'Safe Zone' created by 'current using equipment' ??

[EFLImpudence]

I'm afraid that it's far from obvious to me.

Ok.

The definition:
"Point (in wiring). A termination of the fixed wiring intended for the connection of current-using equipment."

Not everything is spelled out in infinite detail to satisfy every question you can think of.

In the case of an accessory with a faceplate of approx 90 x 90 mm or 90 x 150 mm, the 'widths' of the 'zones' it creates are very clear. However, if we start talking about 'the point where the cable is connected', I haven't a clue as to what that means in terms of the 'widths' of the zones, have you?

Not really but how essential is it?

In any event, I started this thread since you appeared to be saying that something like a mirror or TV created 'zones' whose dimensions were defined by the overall dimensions of the item/'appliance' concerned. As I asked, has your view about that perhaps changed?

I don't think it has changed - see my previous post #10.

I am merely using what I consider common sense which might warn me where not to drill holes (without further inspection) if I don't know where such items used to 'create' safe zones are when they are not visible.

I previously mentioned a shaver light. I think this is quite a good example (similar to your mirror) where the cable just comes through a hole in the wall and back of shaver and connects inside the appliance. This item might be easier to dismantle and check than your mirror but the principle is surely the same, is it not?

Where at first glance would you consider are the safe zones around a shaver?

 

[Murdochcat]

I think about safe zones when first fixing. So the cable will be vertical or horizontal from the point at the wall.

And yes some people just like stirring

 

[JohnW2]

Not really but how essential is it?

I would say not just essential but actually crucial. If one is going to have rules about where a concealed cable are permitted to be routed, then it surely is essential that those rules define the widths, as well as the directions, of those permitted zones, isn't it?

As I've said, in the case of an accessory with a faceplate, or even something like a CU, the widths of the permitted zones are very clear, but if it is just a 'connection point', then the widths of the zones are as clear as mud!

I don't think it has changed - see my previous post #10. .... I am merely using what I consider common sense which might warn me where not to drill holes (without further inspection) if I don't know where such items used to 'create' safe zones are when they are not visible.

Your post #10 merely quote your previous one (#8), in which you suggest that I have got things 'the wrong way around', but isn't that precisely what you are now doing yourself?

I agree totally that, in the absence of any clear indicators of where cables are most likely to be, common sense dictates that someone with a drill in their hand should be aware of the possibility that buried cable (feeding something large and fixed to the wall) might be 'almost anywhere'.

However, I'm not talking about the situation from the point-of-view of the person with a drill. Rather, I'm talking about the person who installs/buries the cable, and the rules which he/she attempts to follow as regards where they are permitted to bury the cable.

In practice, I would bury the cables as best as I could in vertical or horizontal alignment with what I knew to be the 'point of connection', even though the location of that point would not be known to any other person subsequently.By so doing, at least I 'would have tried'!

If the regs want to define #permitted routes' for buried cable in such situations, I would think that they probably should do something like define permitted (horizontal and vertical) zones of specified width, radiating from the centre point of a visible large item, since it doesn't really make I don't think it makes all that much sense to permit a cable to be buried anywhere which takes one's fancy which is aligned (horizontally or vertically) with the entire width or height of a large item fixed to the wall.

 

[JohnW2]

I think about safe zones when first fixing. So the cable will be vertical or horizontal from the point at the wall.

As I've just written, that's what I would do, largely because it's "the best I could do". However, if it transpires that someone subsequently fixes a large mirror/TV/whatever to the wall with your 'connection point' right at one corner of the item,then I would have achieved little .

As I've said, if the regs wanted to address this issue in a better fashion, they would perhaps define permitted routers for concealed cables of specified width radiating (horizontally and vertically) from the centre of the visible item - or something like that.

 

[Murdochcat]

As I've said, if the regs wanted to address this issue in a better fashion, they would perhaps define permitted routers for concealed cables of specified width radiating (horizontally and vertically) from the centre of the visible item - or something like that.

As we experience in the uk, time after time, nobody really wants to come up with “tight” regulations and isn’t just about electrics. This is a disaster for the UK and needs addressing.

I’m on a complete refurb / extension ATM. Recommended to owner that they have a heat alarm in the kitchen in addition to the smoke alarms in the hall and landing. Builder suggests no. BCO says not necessary. This in my opinion is sheer madness as most domestic fires I’ve come across started in the kitchen.

 

[JohnW2]

As we experience in the uk, time after time, nobody really wants to come up with “tight” regulations and isn’t just about electrics. This is a disaster for the UK and needs addressing.

