Dodgy trade pictures for your amusement! - 1 Million Views!

[Darkwood]

Right ... Just been nudged to set this up by Paul.M and sounds a good idea following recent threads I've done in the Arms..

Rules....No Offensive material... edit if required before posting as this is the public arena.
Anything to do with the trade or in and around it ...H&S pic's welcome.



I've posted this a few times and this is at a mates house following a kitchen refirb several yrs ago. mg_smile:

 

[brianmoooore]

Is the heavily taped up cpc of the blue/brown T&E disappearing into the ceiling being used as a perm. live/switched live to the fan?

 

[Raptor0014]

Is the heavily taped up cpc of the blue/brown T&E disappearing into the ceiling being used as a perm. live/switched live to the fan?

I’ve not untangled it all yet. I’ve got a number of points from this inspection and the list of remedial work keeps growing.

Landlord asked why I was taking light fittings down and sockets off as his last EICR was done in about 30-45 mins and never did any of this, I’ve been here 3hrs so far!

So I showed him this and said ‘that’s why, along with the fact you have a broken leg of a socket ring somewhere, no earth bond to your gas (meter was moved outside around 2yrs ago he said and it appears it’s never been re-bonded) and there is a socket being spurred off the shower so far.

 

[Julie.]

....and there is a socket being spurred off the shower so far.

Sounds pretty poor.

However, open question to everyone, just what exactly would be wrong with taking a socket outlet off the shower circuit (or anything else such as ufh, or similar); if electrically it had the usual stuff right such as rcd, Zs within limits etc.

General question on people's thoughts about this.

 

[DPG]

Sounds pretty poor.

However, open question to everyone, just what exactly would be wrong with taking a socket outlet off the shower circuit (or anything else such as ufh, or similar); if electrically it had the usual stuff right such as rcd, Zs within limits etc.

General question on people's thoughts about this.

It's not unlike a cooker circuit feeding a 13A socket.

 

[Raptor0014]

Sounds pretty poor.

However, open question to everyone, just what exactly would be wrong with taking a socket outlet off the shower circuit (or anything else such as ufh, or similar); if electrically it had the usual stuff right such as rcd, Zs within limits etc.

General question on people's thoughts about this.

You can’t run a 2.5mm spur from a 32A 6mm shower.

Not matter what the Zs is. The cable is only rated at max 27A.

So unless you ran it in 6mm, which would be some effort for a 2g socket then it’s not going to be compliant.

 

[DPG]

You can’t run a 2.5mm spur from a 32A 6mm shower.

Not matter what the Zs is. The cable is only rated at max 27A.

So unless you ran it in 6mm, which would be some effort for a 2g socket then it’s not going to be compliant.

Ah you never said it was in 2.5mm

 

[timhoward]

You can’t run a 2.5mm spur from a 32A 6mm shower.

Not matter what the Zs is. The cable is only rated at max 27A.

So unless you ran it in 6mm, which would be some effort for a 2g socket then it’s not going to be compliant.

That is exactly what my head said at first too.
But....
Overload protection - each appliance and supply cable protected by 13A fuse in plug. OK, two at once would be a bit interesting but unlikely.
(In some circumstances overload protection is allowed downstream - I'd need to read that bit again to comment further.)
Fault protection - it's RCD protected.

It's a truly horrible design but is it actually non-compliant?

 

[DPG]

That is exactly what my head said at first too.
But....
Overload protection - each appliance protected by 13A fuse in plug. OK, two at once would be a bit interesting but unlikely.
(In some circumstances overload protection is allowed downstream - I'd need to read that bit again to comment further.)
Fault protection - it's RCD protected.

It's a truly horrible design but is it actually non-compliant?

What about shower running at same time as someone has plugged a heater in?

 

[timhoward]

What about shower running at same time as someone has plugged a heater in?

That makes the upstream 32A MCB more likely to trip, and the spur is only drawing the heater current?

 

[timhoward]

What about shower running at same time as someone has plugged a heater in?

