partition or within 150mm of an angle formed by two adjoining walls or partitions• Where the cable is connected to a point, accessory or switchgear on any surface of the wall or partition...."

Those are the three sentences that comprise that sub-clause. Because they are in one sub-clause I consider them to be associated therefore all cables must emanate fom corners or tops of walls. Imagine the word 'and' between the sentences.

If you're going to start imagining words which aren't there then all bets are off.

Try imagining "Except" between the sentences - you could have great fun with that.

So they published the OSG's to cover up their mistake.

edited to restore picture

 

[holmslaw]

..

 

[GaryMo]

"be installed in a zone within 150mm from the top of the wall or partition or within 150mm of an angle formed by two adjoining walls or partitions• Where the cable is connected to a point, accessory or switchgear on any surface of the wall or partition...."

I like the full stop!

 

[chapeau]

522.6.6 (v) says...........

Those are the three sentences that comprise that sub-clause. Because they are in one sub-clause I consider them to be associated therefore all cables must emanate fom corners or tops of walls. Imagine the word 'and' between the sentences.

The standard interpretation sees the three sentences as unassociated, imagine the word 'or' between the sentences. So if they are unassociated then surely they should have been individual sub-clauses.

No, the standard interpretation sees them to be associated.

They are associated as they deal with a cable which is in a wall and does not have the protection(s) defined in (i) to (iv).

If you were to imagine the word 'or' in (v) it would not change the meaning of the paragraph. Th neccessary 'or' is at the end of (iv).

At the end of the day it doesn't really matter as this is a DIY site and as you know full well us DIYers are not bound by the regs

 

[GaryMo]

At the end of the day it doesn't really matter as this is a DIY site and as you know full well us DIYers are not bound by the regs

Unfortunately that also applies to a great number of 'electricians' i've come across