Wall lights (part P doctor book related)

[Adam_151]

Got my copy of this (Thanks Paul )

Was reading the bit about having to sink a box in for wall lights, while I obviously agree that this is a neat way of doing it, I can't see whats actually wrong regs wise with just allowing the cable to exit the plaster under the light and make the connections in the back of the light... afterall thats what we do with ceiling fittings most of the time.. (obviously if your light doesn't have enough room it'd be wrong to make the connections in a hole dug in the plaster)

Just interested in the forums views on this

 

[ricicle]

From what I've seen a lot of Sparkies who wire new houses leave the wall light points in metal architrave boxes with the blank plates on.
That's how they were left in my house anyway.But I see nothing wrong with the cables behind the light in no box as long as there is enough room to do the connections correctly.

 

[Steve]

For some light fittings its a great benefit to have a bit more space behind the fitting, for example i was putting up a ceiling light last weekend. It was a 3 arm fitting, that i had to assemble myself, pre-stripped cable cores etc, but the base of the fitting didnt have a lot of room for the 4 terminals and 6 lamp wires, earth tag etc.

And for DIYers, I can see the benefit for them of having a ceiling box, where the rose connections are made, and then three cores dropping into the fitting itself. Makes their life easier, they dont have 9 or 10 cores to contend with

 

[partpdoctor]

hi adam

you can have the wires come straight out of the wall into the fitting but...

according to 526-03-02 (iii) or (iv) or (v) you would have to show compliance that the surrounding material complies with:
"glow wire requirements" BS 6458-2.1 or
building material 476-4 or
"ignitability characteristic P" (BS 476 part 5)

i havent a clue what these are so to "ez-comply" you go by 526-03-02(ii)
"an equipment enclosure complying with the appropriate BS"

this is a good forum but i dont contribute much, mainly hanging out at the IEE forum, should i stay or should i go?

 

[partpdoctor]

hi
as a ps the 17th edition says more by saying less...

526.5 a connection can be made within .......

(iii) within building material that is non-combustible
(iv) an enclosure formed or completed by part of the building structure

connectors under the floor anyone?
going to lie down now as i have been doing it wrong all these years

 

[ricicle]

this is a good forum but i dont contribute much, mainly hanging out at the IEE forum, should i stay or should i go?

Stay, why not.

 

[partpdoctor]

thank you

i dont get the "cant wait" bit, i am not a contoversial poster...

 

[Adam_151]

Interesting, I'm sure I've pondered it before but what about where you get a fitting from argos and that generally just has a bracket you screw to the ceiling to support the fitting and the enclosure is formed by the fitting and the ceiling together.... I suppose it would be interesting to see what the BS for the fitting actually says, whether that allows to to count as an "an equipment enclosure complying with the appropriate BS"

I have a feeling its something that doesn't really cause many problems in reality and rather like the missing circuit schedules in domestic CUs you alluded to (I've never seen one!), lots of people don't bother worrying about it.

Going swiftly offtopic...

Slightly dissapointed that you hadn't managed to include a simple explanation of the adibatic in your book though

I also hang around the iee forum a bit, but I don't post much

 

[Adam_151]

i dont get the "cant wait" bit, i am not a contoversial poster...

Thats just his signiture file....

 

[ricicle]

I also hang around the iee forum a bit, but I don't post much

AKA Mr Phoenix

 

[partpdoctor]

hi all

right, i get the cant wait bit!
on IEE i am AKA "electricman"

now...
an argos fitting as you descibe should really go on a box, now wether it does or does not really matter but the fitting and /or lack of box should be recorded as a "departure" as it is a not BSwhatever fitting and therefore cannot strictly comply with BS 7671, i forgot to mention this as a departure example in the work.

as to the adiabatic, it is outside the remit of the book as you dont need it. the reason for this is that the OSG circuit set-ups have the adiabatic sums worked out for you..

i have only started out on this writing lark and have other "projects" in hand, complex circuit calculations will be covered in laymans terms

 

[Adam_151]

as to the adiabatic, it is outside the remit of the book as you dont need it. the reason for this is that the OSG circuit set-ups have the adiabatic sums worked out for you..

I was perhaps being a tad less than 100% serious

 

[Spark123]

What are your plans for your next books?

 

[partpdoctor]

sorry
i will lighten up in time-thought you were serious

 

[partpdoctor]

mmm books

electrical tips and tricks( making off big swa, conduit, trunking etc)
pirs
2381
2391
2400
17th edition part p doctor in meantime- lots of changes and implications...