The breaker and 1st leg of 6mm to shower are correctly matched, so any overload here is dealt with normally by 32A breaker tripping.
Don't get me wrong, I hate it! But I can't immediately see it is unsafe.

 

[DPG]

That makes the upstream 32A MCB more likely to trip, and the spur is only drawing the heater current?

Im just thinking, if the shower and heater together were above the MCB rating, but not enough to trip it. Just thinking out loud.

 

[Raptor0014]

If it was ran in 6mm then technically it could be safe.

But as far as I’m aware a shower has to be a dedicated circuit and nothing else on it.

 

[DPG]

If it was ran in 6mm then technically it could be safe.

But as far as I’m aware a shower has to be a dedicated circuit and nothing else on it.

Which reg covers that?

 

[Raptor0014]

Which reg covers that?

I don’t know if it does. When I rang NAPIT the chap I spoke to said it should be a dedicated circuit.

Maybe it’s one of those fads being passed off as a reg?

 

[timhoward]

Im just thinking, if the shower and heater together were above the MCB rating, but not enough to trip it. Just thinking out loud.

As a B32 wouldn't trip at all with a load of ~46 amps, the question is how hot does the 6mm get for the duration of the shower.
It would trip after roughly 15 minutes with a 50A load.
We need someone to plug an EV into the other side of the socket!

But as far as I’m aware a shower has to be a dedicated circuit and nothing else on it.

I agree that angle needs exploring, what requires a dedicated circuit. Appendix 15 comes to mind, but I don't have book here.

 

[timhoward]

When I rang NAPIT

Last week NAPIT told me "not to worry" about an RCD taking 0.5 seconds to trip due to a PV system back-feeding and not shutting down very quickly.
There are some good technical people in NAPIT but I find them a bit hit and miss.

 

[DPG]

As a B32 wouldn't trip at all with a load of ~46 amps, the question is how hot does the 6mm get for the duration of the shower.
It would trip after roughly 15 minutes with a 50A load.
We need someone to plug an EV into the other side of the socket!

I agree that angle needs exploring, what requires a dedicated circuit. Appendix 15 comes to mind, but I don't have book here.

I don't think Appendix 15 would cover showers.

 

[pc1966]

However, open question to everyone, just what exactly would be wrong with taking a socket outlet off the shower circuit (or anything else such as ufh, or similar); if electrically it had the usual stuff right such as rcd, Zs within limits etc.

General question on people's thoughts about this.

If it is electrically sound then to me the problem it sort of violates the "principle of least surprise" in that you might have a lone socket that is still powered when someone thinks they have isolated the RFC/radials related to that.

Yes, you should never assume and always do your safe isolation tests, but we know that is often missing in any DIY work, etc.

A cooker outlet socket is clearly related to the cooker feed, so no problem there.

The odd radial or conversion from other use has that, but usually there the CU would be labelled with its new use. Yes, you laddie! Stop laughing at the back!!!

 

[westward10]

If NAPIT or any scheme for that matter say it is okay then there is your answer, it probably isn't okay.

 

[Raptor0014]

If NAPIT or any scheme for that matter say it is okay then there is your answer, it probably isn't okay.

I’m not sure you can make a sweeping statement like that.

I’ve not had any issues with NAPIT and always found them to be quite helpful. Even explaining things in detail for me when I ask ‘why’ to help me understand what they’re saying if it’s not immediately obvious.

 

[Julie.]

You can’t run a 2.5mm spur from a 32A 6mm shower.

Not matter what the Zs is. The cable is only rated at max 27A.

So unless you ran it in 6mm, which would be some effort for a 2g socket then it’s not going to be compliant.

Nope, 2.5mm^2 would be fine, the maximum load could only be 26A max for a double socket outlet, and realistically 20A , so some if not most installation methods would have the capacity, exactly the same as a spur off a RFC.

Would not have to be 6, or 4mm^2, and if it was a single socket or FCU probably 1.5mm^2 would be ok from a load perspective.

