Unearthed lighting circuits - considerations

[donrkebab]

The main concern is not the lack of earthing, because this can be alleviated by simple means as have been mentioned. It is that unearthed lighting circuits are - as of today - more than 53 years old. These cables could be in perfect condition, or there could be areas of brittle insulation caused by circuit over heating and/or inferior pvc. This means that if the cables are touched in any way there is a risk of dislodging insulation and causing a fire or electric shock.
That is why unearthed lighting circuits should be replaced, and if you ask me to work on one, I will refuse.

 

[flameport]

This was also before condition reports were generally happening

Regular inspections are not new, they have been in the wiring regulations for ever.

This example from the 1955 edition:

 

[JohnW2]

The main concern is not the lack of earthing, because this can be alleviated by simple means as have been mentioned. It is that unearthed lighting circuits are - as of today - more than 53 years old. These cables could be in perfect condition, or there could be areas of brittle insulation caused by circuit over heating and/or inferior pvc. This means that if the cables are touched in any way there is a risk of dislodging insulation and causing a fire or electric shock. That is why unearthed lighting circuits should be replaced, and if you ask me to work on one, I will refuse.

Is there, in reality, an appreciably greater risk that a cable (assuming it is PVC) could have "areas of brittle insulation caused by circuit over heating and/or inferior pvc" when it is ≥53 years old than when it is much younger?

Even with incandescent lighting, cables used for lighting circuits have always been so over-specified that 'over heating' would be an extremely unlikely occurrence ... and, as per a recent thread here, 'inferior PVC' appears to exist in 2019, just as it may have done decades earlier.

Kind Regards, John

 

[donrkebab]

Is there, in reality, an appreciably greater risk that a cable (assuming it is PVC) could have "areas of brittle insulation caused by circuit over heating and/or inferior pvc" when it is ≥53 years old than when it is much younger?

Even with incandescent lighting, cables used for lighting circuits have always been so over-specified that 'over heating' would be an extremely unlikely occurrence ... and, as per a recent thread here, 'inferior PVC' appears to exist in 2019, just as it may have done decades earlier.

Kind Regards, John

Is there any appreciable point in your response?

 

[JohnW2]

Is there any appreciable point in your response?

Of course there is. You have said that you personally would refuse to work on a 53-year-old lighting circuit because it could have "areas of brittle insulation caused by circuit over heating and/or inferior pvc" - which is fair enough (i.e. your personal judgement/decision).

However, others reading your post might well be led to believe (as 'a fact') that a 53-year-old lighting circuit would be appreciably more likely to have "areas of brittle insulation caused by circuit over heating and/or inferior pvc" than would a much younger lighting circuit. Since I was far from convinced that such was the case, I asked you the question (which you have not answered).

Kind Regards, John

 

[donrkebab]

Of course there is. You have said that you personally would refuse to work on a 53-year-old lighting circuit because it could have "areas of brittle insulation caused by circuit over heating and/or inferior pvc" - which is fair enough (i.e. your personal judgement/decision).

However, others reading your post might well be led to believe (as 'a fact') that a 53-year-old lighting circuit would be appreciably more likely to have "areas of brittle insulation caused by circuit over heating and/or inferior pvc" than would a much younger lighting circuit. Since I was far from convinced that such was the case, I asked you the question (which you have not answered).

Kind Regards, John

I don't answer stupid pointless questions.

 

[JohnW2]

I don't answer stupid pointless questions.

OK, that's your prerogative. I'll therefore take that to mean that you don't really believe that ≥53-year-old PVC wiring is appreciably more likely to present a problem than does much more recent wiring.

 

[donrkebab]

OK, that's your prerogative. I'll therefore take that to mean that you don't really believe that ≥53-year-old PVC wiring is appreciably more likely to present a problem than does much more recent wiring.

I don't know what you're talking about, and I'm sure many others feel the same. You can believe or more importantly imagine whatever you like. bye bye

 

[JohnW2]

Maybe someone else can explain to you what I'm talking about, since I can't think of any simpler language which I could use myself.

 

[fairplay]

The main concern is not the lack of earthing, because this can be alleviated by simple means as have been mentioned. It is that unearthed lighting circuits are - as of today - more than 53 years old. These cables could be in perfect condition, or there could be areas of brittle insulation caused by circuit over heating and/or inferior pvc. This means that if the cables are touched in any way there is a risk of dislodging insulation and causing a fire or electric shock.
That is why unearthed lighting circuits should be replaced, and if you ask me to work on one, I will refuse.

Maybe someone else can explain to you what I'm talking about, since I can't think of any simpler language which I could use myself.

I understood you John. Anyway surely if it was in a bad state, irrespective of its age you would know by looking at it. As to refusing to touch it I'm not sure how you would improve it. It seems a hard message to get across to some people about available resources as well. I don't want to go into my daughter's financial situation a few years back and the help I had given her in various ways but she had that exact situation that donrekebab mentioned. I found in her loft that one or two sections of rubber cables were perished and even the inner wire insulation was breaking up. As I didn't particularly want her house to burn down I didn't "refuse to touch it". I replaced these sections with new PVC cable using junction boxes. I knew this was an improvement but did still worry about what I couldn't see. As soon as funds were available (and it was a couple of years) she had a complete rewire. Was I wrong to "touch it"?

 

[JohnW2]

I understood you John.

Thanks - I'm pleased to hear that someone did .

Anyway surely if it was in a bad state, irrespective of its age you would know by looking at it.

Indeed, what matters in the nature and condition of the cable, not its age.

As I'm sure you will understand, what I 'reacted' to was the suggestion that if the age of a lighting circuit was such that it did not have a CPC, that the condition of the cable was necessarily such that it should not even be 'touched', other than to replace it. Provided it was PVC, there would probably be nothing wring with it at all (other than the absence of a CPC - which, as has been said, can be 'coped with')

Kind Regards, John