Discussion in 'Electrical Wiring, Theories and Regulations' started by Pelly1, Nov 12, 2017.
Discuss 16th ed unsheathed cables in the Electrical Wiring, Theories and Regulations area at ElectrciansForums.co.uk.
Trying to find relevant reg in 16th ed that covers unsheathed cables exposed from jboxes
There won't be one if you mean Permits the situation.
Do you mean the normal round Ashley type brown box where the sheath has been cut beyond the cutout in the box.?
Covers it in which way?
Why the 16th??
History .Doing condition report on block of 90 flats put all downlights in corridors down as c2 100mm of unsheathed cable into clip type connectors and someone has just used connector strip in places no jbox ,noted relevant regs from 17th ed .what client is trying to do is hold main contractor who gave 10yr warranty on building to task .just wanted to get in front as I am expecting reply from them to be it was installed to 16th ed.
No regulation would allow that! Past or present!
C2 for all.
Don't know the exact numbers off hand but all live connections should be adequately enclosed and no basic insulation should be visible outside the enclosure
Cores of sheathed cables from which the sheath has been removed and non-sheathed cables at the termination of conduit, ducting or trunking shall be enclosed as required by Regulation 526-03-02.
Non-sheathed cables for fixed wiring shall be enclosed in conduit, ducting or trunking.
BS 7671 : 1992
It wasn't permitted by the 16th Edition.
That said you are carrying out your inspection and testing taking cognisance of the requirements of BS7671:2008 (2015) and not any withdrawn Standard.
Good luck anyone trying to prove that was how it was installed ten or how ever many years ago.
I have to ask, why the 16th, is this a historical problem? pre 17th
The OP has said, that the client wants to take advantage of the builder’s 10 year warranty.
Obviously, if the work did not comply at the time of construction, the client can make a claim.
Sadly still see downlights done like this all the time. The connectors supplied on many fittings don't help one bit either.
I agree with previous comments, why the 16th edition?
Previous work carried-out which was compliant under old regulations is deemed satisfactory by current regulations, however any work that you perform now can be subject to the current regulations despite warranties.
Regardless, I'd advise my clients to change any old wiring systems to meet the current standards and explain why the standards where changed... safer for them and better business.
I think you are missing the point.
The wiring is not satisfactory, and the OP wishes to know if it complied with the Regulations in force at the time of it’s design/construction.
If it did comply, the OP’s client may not be able to ask the builder to rectify under the terms of the warranty.
If it did not comply then the client will be able to ask the builder to rectify.
What you personally would do is neither here nor there.
All the OP needs to know, is whether the work complied.
Not necessarily. It may or may not be satisfactory, but the simple fact that it no longer complies is not what makes it unsatisfactory.
Would you consider fused neutrals to be satisfactory if you came across them?
Thanks for replies .i think spinlondon got jist,if I didn’t comply with 16th at time of completion and signing off of test sheets then client going after builder to put things right.wouldnt have same firm in test sheets were a joke ,written out in cafe /pub me thinks
I see what you mean, sorry for the confusion.
As Spinlondon said, if it wasn't satisfactory when installed then the warranty should take care of it.
Which particular regulation would you use to support this statement?
Such work practices are going on today ....
Not very often we see your work Murdoch
Page 4 of the current regulations (BS7671 Amendent 3) states under the title "Introduction to BS 7671:2008(2015)" during paragraph two, that "Existing installations that have been installed in accordance with earlier editions of the Regulations may not comply with this edition in every respect. This does not necessarily mean that they are unsafe for continued use or require upgrading"
That isn't quite what you quoted in #13.
I was paraphrasing, and I accept I wasn't completely correct during #13 but neither was I quoting. I hope this clears things up.
The regulations could be more specific regarding your question and at the end of the day, it's entirely your choice when interpenetrating it's contents. To be honest, you don't even need to follow it's advice at all technically, but I'm not getting into that as it's not something I'd recommend.
That does not support your statement. As you have clearly highlighted it only states that it does not necessarily mean that it is unsafe or requires upgrading, this is not the same as saying that something installed compliance with previous regulations is never dangerous or needs upgrading.
What it means is that compliance with previous regulations on its own is not a reason to consider something unsafe, a good example is that red and black conductors do not comply with current regulations but this on its own is not unsafe.
It also means that if something is considered unsafe now then it doesn’t matter if it complied at the time of installation, it is unsafe. A good example of this is that it was once a requirement of the regulations to install a fuse in the neutral of a circuit, this is now considered unsafe and is potentially dangerous.
Which edition of the Regulations required fused neutrals?
The 9th edition (regulation 94) is the only one I actually have a copy of to hand to confirm this at the moment, but I think the requirement was also in later editions and wasn’t removed until the 13th (1950’s era)
I am sure that in the 15th you could have unsheathed flex to loads eg electric clocks lights etc of 0.5A. It would not be the edition of the regs it was installed more as designed to. when was this work done ?. The problem is that these fittings are mostly designed to take one cable, however, this is just bad workmanship.
You been in my kitchen ?
(Kev definitely helped with the under cupboard lights)
I would imagine the installation was constructed within the last 10 years, considering the client wishes to take advantage of the 10 year warranty.
Steady!.....I would never use green/yellow tape for that........black tape would blend in better!
This is a good thread, one that could take up days of debating at the IET. We understand the regulations are not retrospective but here we asking to confirm that when it was installed, it did comply at the time with the past regs (for warranty). In these days of litigation why pay for a rewire if you can prove it was done incorrectly and claim. Brilliant.
Just another thought. Let’s say that the initial work was done in accordance with say 16th and cert issued. This is the cert being compared against now. How do we know that the downlighters were not changed since then and the work (and connectors) was not the work done by the certifying sparks.
Doesn't sound like a rewire. More like a new build done less than 10 years ago. Maybe the OP can confirm?
6-10 years ago MR16 Downlighters where all the in thing. Now it's all LED, so it wouldn't be a surprise to see downlighters replaced even if only for GU10 fittings with LED lamp.
Separate names with a comma.