I ask the question, because one's initial thought is to object, but is it actually wrong?

I know it's unusual and unexpected, but perhaps more compliant and less unexpected than some things we see!

 

[Pretty Mouth]

App. 15 recommends keeping cookers >2kW and other similar loads (heating etc) off ring finals, to avoid overloading either leg of the ring.

It's badly worded though, and often taken out of context, leading to the pseudo-reg that all such loads should be their own dedicated circuit.

 

[Raptor0014]

Nope, 2.5mm^2 would be fine, the maximum load could only be 26A max for a double socket outlet, and realistically 20A , so some if not most installation methods would have the capacity, exactly the same as a spur off a RFC.

Would not have to be 6, or 4mm^2, and if it was a single socket or FCU probably 1.5mm^2 would be ok from a load perspective.

I ask the question, because one's initial thought is to object, but is it actually wrong?

I know it's unusual and unexpected, but perhaps more compliant and less unexpected than some things we see!

The way I’ve always had it explained to me is that a spur off a RFC is fine because they’re in a ring and the socket won’t pull more than 26A. This is assuming cable is clipped direct.

However for, in this case, a shower circuit it’s not in a ring so the full load of 32A can go down it and overload the 2.5mm.

More than happy to hear other explanations and I’ve got my annual assessment next month so I’ll make a point of asking about this very scenario with the assessor as it will be interesting to see what their take on it is.

 

[pc1966]

However for, in this case, a shower circuit it’s not in a ring so the full load of 32A can go down it and overload the 2.5mm.

Not for a single or double socket as they have the 13A fuses limiting long-term loads to 13/26A (in fact most double sockets are only rated at 20A by specification).

If you have multiple sockets then yes, the feed cable had to be rated at the supply MCB to avoid overload risk, but for a single fused load it is limited by design.

When it comes to spurs off a RFC I dislike them for two reasons:

• They break the end-end test on full continuity and resulting max R1+R2 from (r1+r2)/4
• What starts as a single/double socket spurred off might then be spurred again like a radial but now violating the '2.5mm on 32A safe due to loop' aspect.

 

[Julie.]

...What starts as a single/double socket spurred off might then be spurred again like a radial but now violating the '2.5mm on 32A safe due to loop' aspect.

This I agree with, which is why you may only take one point off on a spur, but soooo easy for a diyer not to know this.

 

[Julie.]

The way I’ve always had it explained to me is that a spur off a RFC is fine because they’re in a ring and the socket won’t pull more than 26A. This is assuming cable is clipped direct.

However for, in this case, a shower circuit it’s not in a ring so the full load of 32A can go down it and overload the 2.5mm.

More than happy to hear other explanations and I’ve got my annual assessment next month so I’ll make a point of asking about this very scenario with the assessor as it will be interesting to see what their take on it is.

As said by pc, this part of the circuit is the same as a spur, the only current which can go down it is that associated with the load on the end of it.

If that is a fixed value, or load limited by a fuse etc. Then no more than load current can flow unless there is a fault condition.

I can see us all grasping to try and back-fit some genuine, or invented regulation because it feels wrong.

I have no doubt that we all object and then actually struggle to justify why we object.

Which is why I asked the question, the example achives ads (assuming Zs is ok), has overload protection inherent due to single socket or fcu, has acceptable voltage drop, rcd etc.

So is compliant - why do we object?

 

[pc1966]

So is compliant - why do we object?

If we have to find regs to justify the general feeling of unease then:

• The ones about separation of circuits spring to mind (as clearly sockets and showers are not natural bedfellows, and it is uncommon for a shower circuit to have even two showers attached as they are normally dedicated circuits)
• The ones on general workmanship - as in it is clearly some bodge/short-cut to avoid wiring in to an existing RFC/radial that was put in specifically for socket use.

Too hungry to look them up just now as pizza has to be organised for my oven!

 

[nicebutdim]

So is compliant - why do we object?

