New attic circuit

anacc

I'm planning on rewiring my attic. At the moment it's not very safe. While the rest of the house is wired in radial circuits there a couple of rooms that are wired in a ring circuit. From a socket on that ring there's a spur to a socket in another room. Then there's another spur from that spur/socket to a double socket in the attic. The lights in the attic are flourescent tube fixtures that are wired to a plug that is in one side of the double socket, then there's an extension cable plugged into the other side of the double socket and that extension cable runs the length of the attic (it's a very long bungalow) where there's a few things plugged in.

I want to remove the second spur off the ring. I'll then run 2.5mm T+E up to the attic from the hotpress where the distribution box is, then connect a few sockets in series. These sockets are for my modem, an ethernet switch, a couple of WiFi APs, a Sky box that's used for multiroom, and I'll probably also be installing wired alarms and maybe a doorbell.


I'd like to also connect the attic lights to this circuit. I know it's not best practice to connect lights to an RCD-protected circuit but these lights are not going to be regular house lights where the RCD tripping the lights could potentially be a hazard. Would it fall foul of regs having that attic lighting on the same circuit as the attic sockets?


To connect the lights to the circuit I would put a 13A fused spur with a switch (infintely better than the current process of groping in the dark to plug in the lights). From that switched spur I would run 1.5mm T+E to connect 4 bulkheads with LED bulbs. Is there an issue mixing 2.5mm and 1.5mm cable on the same circuit in this manner? The 13A fuse would be protecting the 1.5mm cable, yeah?

There is a spare 20A MCB in the distribution box that is RCD protected. It was for a circuit that an electrician moved a few years ago to an RCBO, so the MCB is fine and can be reused. Although I know I'm capable of wiring up the circuit in the box I'll call an electrician for that part because of the regs... Is there any issue with me doing the rest of the installation as long as a REC connects it in the box?

I made a diagram to help visualise the installation in case I'm not explaining clearly

Thanks in advance for any advice.

If its a bungalow there is no excuse for not running cables to the fuse board.

meercat

There’s so much wrong with this post it’s hard to know where to start
Get a rec in to do a proper and safe job and provide a certificate

Risteard81

What do you mean that the distribution board is in the hot press? It shouldn't be.

To be perfectly honest your post strongly suggests to me that you don't really know what you're doing. I could only advise that a REC does the lot. (And without being clear exactly what you're proposing doing I can't even state that what you intend on doing yourself would be lawful for you to do.)

Get a REC in.

2011

I have to agree with Risteard81 & meercat. It sounds like the wiring is a complete mess. I would consider a distribution board in a hot press is not just unacceptable, it is a liability. As it is a bungalow it should be a bit easier to rewire.

TheBully

So much wrong in the post I think your trolling guys here

anacc

By "Hotpress" I mean a room that's a few metres square that contains the tank, immersion, and shelves for storage. It's actually a very small room not a cupboard, but hotpress is just what we call it. The distribution board was in there when we bought the house, we had a REC in a few years ago who did a lot of work on other parts of the house and he was quite particular about a lot of things to do with regulations but had no issues working with the board in that room. Don't see any need to be paying big money to move it it it's not breaking regulations.

With regard to the rest of the post, ye'r all saying there's so much wrong but besides the distribution board location there's no suggestion as to what else is wrong. Maybe I wasn't clear in what I was trying to say and you're picking up on the wrong things?

The old wiring in the attic is a mess. That's where there's a spur off a spur, etc. It was like that when we bought the house. If that's where you say there's a mess then I'm fully in agreement. I want to completely remove old attic wiring as it is unsafe.

What I want to do is what's in the diagram. That is run new cable with new sockets on 2.5mm T+E which will be connected to a 20A MCB in the distribution board. It would be useful to also connect the new attic lights to this circuit but I don't know if that's allowed by regulations.

So my first question is: is it allowed by regulations to install attic lights which are used very infrequently on the same circuit as sockets that are protected by an RCD?

If the answer to that question is "yes" then from a wiring point of view (look at the diagram I provided) there would be 5 sockets on the circuit wired with 2.5mm T+E. From the last socket the 2.5mm would extend into a 13A switched fused spur which will be the switch of the lights.

