Advice On Rewire Of Lighting Circuit

[Pete999]

It is easy to say it is non compliant but no one is coming up with what they would say in say an EICR. What is the non compliance? I am not saying it is good or acceptable practice or compliant just thinking it through properly. I have a ricked back so stuck at home and taking it out on here.

So what is your point?

 

[Wilko]

It is easy to say it is non compliant but no one is coming up with what they would say in say an EICR. What is the non compliance? I am not saying it is good or acceptable practice or compliant just thinking it through properly. I have a ricked back so stuck at home and taking it out on here.

If I was round for a Report I expect I wouldn’t be able to see those JB and the circuits would test ok due to Wago .

 

[Pete999]

I suppose the non maintenance free boxes under the floor boards would get a C3, though far from a big deal. The patress could be a C1 if the hole is big enough to get a finger in, otherwise no code. 1950s, I assume that conduit was the clamp together stuff so likely isn't earthed. C3 if the conduit is not accessible to touch, C2 if it is.

Never mind the JBs what about the idiot idea of stuffing stripped off singles down some conduit?

 

[Pretty Mouth]

Never mind the JBs what about the idiot idea of stuffing stripped off singles down some conduit?

If the conduit was earthed, I would see little problem with that, other than the sharp edge at the point the cable exits at the top

 

[Vortigern]

So what is your point?

My "point" @Pete999 is WHAT IS NON COMPLIANT

 

[James]

132.7 type of wiring and method of instalation
133.1.1 and 133.1.3 Selection of electrical equipment
134.1.1 good workmanship
510.3 compliance with instructions
511 compliance with standards
522.8.1 cable supports and enclosures

hows that for starters?

 

[Vortigern]

132.7 type of wiring and method of instalation

Not relevant

133.1.1 and 133.1.3 Selection of electrical equipment

Not relevant as you can operate outside of British or Harmonised standard where certification is provided to show it is at least as safe.
it refers to electrical equipment not cable

134.1.1 good workmanship

Maybe true

510.3 compliance with instructions

What instructions?

511 compliance with standards

We have seen standards but cannot view them, only the numbers so cannot comment (or afford them)

522.8.1 cable supports and enclosures

I cannot really see damage occurring so I think irrelevant and looking at the next reg you could just as easily say it agrees it is an acceptable method.

hows that for starters?

 

[Vortigern]

I know we see things which we are intuitively disgusted at or detest, but that is not something you can write on a cert. C2 cable is disgusting - is just plain nonsense. My whole point being it may be bad practice, it may look bad but really speaking how does it seriously cause danger to livestock of person. As I say I have nothing better to do, not really agreeing or defending such sloppy work but I like to be clear when I say that is a problem to a client and be able to quote a reg that actually makes unequivocal sense, not just have an emotional outburst, it's just not professional and is an offence to reason. I just feel it's like those cowboys who with a sharp intake of breath, "no earth you'll have to have a rewire","no rcd, you'll have to have a new cu madam"

 

[Pete999]

My "point" @Pete999 is WHAT IS NON COMPLIANT

Most of the installation

 

[James]

I am not arguing with you here, @Vortigern .
i suspect it would not be your choice of instalation method.
i am trying to put some actual reg numbers into the conversation to debate.

 

[westward10]

A non compliance does not necessarily pose a risk to life or health. Because unsheathed conductors have been installed and the conduit is open ended the containment system is incomplete. The two gang back box is essentially broken and cable ties are not appropriate for ad hoc cable restraint.
I don't believe anyone would go home, put their feet up and think yep I did a good job there.

 

[Vortigern]

I am debating personally. No hint of argument. I think 134 good workmanship is the only reg I can see that may be relevant and I have had a look at them all to see if there is merit and I think it is on the edge for a of what you introduce. I have no doubt I could put them all into a report and rely on the fact no one would really check them and assume there has been an egregious failure of the installation and compliance which would not really be the case.

 

[James]

James said:
132.7 type of wiring and method of instalation

Not relevant

The choice of the type of wiring system and the method of instalation shall include consideration of the following

i The nature of the location (probably nor relevant)
ii The nature of the structure supporting the wiring (hmm, single insulation entering a sharp conduit) maybe

iii to vi not relevant

vii other external influences (e.g. mechanical, thermal, and those associated with fire) to which the wiring is likley to be exposed to during the erection of the electrical instalation or service.

 

[Vortigern]

Most of the installation

'fank gawd you don't work for NICEIC

 

[Vortigern]

other external influences (e.g. mechanical,

Yes I could actually see that one. If someone put a heavy item to store up there and plonked it on that wire, or tripped/stood on it, there could certainly be a big bang so definitely concede the point there, and it is quite likely as a possible event. If it was earthed though....

 

[ipf]

What seems to have happened back in the 50's when the conduit was installed they had the fantastic idea to flatten/crush the conduit a little that was plastered into the wall so it is more oval than round.

I can only guess but it seems they did this to avoid having to chase the walls out as much.

Even when using 1.0mm2 cable there was no way a three core with twin & earth way going to fit down that conduit with the sheath. He did try with fairy liquid as he asked me for my help to try & pull them through with him.

Damaged split conduit is in a wall is a serious, unseen hazard to fresh cabling installed.....especially after stripping T/3c+E, as described. It could well have taken a fair bit of pulling in, too.
I can't see how taping alters the fact that it's singes in steel conduit and, as such, said conduit should be earthed.

 

[HappyHippyDad]

Of course it is easy to criticise but the use of that two gang box with the end broken open to install the cables leaves you open to it. Regardless of any restrictions put in place by the client you have to sometimes draw a line and say, this isn't going to work we need to review the situation.

I was kind of aiming it generically Westward, not at you.

 

[James]

James said:
133.1.1 and 133.1.3 Selection of electrical equipment

Not relevant as you can operate outside of British or Harmonised standard where certification is provided to show it is at least as safe.
it refers to electrical equipment not cable
.......................................................................................

Look up equipment in the definitions, it includes wiring systems.

133.1.1 Every item of equipment shall comply with the appropriate British or harmonized standard. in the absence of such a standard, reference shall be made to the appropriate IEC standard or the appropriate standard of another country.

133.1.2 where there are no applicable standards, the item of equipment concerned shall be selected by special agreement with the person specifying the installation and the installer.

133.1.3 where equipment to be used is not in accordance with 133.1.1 or is used outside the scope of its standard, the designer or other person specifying the installation shall confirm that the equipment provides at least the same degree of safety as that afforded by compliance with the regulations. such use shall be recorded on the appropriate electrical cert.

..............................................................................
so, a cable manufacturer has confirmed that the inner cores of twin and earth do not adhere to the standards required for singles in conduit.
there are standard cable types available that are suitable for installing in conduit.
by choosing a cable that is not designed for the method of install that you are using, we must be going down the 133.1.3 route?

how are we going to confirm that the cable selected provides at least the same degree of safety as complying with the regs? after all there is an off the shelf cable designed to do the job but we have decided to use the inner cores of a cable and by disassembling it, we have reduced its safety level.
the manufacturer has said the insulation is of similar size but manufactured and tested to a different standard.

its not an something i would like to defend myself in court for.

For every installation that you see, where you look at it and think "that's a bit rough" there is a reg in the book to back it up with.

 

[HappyHippyDad]

Perhaps a piece of chewing gum around the top of the conduit?

 

[HappyHippyDad]

Thought we should bring the temperature down a little