Bedside wall lights

[panther100]

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

Thanks John,

I thought that's what they might say. i could only find things referencing to older regs but did find a couple of things agreeing with you and EFLImpudence which through me. All cables will be within safe zones. I plan on mounting the FCU next to the socket I am spurring from on the horizontal and then the first switch will be vertically above it and then the second switch will be on the horizontal to the first.

Thank you for all your help will post a photo once the job is complete.

 

[JohnW2]

Thanks John, I thought that's what they might say. i could only find things referencing to older regs but did find a couple of things agreeing with you and EFLImpudence which through me. All cables will be within safe zones. I plan on mounting the FCU next to the socket I am spurring from on the horizontal and then the first switch will be vertically above it and then the second switch will be on the horizontal to the first.

You're welcome. In that case, the cables can be as close to the surface as you like, provided only that the circuit is RCD-protected.

Bear in mind that virtually all buried cables are buried less than 50mm deep. It's only if you move out of safe zones that substantial mechanical protection (or an earthed covering) is required.

Kind Regards, John

 

[rsgaz]

The house is actually a new build
...
I did mean drill through the studs

Is this not an upstairs room with a loft above it?

You shouldn't need to do any stud drilling or plasterboard removing and repairing. Go up into the loft and drill down through the top plate of the wall in both locations you can then fish cables through with some fibreglass rods to aid getting past the wall insulation. If you have noggings, then things will get trickier, but if it was me, I'd still prefer to spend money on hex drill extensions to drill the noggings from above than on filler, paint, etc.

Gaz

 

[Risteard]

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

Nothing old fashioned about it. Hardly anyone here would ever consider using 3-core cable for two-way switching!

 

[EFLImpudence]

I certainly agree that one does not need to design with possible future idiocy or ignorance in mind,

...but you do and you are.

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).

Is that consistent ???

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.

Have you rewired your ceiling roses ???

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.

Ok.

With the design in question, do you not think that the blue sleeving and the fact that the neutrals are NOT connected to the switch - but in a separate connector block as they are with loop at switch installations - would make it apparent?

 

[JohnW2]

Nothing old fashioned about it. Hardly anyone here would ever consider using 3-core cable for two-way switching!

It's not so much a question of how many cores the cable has (both 'old-fashioned' and 'new-fashioned' methods, here, usually use 3-core cable), but, rather, the way in which the 2-way switching is arranged. Do I take it from what you say that, over there, you still usually use the method that I was brought up on (with power connected to one switch, and the light being connected to the other switch (and having to find it's neutral from somewhere)??

Kind Regards, John

 

[EFLImpudence]

If only there were other instances where Line and Neutral were in the same cable, then DIYers may have been used to it.

 

[Risteard]

It's not so much a question of how many cores the cable has (both 'old-fashioned' and 'new-fashioned' methods, here, usually use 3-core cable), but, rather, the way in which the 2-way switching is arranged. Do I take it from what you say that, over there, you still usually use the method that I was brought up on (with power connected to one switch, and the light being connected to the other switch (and having to find it's neutral from somewhere)??

Kind Regards, John

Well the neutral is going to be looped through the light anyway - just an ordinary 3-plate arrangement with conventional two-way switching as opposed to what is actually known as the conversion method (as it is useful for converting 1-way switching to 2-way switching). So you would use a single brown from the luminaire to one switch, strappers between 2-way switches (and intermediates if 2-way and intermediate switching is being employed) and then a single brown back to the luminaire from the last switch.

 

[JohnW2]

With the design in question, do you not think that the blue sleeving and the fact that the neutrals are NOT connected to the switch - but in a separate connector block as they are with loop at switch installations - would make it apparent?

I think people must be bored today. I never wanted or intended to make an issue of this, but there seem to have been umpteen posts resulting from people picking up on one little thing I wrote!

Anyway, in answer to your question, the things you mention should, indeed, make the situation more apparent. Indeed, if one assumes that people working on the wiring will always be ones who fully understand what they are doing, and never make mistakes, then there would be nothing to discuss. However, the very existence of colour coding of cores, and over-sleeving, is to make life simpler, even for the knowledgeable, and thereby to reduce the chances of mistakes being made.

However, as I said, I do not really regard this as an issue that needs much debate

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

Well the neutral is going to be looped through the light anyway - just an ordinary 3-plate arrangement with conventional two-way switching as opposed to what is actually known as the conversion method (as it is useful for converting 1-way switching to 2-way switching). So you would use a single brown from the luminaire to one switch, strappers between 2-way switches (and intermediates if 2-way and intermediate switching is being employed) and then a single brown back to the luminaire from the last switch.

Those 'single browns', or their equivalent, were the main problem with the traditional/conventional method, since, being 'unpaired', they resulted in significant 50Hz fields which upset audio enthusiasts etc. - and I think that was one of the main reasons why what you call the 'conversion method' has, as far as I can see, now become the method of choice over here.

Kind Regards, John

 

[securespark]

If only there were other instances where Line and Neutral were in the same cable, then DIYers may have been used to it.

I knew I went wrong wiring my sockets to R & Y phases when I switched my TV on and it melted...