accessible?
MF?
we are getting lost in the terminology,i think.
If a junction is truly inaccessible, it has to be MF, but if it is truly MF it should not be a concern...However, i am sure all of you proper electricians on here have seen examples of supposed MF junctions that are far from that.
The result is confusion...
Proper electricians will choose a method that will stand the test of time...bodgers will use choc-block and leccy tape buried in whatever is to hand.
I am not an electrician, as I have said many times, but in my amateur view any joint that CAN be accessed should be made in such a way that it it is able to be tested and proved ok...in a perfect world, any joint that CANNOT ever be accessed must be made in such a way that it cannot ever be compromised...if you find yourself making many such joints, I submit you should find appropriate methods.
There is a distinction between accessible, and accessible with some effort involved.
Both are "accessible", in my opinion. I bet most of you guys consider what you have to do, choose a method that allows access of some kind whenever that is possible, and if you forsee a situation where the circuit will never be able of access in the future, then you will avoid joints. Yes, a counsel of perfection...but never a bodge.
I know nothing of large industrial installations, but I believe that in domestic stuff it is almost always possible to keep all joints accessible, though the MF option is preferable even for the less accessible ones.
Tin hat on...
BTW, on another point, what is an accesssible toilet? Having a toilet that is inaccessible is a useless toilet!
Just another dilution of proper English...
Another tin hat on!