My second quesiton is: do I need to continue to use 2.5mm T+E for the lights or can I use 1.5mm T+E seeing as that cable would be protected by a 13A fuse in the switched spur?

With regard to connecting the circuit to the distribution board I would be calling a REC to do that because I know any work on the board must be carried out by a REC. The REC would also need to check my wiring to make sure it's up to standard. I just want to save time and money by having as much done as possible before calling a REC.

2011

I’m very busy at work so can’t provide a proper reply right now but just to pick up on a point: It is completely illegal for anyone other than a registered electrical contractor to add any circuit to a distribution board, end of.

Also apart from what you are describing does not align with the definition of minor works, as such only a REC is permitted to do this.

Leaving the legalities aside common sense should tell you that only a qualified electrician should do this work. No offense intended, but from your posts it would suggest to me that you don’t have the understanding required to safely do this work.

anacc

2011 wrote: »

I’m very busy at work so can’t provide a proper reply right now but just to pick up on a point: It is completely illegal for anyone other than a registered electrical contractor to add any circuit to a distribution board, end of.

Yep, I know that. As I said, I will be calling a REC to connect the circuit to the board.

Also apart from what you are describing does not align with the definition of minor works, as such only a REC is permitted to do this.


Leaving the legalities aside common sense should tell you that only a qualified electrician should do this work. No offense intended, but from your posts it would suggest to me that you don’t have the understanding required to safely do this work.

Fair enough, thanks. Can you help me understand what it is from my posts that makes you think that?

2011

anacc wrote: »

Yep, I know that. As I said, I will be calling a REC to connect the circuit to the board.

This circuit must be wired and connected in its entirety by a REC.

Can you help me understand what it is from my posts that makes you think that?

Will do later.

meercat

As already stated by a number of posters,this work should only be carried out by an rec

Here’s the relevant regulation regarding distribution board
530.5.4
A distribution board shall not be located in the following locations
-storage or airing cupboards
-under timber staircases
-where it may be covered by garments
-in a bathroom,washroom or wc

anacc

meercat wrote: »

As already stated by a number of posters,this work should only be carried out by an rec

Here’s the relevant regulation regarding distribution board
530.5.4
A distribution board shall not be located in the following locations
-storage or airing cupboards
-under timber staircases
-where it may be covered by garments
-in a bathroom,washroom or wc

OK great, none of those apply to my distribution board. Thanks

Risteard81

anacc wrote: »

OK great, none of those apply to my distribution board. Thanks

They very clearly do.

An "airing cupboard" is what polite society in England calls a hot press.

anacc

Risteard81 wrote: »

They very clearly do.

An "airing cupboard" is what polite society in England calls a hot press.

As I said already though, it's not a cupboard, it's a room. It's ceiling to floor in height, plastered walls, enough room for someone to stand in there, and the door opens into a hallway not another room.


We call it the hotpress because the tank and immersion are in there. Habit I guess from when we lived in houses where the tank and immersion were actually in cupboards.

Risteard81

anacc wrote: »

As I said already though, it's not a cupboard, it's a room. It's ceiling to floor in height, plastered walls, enough room for someone to stand in there, and the door opens into a hallway not another room.


We call it the hotpress because the tank and immersion are in there. Habit I guess from when we lived in houses where the tank and immersion were actually in cupboards.

Some aspects of the Rules don't apply to hot presses where they are in walk-in rooms, but mounting of a distribution board is not one of these. It is forbidden in a hot press regardless of whether it is a walk-in room or not. You will notice that no distinction was made in what was quoted, whereas the main section dealing with the Rules surrounding the hot press actually differentiates between it being a walk-in room or not. So I'm afraid your argument does not stand.

You call it the hot press because that's what it is. It's just bigger than some other people's hot presses.

