Interesting Conundrum 1.5 power

[swaRRR]

Do other countries have similar de-rating factors for cables touching insulation ?
1.5 clipped is 19 amps but our regs then say if it passes through insulation you effectively have to reduce its ccc by half , which imo does seem a bit OTT

Literally every lighting circuit i've ever seen upstairs in a loft has been cocooned in the stuff

 

[7029 dave]

Nope I would not even touch it.
New circuit for the additional sockets with 2.5mm T&E

 

[Pretty Mouth]

Like many rules and regulations, there has to be a defined point for acceptable or not. Our regs happen to say 5% drop (3% lights but that is another debate...) from the nominal 230V for calculation and if it less then OK, if not then you need to alter the design (usually thicker cable, as typically load is fixed and route has no shorter paths).

What you can get away with in practice is a lot more, but that is not really the point of compliant design!

Most of my work is additions and alterations to existing circuits in occupied houses, often to installations of not a very high standard. I find that 100% compliance isn't always feasible, and sometimes I have to take a pragmatic approach.

An example being using RCD spurs to provide additional protection while working to 18th edition and 1st amendment - it wasn't compliant, but it provided the protection without me having the change the fusebox, so why not?

Same with voltage drop. If a circuit length already exceeds the theroretical VD limit (fairly common for ring finals in older houses), but the owner wants a new socket installed (usually in a place where they're running an extension lead to anyway), I just go ahead and fit it. I know it's going to be fine regarding VD.

The OP's situation is the sort of thing I would encounter, and I would try to find a way to make it work for the customer if I could, as long as I was happy that there was no danger in it.

 

[Dustydazzler]

So...

Been discussing this job with my mate and long and short is he now wants it all done properly so we are going to re-wire all the socket circuits from scratch

I have done him a mates rates quote of £75 per point as long as he helps me do all the labouring and fortunately he is a painter decorator so will do all the making good of chases

 

[7029 dave]

Best solution all round .

 

[UNG]

So...

Been discussing this job with my mate and long and short is he now wants it all done properly so we are going to re-wire all the socket circuits from scratch

I have done him a mates rates quote of £75 per point as long as he helps me do all the labouring and fortunately he is a painter decorator so will do all the making good of chase

Panic what panic

It makes sense and your mate has obviously taken your concerns onboard at least you have the fishwires already in place

 

[pc1966]

Most of my work is additions and alterations to existing circuits in occupied houses, often to installations of not a very high standard. I find that 100% compliance isn't always feasible, and sometimes I have to take a pragmatic approach.

An example being using RCD spurs to provide additional protection while working to 18th edition and 1st amendment - it wasn't compliant, but it provided the protection without me having the change the fusebox, so why not?

Indeed, why not? Many asked that question of the IET/BSI over their removal in the 18th and all they got was a weaselly-worded statement that they were not to such-and-such standard, not why they were now deemed to be unsuitable.

Thankfully they seem to have made a return in AM2 so some sanity!

Same with voltage drop. If a circuit length already exceeds the theoretical VD limit (fairly common for ring finals in older houses), but the owner wants a new socket installed (usually in a place where they're running an extension lead to anyway), I just go ahead and fit it. I know it's going to be fine regarding VD.

The OP's situation is the sort of thing I would encounter, and I would try to find a way to make it work for the customer if I could, as long as I was happy that there was no danger in it.

In many cases that is the sensible approach.

Here the discussion is kind of over now they are getting them rewired but the debate was down to "acceptable or not?" and my view is they were marginal. Probably safe but poor practice for the UK due to the normal assumptions of loading/area covered on a socket circuit where they are normally expected to be 32A RFC or 20A radials.

 

[Dustydazzler]

So

I actually started the job today and to make matters even worse there are JBs under the floors and hidden in the stud walls where I assume cables were either too short or sockets moved during the 1st fix stage and rather than pull in some new cable the electrician just cut the cable and added a bit never to be seen again once boarded over

So not only were the sockets wired in 1.5 , there are JBs hidden all over the place NICE

 

[pc1966]

So not only were the sockets wired in 1.5 , there are JBs hidden all over the place NICE

That is the thing about seeing Muppetery, usually the face value is only the beginning of it...

 

[UNG]

So

I actually started the job today and to make matters even worse there are JBs under the floors and hidden in the stud walls where I assume cables were either too short or sockets moved during the 1st fix stage and rather than pull in some new cable the electrician just cut the cable and added a bit never to be seen again once boarded over

So not only were the sockets wired in 1.5 , there are JBs hidden all over the place NICE

If this is one house that is badly wired in a relatively new estate what are the rest of the houses in the estate like

 

[nicebutdim]

Sounds like a potential source of steady income, once word gets around about this house.

 

[Dustydazzler]

If this is one house that is badly wired in a relatively new estate what are the rest of the houses in the estate like

According to my mate who just bought the house the estate was built in around 2008-2009 , so this pre-dates Part Pee i think otherwise how on earth did this sh!t install pass ?

 

[loz2754]

According to my mate who just bought the house the estate was built in around 2008-2009 , so this pre-dates Part Pee i think otherwise how on earth did this sh!t install pass ?

Nope. Part P came in in 2005.

 

[nicebutdim]

According to my mate who just bought the house the estate was built in around 2008-2009 , so this pre-dates Part Pee i think otherwise how on earth did this sh!t install pass ?

Why would it not have passed? Someone signs a certificate and it's filed away, never to be seen again. I know little about the process as it doesn't apply over here, but does are any checks ever conducted? Surely the only value in that cert is the fact it has a name attached.

 

[brianmoooore]

Surely the only value in that cert is the fact it has a name attached.

Which is what I said about Part P from its inception, and still do today.
What were just cowboys are now promoted to cowboys with a piece of paper in their hand.

 

[Dustydazzler]

There was no electrical cert available to this house so even if anyone wanted to check who wired it there is no chance now

 

[Mike Johnson]

Going back someone said that 16amp in 1.5mm was fine for a kitchen, in EU terms maximum of eight sockets in 1.5mm, but all the white goods have to be on their own individual circuit, so the maximum a 16amp radial in a kitchen would take is a toaster and kettle.

 

[Mike Johnson]

To find out the who the electrical contractor was, ask the HSE for a copy of the Estate F10, then ask the appointed professionals, all of whom would be named on the form.