Rules and Guidelines
Want to participate in the discussions? Please read our Community Rules and Guidelines. Need some help? Visit Support and Answers.

  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 43 replies
  • Subscribers 32 subscribers
  • Views 4391 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

Ring Main Joint Box

PG
A kitchen worktop twin S,O, is to be relocated horizontally by about 60cm. 

The ring final cct (RFC) is cabled in buried T&E and the galv' steel back-box is flushed into the plaster/brick wall.

The RFC T&E extension cabling will be buried under plaster, covered in plastic capping along the horizontal  prescribed zone. Visually, it would be reasonable for an electrician to be aware that the route may contain cable(s).

The circuit is RCD protected.

The intent is touse insulated crimp and double insulating tape the jointed cables within the existing box to achieve a maintenance free connection, A 2mm thick (fabricated) plate was to be used to cover the back box and provide additional mechanical protection. The box would then be plastered over.


The questions are:-

1. How many would consider the steel plate back box cover a desirable feature or would a simple plastic cover suffice?

2. Should the original back box be left  unearthed?


Thanks in advance.
  • 0
    true - and originally the box would have been earthed, even if not by wire, when the socket was attached to it.

    The better option would be something like a plastic wago box, or heat shrink over the whole lot.

    I'd wholeheartedly agree, plaster and tile adhesive are not exactly good conductors, and if dry may be considered to be insulating but like cement are quite capable of passing a few milliamps in to a hand sized contact area when steamed up a bit.  A good few years  ago, before RCDs were so common, I have seen an emulsion painted wall that when leant on gave a mild tingle sort of shock, but it was only noticed at certain times - when humidity was high as it turned out - the cause was eventually traced to a damaged cable in the room on the other side.
  • 0
    I am not quite clear why the old socket has to be removed. If it is not a spur itself, a further socket may be spurred off it, or the ring may be extended.


    But perhaps the intention is to place a cupboard over the location.


    Here is one that I found earlier. This badgery was revealed when a cooker hood was removed. The photo doesn't show it, but there was a socket about 8" below.

    7b5b310896cb1a1a96104d419fc42f55-huge-img_04671.jpg
  • 0
    Become it will be blanked off and concealed with plaster leaving absolutely no indication of where the CABLE DROP to it comes down the wall to it.


    Therefore the cable drop is not in a permitted zone and it does not comply with the regulations.


    Andy Betteridge
  • 0
    That photo example from Chris is an ugly mess but regs wise OK - after all the terminals are enclosed, the only wiring out of the direct route is surface visible, and it is readily accessible, so does not need to be maintenance free. 

    Had the JB been hidden by being plastered in it would be  different matter - I remember these images from a thread on the old forum from AM as an example of  stretching the definition of screw terminals joints being accessible with tools.

    http://ancient-mariner.co.uk/public/IMG_0749.JPG
    http://ancient-mariner.co.uk/public/IMG_0750.JPG
    http://ancient-mariner.co.uk/public/IMG_0752.JPG


    the problem with the original proposal is that the change of direction  will be buried.


  • 0

    Sparkingchip:

    Become it will be blanked off and concealed with plaster leaving absolutely no indication of where the CABLE DROP to it comes down the wall to it.


    Therefore the cable drop is not in a permitted zone and it does not comply with the regulations.




    Eh? ?


    If you leave the socket in place, you keep the zones.

  • 0

    mapj1:

    That example is ugly but regs wise OK - after all the terminals are enclosed, the only wiring out of the direct route is surface visible, and it is readily accessible, so does not need to be maintenance free.




    134.1.1? The screw terminals should not be taking the weight of the JB, even if it is only a couple of oz.


    Did you notice the reason for the JB? ?

  • 0

    Chris Pearson:




    Sparkingchip:

    Become it will be blanked off and concealed with plaster leaving absolutely no indication of where the CABLE DROP to it comes down the wall to it.


    Therefore the cable drop is not in a permitted zone and it does not comply with the regulations.




    Eh? ?


    If you leave the socket in place, you keep the zones.


     




    Pay attention at the back of the class and read the question.


    The new sink is going where the existing socket is, that is why the socket is being moved.


    Andy Betteridge 

  • 0

    PG:

    The existing socket will be positioned between the new sink and drainer so should move. I could put a blank on and seal with silicon sealant but it will not look great on the new tiled surface.

    Regards




     

  • 0

    Sparkingchip:




    Chris Pearson:




    Sparkingchip:

    Become it will be blanked off and concealed with plaster leaving absolutely no indication of where the CABLE DROP to it comes down the wall to it.


    Therefore the cable drop is not in a permitted zone and it does not comply with the regulations.




    Eh? ?


    If you leave the socket in place, you keep the zones.


     




    Pay attention at the back of the class and read the question.


    The new sink is going where the existing socket is, that is why the socket is being moved.



    This is too complicated! ?

  • 0
    It’s not complicated.


    The socket AND the cables need moving to the new location, leaving nothing behind.


    Andy Betteridge

Community Rules & Guidelines