As a general statement, I'm inclined to agree. However, in this particular case the regs regarding concealed cables are totally 'tight' in relation to accessories/CUs etc - and. indeed, we see people here being critical because the path of a cable veers very slightly outside the height or width of the accessory - so it wouldn't be that surprising if they made the rules equally tight for 'current-using-equipment.

This in my opinion is sheer madness as most domestic fires I’ve come across started in the kitchen.

I can sympathise with your view, but I imagine those who are offering differing advice probably have in mind the fact that the great majority of domestic 'false fire alarms' also occur in kitchens.

 

[Murdochcat]

I can sympathise with your view, but I imagine those who are offering differing advice probably have in mind the fact that the great majority of domestic 'false fire alarms' also occur in kitchens.

Never seen this when heat alarms are fitted in kitchens, seen many when people fit smoke alarms in kitchens. Our heat alarm has never gone off in 11 years since it was fitted, except when burning toast and the open kitchen door allowed the hall alarm to go off along with all the rest.

 

[ericmark]

As to original question, if the whole appliance defines the zone, wires still need to run straight not diagonal, and one would not want to remove the wiring when ever the appliance is removed, so in real terms it would be the outlet which defines the zone.

 

[JohnW2]

As to original question, if the whole appliance defines the zone, wires still need to run straight not diagonal,

Why? One is surely free to route cables however one likes within a defined ('safe') zone, isn't one? If that zone is very large, then the cable could surely be 'diagonal'?

We are used to pretty narrow zones (usually the width or height of an accessory's faceplate), which means that cables have to run roughly vertically or horizontally, but that all changes if the zones are very wide.

and one would not want to remove the wiring when ever the appliance is removed, so in real terms it would be the outlet which defines the zone.

...but, as had been discussed, what do you mean by ';the outlet' - and, in any event,that 'point' becomes useless as a guide to someone with a drill in their hand if it cannot be seen because it is hidden somewhere behind the appliance.

 

[ericmark]

deleted

 

[JohnW2]

As to original question, if the whole appliance defines the zone, wires still need to run straight not diagonal,

Why? One is surely free to route cables however one likes within a defined ('safe') zone, isn't one? If that zone is very large, then the cable could surely be 'diagonal'? .... We are used to pretty narrow zones (usually the width or height of an accessory's faceplate), which means that cables have to run roughly vertically or horizontally, but that all changes if the zones are very wide.

In case my prose explanation was not adequate, IF (which I seriously doubt was the intended interpretation of the reg), the entirety of a large current-using-appliance defined the ('safe') zones, then cable routes such as those shown here in red would presumably be perfectly compliant with the reg ...

 

[EFLImpudence]

For goodness' sake, John, let it lie.


No one was saying that an appliance could be used to describe the safe zone like that when installing cables.
It obviously cannot because - well because - when installing cable the appliance won't be there, will it?

All I ever said was that after the installation of, for example, your mirror when the actual device used to describe the safe zone will no longer be visible so if wanting to drill into the wall without removing the mirror the whole width and depth of the mirror will have to be treated as if it were a "safe zone" for cables - or "danger zone" for drilling.


End of.

 

[JohnW2]

No one was saying that an appliance could be used to describe the safe zone like that when installing cables.

You certainly appeared to be saying just that.

It obviously cannot because - well because - when installing cable the appliance won't be there, will it?

Indeed it won't - but if one has a rough idea of the size and position that the appliance will have, one could identify areas which would definitely be within those zones

All I ever said was that after the installation of, for example, your mirror when the actual device used to describe the safe zone will no longer be visible so if wanting to drill into the wall without removing the mirror the whole width and depth of the mirror will have to be treated as if it were a "safe zone" for cables - or "danger zone" for drilling.

We are agreed on that (which is common sense) but it's not what I was talking or asking about. I was talking specifically about the zones defined in 522.6.202 of the regs as being ones in which it was permitted to install buried cables, and you seemed to be saying that those zones were defined by the overall dimensions of the appliance. The requirements of BS7671 relate to the activities of people installing cables, not those who drill into walls.

 

[pcaouolte]

Perhaps we could start with the common case of a wall mounted extractor fan. Does the extractor fan create safe zones above, below and to both sides which are the same width and height as the extractor fan?

 

[Murdochcat]

Perhaps we could start with the common case of a wall mounted extractor fan. Does the extractor fan create safe zones above, below and to both sides which are the same width and height as the extractor fan?

IMHO Yes because you have no idea where the cable entry is AND cables need to be run vertically or horizontally

But in the case of , for example an oven, the safe zone is dictated by where the cable exits the wall