How many regs

[Sparky_Steve]

should have used Cat5e then it has an earth i think

 

[Paul.M]

One of the golden rules for any electrician is that the fuse/mcb/rcbo must be a lower ratting than the cable. What can the cable handle?

Also there is a reg stating that sockets must fed by a csa of xxxxxx mm. See if you can find the reg?

 

[shanky887614]

its not a straight forward answer as the manufacters instructions will say design current.

for example usually 2.5mm is recomended as 16amps even though it can hold around 2X amps.

with tri rated cable 1.5mm can carry 2X amps acording to manufacter

would you wire sockets in 1.5 tri rated, no simply because it will cause grief when someone goes to do a pir etc in future and think its standard cable.



i doubt cat5 is designed for 230/240v as its a data cable so i wouldnt use it.

seen some right dodgy stuff, a newbuild i got dragged to help 2nd fix (people living there)

had 6MM TWIN from CUTOUT to 100A mainswitch as temp supply


is it right/legal, no will it stop people doing it, no

 

[shanky887614]

should have used Cat5e then it has an earth i think

no i think the difference is how the pairs are twissted.


never heard of 2.5mm core cat5 so shouldnt be ussed

 

[Happy Jack]

Just chipping in.

I'm very interested to see if anyone can find a breach in the UK regs with the socket mounted upside down at floor level.

Well, Part M of the Building Regulations is fairly fresh in my mind. But 553.1.6 appears to cover it.

One of the golden rules for any electrician is that the fuse/mcb/rcbo must be a lower ratting than the cable. What can the cable handle?

Ay. Ib < In < Iz. Assuming the worst case scenario via the specification of CAT5e, an AWG of 26 translates to approximately 0.13mm2. Even if I knew absolutely nothing else about the cable, that alone would be enough to invoke a fairly serious response.

Also there is a reg stating that sockets must fed by a csa of xxxxxx mm. See if you can find the reg?

433.1.103, also mentioned in the OSG, the third paragraph p.175, Appendix H.

So how many Regs? I would imagine this infraction has fallen foul of a dozen, at least. But surely it just needs to be one...