open wiring

[murdock]

what are your thoughts on the short piece of exposed wire between the pipe and the ceiling board feeding lights...i believe this is such a trivial thing and should not be regarded as a fault which will stop the issuing of a coc...so long as the joint is not done in the roof space.

correct it is about the short piece of wire beteen the pipe and fitting...not about twin+e.

so let me ask this question what is the diffrence between the short piece of exposed wire and the whole roof being wired in twin + e

rats eat thru twin + earth just as fast as they can eat thru a short piece of exposed wire...

what i am try to find out is should the coc be held back because you can see 50mm of red and black wire.

the aim of the question is not to "catch" anyone out...just get some feed back from everyone.

just to add...what about the "exposed" earth wire used to earth a ceiling fan when when the metal pipe is used as an earth in an old installation.

[murdock]

the way i would like to see light fittings wired(i can dream)...a junction box in the roof with a piece of metal sheathed heat resitant wire connected to the light fitting...no rats...no burnt wires...in the real world this only happens where my customers give me open order numbers.

[Dave A]

So you would find acceptable the connection of a "light fitting" where the ceiling rose is amiss and the joints are below the ceiling? :-)

No (just in case that wasn't a rhetorical question )

I probably should bail out on this discussion at a technical level anyway. I'm probably seeing issues where there aren't any.

[SparkyScott]

The way I would wire in the lofts is running boards screwed to the beams,clip the twin and earth to that and joint boxes
on the running boards alot neater,unlike my sisters loft that is just a mess!

[Sparks]

I reckon hair-splitting will be with us for many years to come. This is just one of many points on which there is not a hard and fast rule which has to be complied with. If there is "open wiring" in a flat roof no-one will know. The roofspace just gets excluded from the COC because of inaccessiblity. Guys (registered or not) work the cheapest and fastest they can then grab the money and run. The guy who comes later has the problem of telling the client he was an idiot for being a cheapskate.

[murdock]

or worse...when you take on a new customers and you add a light or 2 then the installation starts to fail...you look the a!! because now since you worked on the installtion there are suddenly problems.

i have this issue at present...i did some work for a customer about a year back...notified the customer of the shocking installation...twin+e buried directly in the plaster...no boxes...light fittings and plug boxes used as junction boxes...i keep getting called back for problems with the installation failing...seems like the brickwork must have squashed the cabling in various places especially between the ground floor and first floor...tv guy put nice new dstv cable and nailed it to the wall in the same place were the outside light cables run..

[Dave A]

Lots of fun to be had in the electrical contracting game for sure

[Sparks]

The worst is, when you expose the guys doing it you have to kiss the DOL ass to try get something done about it. It has taken a few months to get a case submitted to the Senior Prosecutor's office. Had I not stayed on DOL's case and eventually got hold of the Deputy Director, I have no doubt nothing would have happened. There is still a glimmer of hope for now though. Good thing I am such a stubborn SOB.

[Jerrad]

I had the same issue when testing, found open wires to the Batten holders of an old house.According to SANS 7.2.2.2 provisions must be made to prevent heat damage of wire/cable ends to a light fitting, it would be advisable to use a heat resistant cable from a round box to the final wiring of a batten holder.

[murdock]

i wish you luck trying to get a prosecution on such a remedial item...when you cant even get a prosecution for a totally illegal installation...with life threatening violations

[Jerrad]

That is unfortunately true, there is no recourse if someone issues an invalid COC.

[ACEsterhuizen]

So if a building's wiring (surfix) is all done with helacon connectors, no inspection / junction boxes, is it reg compliant (or not) because it is in the "inaccessible roof space?" or because the helacon connectors complies with reg 6.16.1.9 a, b, c, d and e.

a) non-flammable,
b) located as near to the appliance(s) as is practicable,
c) permanently installed,
d) such that they cannot be opened without the use of a tool, and
e) readily accessible.

[Sparks]

No it is not.

[ACEsterhuizen]

No it is not.

Please Sparks can you refer me to the specific regulations that clearly supports that statement. Also, 6.3.7 , 5.1.1 , 6.16.1.9 a, b, c, d, and e, 6.3.7.2 , 7.8.5.1: (IP4X Protection against wire, etc. Cannot be penetrated by a solid object 0.04 in. (1.0mm) or more in diameter) does not exclude helicon joints or terminations. Bearing in mind that most of these are excluded because it is an "existing installation" and falls under clause 5 only.


ps I have a major issue at a casino where these helacon connectors was used (every single joint and termination to a downlight etc) by the contractor and now they want a coc. I would appreciate a good solid set of regs that clearly exclude this type of wiring.

I am unsure about this issue and it is going to cost this client (+-1200 joints/terminations) money to redo all these connections joints and terminations into inspection boxes and junction boxes with glands etc. Also there will be a civil claim against the contractor and I really need to get my facts (and regs) very straight, clear and simple.

[Sparks]

For the regs you will have to give me some time, but off pat you can see that the conductors are exposed and you know that joints must be within an enclosure.
The Helicon while being an approved method of joining conductors are not a replacement for enclosures, they are on an equal par with porcelain connectors and insulated ferrules, would they be accepted if not in an enclosure?
When the terminations are truly "inaccessible" (flat roof with no roofspace) it has become common practice to accept that it be excluded from the COC, however, I believe that the installer should still be held accountable.
I will post the regs I believe to be of relevance as soon as I get some time to find them.