Not usual practice and people are creatures of habit.

 

[pc1966]

Not usual practice and people are creatures of habit.

Especially monks & nuns!

 

[nicebutdim]

Especially monks & nuns!

He said to the netball team.

 

[loz2754]

In many cases the shower circuit is "designed" to it's max capability, and so would be unwise to add another load.
I guess it boils down to fundamental principles rather than any specific regs.

 

[brianmoooore]

The 2.5mm2 cable to one single or double socket isn't the problem. The problem in practice will be the size of the cable common to the shower and the socket, and the rating of the circuit protection device not being high enough for both.

 

[Julie.]

As I said in my statement of the question, cable sizing, protective device sizing, Zs, rcd, ads etc being OK.

(The question is equally applicable to an fcu with a 1A fuse added to a 7.5kw shower supplied via a 40A mcb - with 10mm^2 cable)

What is the reason we try to find objections?

 

[timhoward]

What is the reason we try to find objections?

You've got me thinking - why do I hate it? I think it's because I have a sixth sense that the unusual nature of it could create safety issues, as others have said too. Hopefully not for sparks, though we do all make mistakes sometimes especially when tired. I'm thinking more of the DIY hero, or those that know enough to be dangerous.

So how do we feel about two rather predictable regs:

314 Division of Installation
314.1 Every installation shall be divided into circuits, as necessary, to:
ii) facilitate safe inspection, testing and maintenance
vi) prevent the indirect energizing of a circuit intended to be isolated

One might easily turn off and lock off "upstairs sockets", try a few sockets, and on a bad day having found every other socket upstairs dead not check the one that matters carefully enough. This might be construed to contravene indent ii).
It could work backwards too, you check that one and assume the rest are dead.
Unless there is space to adequately label the circuit, one would not expect the Shower breaker to be energising a double socket.

Another thought is 538.2. - saying that devices for isolation should be clearly identified by position or durable marking. If a shower pull cord isolator isolates a double socket, that probably contravenes this concept.

The question is, are these nit-picking issues from the regs book which are all open to interpretation legitimate enough reasons for the situation to worse than a C3?

 

[loz2754]

As I said in my statement of the question, cable sizing, protective device sizing, Zs, rcd, ads etc being OK.

(The question is equally applicable to an fcu with a 1A fuse added to a 7.5kw shower supplied via a 40A mcb - with 10mm^2 cable)

What is the reason we try to find objections?

I agree that many of us would go into knee jerk mode when presented with a situation that is out of the ordinary, and condemn it without thinking.
That's human nature. A kind of inertia. And even a kind of laziness, because it would require a deliberate effort to come up with a justification for something that would be much easier to condemn and walk away.
Also, too heavy a reliance on a book of regulations, which, in reality, cannot possibly regulate every single situation we might come across.
In other words, maybe we (myself included) should try to have more of an open mind when we see something like a socket connected to the same circuit as shower; or a pair of ring final circuits connected to the same circuit breaker!
And judge each situation accordingly. The case Julie just presented for example, would be much less of a problem, because of the different set of parameters.

 

[Doomed]

Todays EICR, one supply feeding two static caravans

Oh yes, it has been tested every 3 years since the the present owners of the site moved in, so thats at least 2 tests that had no faults found.....

 

[JBW175]

Who needs prescribed zones anyway?

Live cables left plastered in a bathroom wall. Only came to light when the client removed a mirror and was doing some filling and the RCD tripped.

Looks like a disused feed for a mirror light.

 

[JordyStepho]

aahahahahaha this thread is gold! Unreal work out there jeeeez

 

[Dartlec]

Found this gem on an EICR today.

Part still wired in VIR, but also a newer part that I thought might be better...

Always nice to see a TN-S-C install in the wild!

The yellow twist from a bag of bread or similar was a nice touch I felt!

 

[Dustydazzler]

Is that a looped N ?

I have seen some very strange lighting where you have 1 SL but a pair of Ns at the light