I would be very surprised if a RECI Inspector shared your interpretation of it being an acceptable location for a distribution board.

anacc

Risteard81 wrote: »

Some aspects of the Rules don't apply to hot presses where they are in walk-in rooms, but mounting of a distribution board is not one of these. It is forbidden in a hot press regardless of whether it is a walk-in room or not. You will notice that no distinction was made in what was quoted, whereas the main section dealing with the Rules surrounding the hot press actually differentiates between it being a walk-in room or not. So I'm afraid your argument does not stand.

You call it the hot press because that's what it is. It's just bigger than some other people's hot presses.

I would be very surprised if a RECI Inspector shared your interpretation of it being an acceptable location for a distribution board.

It's amazing how you can be so sure about a room you've never seen while other RECs have done work on it with no issue. The last REC we had in a few years ago was very particular about regs and what he could and could not do, and he did a lot of work on the board and it's all certified. I think I'll trust him over some random internet lad. Thanks for your concern though.

disposableFish

Risteard81 wrote: »

You will notice that no distinction was made in what was quoted...

While I don't wish to defend OP (who's clearly off the mark in general...)

I would like to question this.

On one hand I would argue that a semantic distinction is made; room and cupboard are distinct things.

On the other, what's the intent of the rule here?
Is the problem that it's trying to avoid not that of fire risk and inconvenience rather than the presence of plumbing?

Look how it says "storage or airing cupboards" - I don't think it's a coincidence they're grouped like this. Cupboards/hot-presses are cramped spaces with poor air-flow and are normally stuffed full of combustible materials - ie. definite fire risk with a distribution board.
Additionally, you may want to get to a distribution board quickly and that's hard when you have to pull out loads of stuff to get at it.

Bruthal

anacc wrote: »

It's amazing how you can be so sure about a room you've never seen while other RECs have done work on it with no issue. The last REC we had in a few years ago was very particular about regs and what he could and could not do, and he did a lot of work on the board and it's all certified. I think I'll trust him over some random internet lad. Thanks for your concern though.

But you are here asking questions. You hardly expect answers from people you know.

2011

anacc wrote: »

It's amazing how you can be so sure about a room you've never seen while other RECs have done work on it with no issue.

Ask yourself this: Does the room in question fit this definition or not?

-storage or airing cupboards
-under timber staircases
-where it may be covered by garments

If is does then no distribution board should be installed in there.

The last REC we had in a few years ago was very particular about regs and what he could and could not do, and he did a lot of work on the board and it's all certified. I think I'll trust him over some random internet lad. Thanks for your concern though.

Remember you asked a random people on the internet, they are just responding to the best of their ability. The answer is being supported by quotation taken directly from the current regulations (and all this for free).

The risk of asking questions is that you may not always get the answer that you like


Have a think about the logic of this rule, ask yourself this:
1) Would the ambient temperature be higher in this room than say the hall?
2) Is there a danger that pipes could leak / spray onto the board?
3) Could clothing be accidentally stacked against it?
4) If the board were to go on fire would there be more flammable materials local to it than say the hall?


Perhaps you could help us by posting a picture of the room in question?

Edit: When you think about it the rules are written in such a way that a determination can be made about the suitability of a room for a distribution board without have to actually see the room. This has the added advantage of making the decision less subjective.

meercat

anacc wrote: »

By "Hotpress" I mean a room that's a few metres square that contains the tank, immersion, and shelves for storage. It's actually a very small room not a cupboard, but hotpress is just what we call it.

Despite what you call it ,you’re clearly describing an airing cupboard with storage,neither of which are permissible locations. The rules are quite strict on this and your rec should have issued a notice of potential hazard.

anacc

2011 wrote: »

Ask yourself this: Does the room in question fit this definition or not?

-storage or airing cupboards
-under timber staircases
-where it may be covered by garments

If is does then no distribution board should be installed in there.

No it doesn't. It's not a cupboard, we don't have stairs, and there's no garments stored in the room.

Remember you asked a random people on the internet, they are just responding to the best of their ability. The answer is being supported by quotation taken directly from the current regulations (and all this for free).

The risk of asking questions is that you may not always get the answer that you like

Yeah I get it. It's just frustrating to ask questions and nobody comes close to answering them, instead focusing on something that's actually not an issue. FWIW there were two people who PM'd me about the questions and did not reply here publicly because they couldn't be bothered arguing with others on here. Take from that what you will.

