Bedside wall lights

[JohnW2]

Hi, 2x 3 core is enough between switches.
1 live ... 2 Neutral ... 3 1x L1 ... 4 1x L2 ... 5 1x L1 ... 6 1x L2

Indeed, but I think that would require use of the 'old fashioned' method of 2-way switching. That's why I said that (if one wanted to use the 'modern' method, which would probably be less confusing to anyone who had to work on it in the future) one would possibly (I wrote 'probably', but perhaps that was wrong!) need a third cable.

Kind Regards, John

 

[deadshort]

Why complicate ?

DS

 

[EFLImpudence]

 

[JohnW2]

Why complicate ?

I think one could ask that question in relation to either approach. As I said in my last post, to have a situation in which one cable had L, N and one strapper, and the other had three strappers (or one had L + 2 strappers and the other had N + two strappers) could well confuse a good few people who subsequently found themselves working on the wiring.

However, either approach would obviously work, and your method would be 'simpler', even if potentially more confusing. It's therefore down to the installer's choice.

Kind Regards, John

 

[deadshort]

Give it rest man.

DS

 

[panther100]

View attachment 107744

WOW thats great! Thank you EFLImpudence that makes complete sense.

 

[JohnW2]

<a wiring diagram>[/ATTACH]

Indeed, that's what DS is suggesting.

However, see my exchange with DS. I would be slightly uncomfortable with that 3-core cable containing two stappers plus N. If someone disconnected one of the switches and was then trying to reconnect it, if they did not fully understand what was going on (which I presume you would agree is not very conventional), there would be the potential for a 'bang' if they got it wrong - something which is never normally possibly with mis-wiring of 2-way switches.

Kind Regards, John

 

[deadshort]

And we're off and running ………… see you at Christmas

DS

 

[JohnW2]

And we're off and running ………… see you at Christmas

Merry Christmas to you, too.

I've said my piece. I personally would probably not want it done that way in my house (not the least because it might be me who subsequently got confused by what was going on!), but that's just a personal view.

Kind Regards, John

 

[panther100]

Planning out this job can I confirm that a notched wall stud and cable safe plates no longer meet the mechanical protection requirements. No issues if not as I should be able to drill more than 50mm from the surface.

Thanking you all again

 

[EFLImpudence]

Planning out this job can I confirm that a notched wall stud and cable safe plates no longer meet the mechanical protection requirements.

It would if the plate is thick enough - 3mm. plus ?
Having said that, in theses days of nail guns even that may not be enough.

However, if the ring circuit is covered by an RCD, protection is not required.

No issues if not as I should be able to drill more than 50mm from the surface.

Do you mean through the studs?
Not sure it would be wise to notch deeper than 50mm.

 

[panther100]

It would if the plate is thick enough - 3mm. plus ?
Having said that, in theses days of nail guns even that may not be enough.

However, if the ring circuit is covered by an RCD, protection is not required.


Do you mean through the studs?
Not sure it would be wise to notch deeper than 50mm.

The house is actually a new build this year so everything SHOULD meet up to date standards. That being the case then one of the thin cable safe plates you get from the likes of TLC etc would be perfectly fine just to add a bit of extra security should anyone try any thing silly.

I did mean drill through the studs and not notch deeper than 50mm

Thank you

 

[flameport]

if they did not fully understand what was going on

If people tamper with electrics without understanding what they are doing, then damage and destruction is inevitable regardless of how the circuit was installed.

 

[JohnW2]

If people tamper with electrics without understanding what they are doing, then damage and destruction is inevitable regardless of how the circuit was installed.

I certainly agree that one does not need to design with possible future idiocy or ignorance in mind, but I also personally feel that one should consider whether one's design increases the risk of mistakes being made (perhaps by a DIYer) in the future (even though I accept that mistakes are entirely the fault of the perpetrator).

With standard 2-way switch wiring, there is one 3-core cable per switch, and if those three cores are incorrectly wired to the switch, the worst that can happen is that the switching will not work as intended [which is one reason why (contrary to the wishes of our previous 'policeman') suggesting to people "which wire should be connected to which terminal of the switch" is generally 'safe']. However, if one of the cores of the 3-core cable is a neutral, then the scope for worse things happening as a result of mistakes increases.

However, as I've said, it's just a matter of person choice, simply something that I probably wouldn't want done in my home.

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

Planning out this job can I confirm that a notched wall stud and cable safe plates no longer meet the mechanical protection requirements. No issues if not as I should be able to drill more than 50mm from the surface.

The regulations don't actually require that the cables are more than 50mm from the surface - merely that, if they are buried less deep than that, that the circuit must be be RCD protected (which it quite probably already is). What the regs do require (unless you want to jump through various hoops) is that buried cables be routed within 'safe zones' - essentially horizontally or vertically in line with visible electrical accessories (FCUs, switches, sockets etc.).

Kind Regards, John