Wiring Sockets on an exposed stone wall

[ban-all-sheds]

That's exactly what I said I couldn't, and wouldn't, do ....

Keep digging - I'm sure you can unearth more evidence that I'm the one not reading and understanding properly.

 

[JohnW2]

OK - experiment over.

I should have known better, but it looked for just a moment as if, contrary to my 'better judgement', it might be appropriate for me to try emerging from my 'rest' and dipping my toes back into the water. However, it only took a few hours for my 'better judgement' to show why it is called that. My 'rest' therefore calls me back.

 

[jg321]

My 'rest' therefore calls me back.

All the best John. Hope to see around again soon.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

OK - experiment over.

An experiment to see what would happen if you decided I must have meant something idiotic and decided to therefore falsely claim that "You don't seem to have done very well tonight at reading and understanding previous posts in the thread"?

Don't know why you bothered.

At this point, https://www.diynot.com/diy/threads/...exposed-stone-wall.496399/page-3#post-4078262 you had a choice. Particularly as I had previously said

But you'd have had no need to turn it any more, as I'm assuming that if you used a spanner you'd not chew up the fitting?

and basically said the same again.

The suggestion of a spanner was in response to this:

it 'self-tapped' it's way so firmly into the 20mm knockout that I couldn't turn it any more to hide that mess from the camera

You thought I meant use a spanner to turn it more, I meant use a spanner and you'd have no mess to need to hide.

Things like this happen, but you had the choice to accept that we had been at cross-purposes, and that everything I had said was reasonable and sensible. But no - you chose to persist in assuming that I'd been suggesting the use of a spanner to forcibly turn something which didn't want to be turned any more and thus do even more damage to it, and you then chose to make out that I was therefore not reading and understanding.

And now it turns out that that was all an experiment? How sad.

My 'rest' therefore calls me back.

If you're going to behave the way you have here, that's probably best.

 

[aptsys]

On top of that, you would struggle like crap to make the tube off into the socket. And you’d need to Earth it

Do you need to earth it?

 

[ban-all-sheds]

If you use singles, then unquestionably yes, it would be an exposed-conductive-part.

"DI", or insulated-and-sheathed cables like T&E? Not so clearcut, but the boxes would have to be earthed anyway, so as long as you did make the tube off properly, and had a good mechanical connection, it would be earthed just as well as conduit or SWA would be.....

 

[JohnW2]

All the best John. Hope to see around again soon.

Thanks. However, I'm not going anywhere - merely reverting to being a little selective about whose posts I respond to!

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

Do you need to earth it?

Although I confess that I have always religiously earthed it (when putting T+E or insulated+sheathed flex inside it), I'm not at all convinced that there is any such requirement. After all, it is acceptable for people to touch such cables, and there is no general requirement to earth metal which is in contact with the sheath of such a cable.

It's incredibly unlikely that such a cable would ever develop a fault between L and the surrounding metal pipe, particularly without involving the CPC of the cable (assuming it had one), but I suppose it is because of that incredibly small risk (and to avoid arguments with anyone who inspected the installation!) that I have 'habitually' done it.

Kind Regards, John

 

[scousespark]

Seriously. Out of 4 pages in a thread in Electrics UK, 3 are discussing how you can use plumbing materials to install a circuit. Wonder why manufacturers bother to make conduit (to the relevant BS) or the correct cable to use as required.

 

[JohnW2]

Seriously. Out of 4 pages in a thread in Electrics UK, 3 are discussing how you can use plumbing materials to install a circuit. Wonder why manufacturers bother to make conduit (to the relevant BS) or the correct cable to use as required.

Good to see you. Happy New Year!

They don't seem to 'bother' to make conduit in a colour (or maybe size) which seems acceptable to some people when exposed on an internal stone or brick wall - although I admit that paint exists.

To (electrically unnecessarily) use pyro (which was the primary suggestion) to get the desired colour and appearance also seems a bit odd/extravagant.

Kind Regards, John

 

[scousespark]

Happy New Year.
I saw the original question but don't get why anybody would go down the route discussed here. Copper pipe and compression fittings are used by plumbers. Electricians use conduit and conduit fittings.

 

[Iggifer]

Happy New Year.
I saw the original question but don't get why anybody would go down the route discussed here. Copper pipe and compression fittings are used by plumbers. Electricians use conduit and conduit fittings.

I'm with you on this one. MICC if you want the copper look

 

[JohnW2]

I saw the original question but don't get why anybody would go down the route discussed here. Copper pipe and compression fittings are used by plumbers. Electricians use conduit and conduit fittings.

I essentially agree - as you will see, in the very first response to the OP's question, I suggested steel conduit.

However, he then asked if copper pipe could be used (because he "thought that it may look good") and, indeed, his original question was essentially about aesthetics - hence the discussion that ensued.

Whilst it is true that copper pipe and fittings are usually used by plumbers, that, in itself, does not mean that it cannot be used for for essentially decorative purposes in order to improve the aesthetics of surface cables - in just the same that wood and wood fixings are usually used by carpenters/joiners, but can be used to improve aesthetics by 'boxing in' cables.

I have personally only ever done it outdoors. Provided that the situation is such that the mechanical strength of steel is not required, I personally regard copper pipe and fittings (designed to be in constant contact with water) as preferable to steel for something that is going to be exposed to the elements for many years - and once it is all 'weathered' it usually blends into outdoor environments quite well.

It seems to be that people tend to favour the copper/brass/gold colour in living areas with exposed brick or stone walls. Painted cable or plastic conduit would be one option, but some may well not like that - so the most obvious other options would seem to be pyro or copper pipe - and, as I've said, pyro (as advocated by Iggifer) seems a bit OTT to me, but maybe that's just me.

As a matter of interest, do you see some specific problems with using copper pipe, or is it just that it "doesn't seem right" to you?

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Whilst it is true that copper pipe and fittings are usually used by plumbers, that, in itself, does not mean that it cannot be used for for essentially decorative purposes in order to improve the aesthetics of surface cables - in just the same that wood and wood fixings are usually used by carpenters/joiners, but can be used to improve aesthetics by 'boxing in' cables.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I'm with you on this one. MICC if you want the copper look

Very expensive to have done.

If all you want is the look, and do not need any of the electrical attributes of MICC, why not use copper tube, if you can find an acceptable way to terminate it into enclosures?

Apart from the size of the "tube" running into it, one of these:

isn't going to look a lot different to one of these, discussed earlier:

So seriously - why not? And that's "why not" for properly thought out reasons, with real facts which show why not.