Have a think about the logic of this rule, ask yourself this:
1) Would the ambient temperature be higher in this room than say the hall?
2) Is there a danger that pipes could leak / spray onto the board?
3) Could clothing be accidentally stacked against it?
4) If the board were to go on fire would there be more flammable materials local to it than say the hall?

1) if it is, it wouldn't be much. There's a good airflow into the room from the hall. The only time we have hot water in the tank is in winter when generally the hallway is cold (not heated using central heating)
2) Unlikely as the pipes run through the floor and the wall rather than near the board
3) Nope, the shelves are at the back of the room while the board is at the front next to the door
4) it's just plaster and plasterboard no matter where the box would be located.

Perhaps you could help us by posting a picture of the room in question?

I've already put enough time into posting about a non-issue without having to go take and post photos when I get home.

Risteard81

It most certainly is not a non-issue.

2011

anacc wrote: »

No it doesn't. It's not a cupboard, we don't have stairs, and there's no garments stored in the room.

As you suggest let's move on from that, it has been done to death now.

Let's focus on the remaining issues.

When you say T + E for the socket circuit do you know that T + E as we knew it for many years (with a reduced bare earth) is now banned?

I will try to address your pother issues this evening when I get home. I will be busy for the next couple of hours.

anacc

2011 wrote: »

As you suggest let's move on from that, it has been done to death now.

Let's focus on the remaining issues.

When you say T + E for the socket circuit do you know that T + E as we knew it for many years (with a reduced bare earth) is now banned?

I will try to address your pother issues this evening when I get home. I will be busy for the next couple of hours.

Thanks. Yes, I know. All the socket wiring in the house (except the one aforemented circuit that is wired as a ring) is wired in radial 2.5mm with compliant T+E with the green/yellow sheathing on the earth. The exception is that ring where the cable is really old 1.5mm red and black with a reduced bare earth, and that's where the spur off a spur into the attic is. Afaik once the extra spur is removed that circuit should become compliant, because existing installations with the old wire don't need to be replaced unless there are major changes to the circuit?

2011

What size MCB is on the ring circuit? Is it a B or C type MCB?

anacc

2011 wrote: »

What size MCB is on the ring circuit? Is it a B or C type MCB?

If I recall correctly it's a Hager B20.

2011

anacc wrote: »

If I recall correctly it's a Hager B20.

That is not permitted, it must be rated at 32A.
However B rated MCB is generally best for a domestic socket circuit.

Edit: I don't work on domestic installations and am off my tools a long time now, but from memory the above is correct. Perhaps one of the RECs on here can clarify.

Risteard81

2011 wrote: »

That is not permitted, it must be rated at 32A.
However B rated MCB is generally best for a domestic socket circuit.

I would suggest that a ring final circuit on a 20A MCB is just bloody stupid and pointless as opposed to prohibited. The whole point of the ring final circuit should be to permit a 32A MCB or 35A fuse to be used.

As for Type B MCBs it is actually a requirement for domestic socket circuits - not just generally the best option.

2011

Risteard81 wrote: »

I would suggest that a ring final circuit on a 20A MCB is just bloody stupid and pointless as opposed to prohibited.

Are you sure?
When my home was inspected by RECI the inspector made the REC change this. It was around 14 years ago.

As for Type B MCBs it is actually a requirement for domestic socket circuits - not just generally the best option.

I would have thought that C type were permitted once the EFLI was low enough (although B type is preferred).

Bruthal

2011 wrote: »

Are you sure?
When my home was inspected by RECI the inspector made the REC change this. It was around 14 years ago.

Possibly just had the mind set to "ring = 32A"

anacc

Im sure there’s a B32 on the board next to the RCD but I’m almost certain that’s not for the ring. I’ll have to double check but can’t right now.

I get that’s it’s stupid/pointless but is it dangerous to have a B20 for the ring? Is there a reason why it would have been done that way decades ago? The house was built in the 70s and I reckon that’s the only circuit that has not been replaced. There was a lot of work done on the rest of the house except the rooms that circuit feeds as well as the attic.