Wall light joining cables?

[Bonce]

I have a wall light situated in the lounge end of my through lounge dining room and want to put a new wall light also in the dining room end. simply connected off the existing wall light (switch to operate both lights).

I have just run out of cable trying to make this run in one length of 1.5 T&E - question is: is it ok in terms of regs to join 2 pieces of 1.5 T&E in a connection block and house in a choc block to continue the run? The run for the cable was very awkward and I should have checked I had enough first, but you live and learn and it looked like there was plenty on the reel! - I want to avoid having to hook wires again which has taken all day!

Thanks in advance.

 

[GaryMo]

Obviously it's better to have one piece of cable and not a joint for no other reason than to extend to new cable. That aside, where will the joint be? Will it be accessible for future testing and inspection?
Where have you run the cable? Is it in safe wiring zones?
Is it less than 50mm from the surface of the plaster? If so, is it going to be additionally protected by an RCD with a maximum rating of 30mA?

 

[Bonce]

GaryMo thanks for answer and yes it will be protected by 30mA RCD - the lighting circuit is already protected at CU.

Cable run is in safe zone i.e directly vertical up to ceiling above wall light fitting under floor to JB. The JB will be available for inspection as it runs to the hallway, where the current lighting circuits run back to CU. A floor board will need lifting to inspect.

So does this mean I can do it? I've just pulled it through and Im literally short about a metre - I agree not the best reason to joint something but is it allowable? I may sleep on it and drum up enthusiasm to do again tomorrow but just wondered in terms or regs and tests that would need to be conducted whether this would cause problems.

Thanks again

 

[GaryMo]

The only this is the accessibility of the junction box.
How would you define 'accessible'? I would say easy access to something.

Pulling back a carpet (possibly moving furniture in the process) and lifting a floorboard, is that easy access?
What if laminate flooring was placed over the boards in the future?

If you're going down this route then the minimum required would be to screw the floorboard in question down, mark that it contains a junction box for the wall lights underneath and leave a note by the consumer unit detailing the location of a concealed junction box.

Another option would be to properly crimp the cables or solder them and cover with heatshrink. This wouldn't required future inspection.

 

[rssteve]

The only this is the accessibility of the junction box.
How would you define 'accessible'? I would say easy access to something.

Pulling back a carpet (possibly moving furniture in the process) and lifting a floorboard, is that easy access?
What if laminate flooring was placed over the boards in the future?

If you're going down this route then the minimum required would be to screw the floorboard in question down, mark that it contains a junction box for the wall lights underneath and leave a note by the consumer unit detailing the location of a concealed junction box.

Another option would be to properly crimp the cables or solder them and cover with heatshrink. This wouldn't required future inspection.

it was stated in this months professional electrician that if a floor board needed lifting it was not to be classed as accesible, it said a trap door incorporated into the floor would be ok.

if it took a while to fish the cable through just use the cable as a draw wire for a new bit, or as its 1.5mm you could easily strech it by a few meters and class it as 1mm2.

 

[GaryMo]

it was stated in this months professional electrician that if a floor board needed lifting it was not to be classed as accesible, it said a trap door incorporated into the floor would be ok.

Same furniture may have to be moved, same carpet lifted so the only difference is you may need to undo 4 screws? There's nothing difficult about that.

Out of interest, who's opinion was this?

 

[Bonce]

Thanks guys for the answers I think I will run it again.

Out of interest on the accessability point. I am sure that my smoke alarms have JB's (I've just seen them!), they are wired into the CU on a seperate circuit on their own 6A MCB (so this seems to comply with regs generally but again the JB isn't accessible (taking into account what you have both said).

At the moment we don't have carpet (first house for me and my girlfriend, we ripped out the old and cant afford new yet!) but in future I'm sure we will have. Would I be right in thinking if I replaced these with what have been referred to as maintenance free junction boxes would this comply and do they still need to be accessible? By this I mean should you be able to draw them out to below ceiling level to inspect. Im not sure if the hole in the ceiling would be large enough below the smoke detectors and then dont we get into the realms of causing problems due to fire resistance of plasterboard etc.

Thanks for help again.

 

[GaryMo]

Would I be right in thinking if I replaced these with what have been referred to as maintenance free junction boxes would this comply and do they still need to be accessible? By this I mean should you be able to draw them out to below ceiling level to inspect. Im not sure if the hole in the ceiling would be large enough below the smoke detectors and then dont we get into the realms of causing problems due to fire resistance of plasterboard etc.

So called maintenance free junction boxes need not comply with the requirements of accessible connections.

If your house is a standard 2 storey dwelling and the garage isn't situated under any of the rooms then it would be classed a one single fire compartment.