Regulation: 559.6.1.100

[uksparks]

Hi,

I believe I know what regulation 559.6.1.100 means, I would like your opinions on what it means.

When I say I think I know what it means, I would like some clarity in case my understand has been twisted on Thursday by the NICEIC bloke.

"Consideration shall be given to the provision of the neutral conductor, at each switch position, to facilitate the installation of electronic switching devices"

 

[uksparks]

My preference is to loop in st the rose, but that's me.

He was honestly a nice bloke and only gave me 4 or 5 crosses on his sheet, I can show you if you like, 3 of which I feel were arguable.

Ah the only other thing I remember without looking was I ticked tnc-s and not TN-s, ok hands up that's my fault. The fuse was sealed and couldn't look in the head, it turns out it was a split concentric, which is probably why I ticked TNCS. My faul entirely.

I did feel he kept trying to catch me out but equally I feel he was suitably pleased with my quick answered and calculations.

 

[HappyHippyDad]

I have never seen that reg before and would not have thought about wiring the neutral into the switch (as standard). Sometimes it may be easier to have the neutral in the switch but usually not. The ceiling rose has a 'loop' terminal in it, it is also easier to access compared to a switch half way down the wall if you needed to extend the circuit..

i wasn't aware of this but having just got my bgb down I think the wording of the regs is important, it says "consideration" which, to me, doesn't mean run a neutral to each switch, it means consider it at the design stage, and then discuss with client. I can't see how you could be marked down for this.

that said I always drop neutrals to switches downstairs and often upstairs too.

Do you always use 3 core down to the switches then Murdoch? (I think thats what you mean rather than not having a P/L in the ceiling rose). Also you say 'often upstairs', I guess this assessor would have even pulled you for not doing it everytime. Does sound a bit OTT.

 

[Silly Sausage]

I have never seen that reg before and would not have thought about wiring the neutral into the switch (as standard).

Have you not read the heated discussions on here about Neutrals at switches?
It's split the community in half!
Whatever suits the situation is good enough for me.

 

[Octopus]

Do you always use 3 core down to the switches then Murdoch?

I guess this assessor would have even pulled you for not doing it everytime. Does sound a bit OTT.

No, T&E feed, T&E loop and T&E or 3 core for load (if its a fan). The reasoning is that its far easier to have just the T&E at the lights, especially with some of the exotic fittings these days.

As for the assessor - well I can't wait for this to be highlighted

 

[thekingiam]

seems a bit over top to run 3 core to switches when not currently required for operation think of all that wasted copper never mind the expense

 

[Andy78]

The reg is clearly worded to show that it is not a requirement to provide a neutral at every switch point. He has just taken the wrong end of the stick.
I can imagine that every inspector has their own favourite regs that they like to pull out to help justify their job though. I can also imagine internal memos and training sessions from NICEIC where inspectors are told what the interpretation of a reg should be.
If your inspector ever pulls you up on anything you disagree with in the future, especially if he demands you rectify it, you could always contact the IET for clarification on regs meanings.

 

[Guest77]

I used to just send the assessor an e-mail with a CC to head office regarding the report if I felt it was wrong, 9 times out of 10 he would have to eat humble pie and apologise and the CC meant his boss knew about his error, every time he came back out he knew to watch his step. UK Sparks you need to write an E-mail asap and put him right before he puts his report in to HQ.

 

[HappyHippyDad]

The reg is clearly worded to show that it is not a requirement to provide a neutral at every switch point. He has just taken the wrong end of the stick.
I can imagine that every inspector has their own favourite regs that they like to pull out to help justify their job though. I can also imagine internal memos and training sessions from NICEIC where inspectors are told what the interpretation of a reg should be.
If your inspector ever pulls you up on anything you disagree with in the future, especially if he demands you rectify it, you could always contact the IET for clarification on regs meanings.

I think you're quite right there Andy. Thats a very specific reg for the assessor to choose, I bet he uses that on everyone he asesses, as he knows it's very likely not all switches will have neutrals in. I cant see how you can be pulled for not putting the neutral in though, just if you haven't given it 'consideration', which you can obviously say you have (as UK did :smiley2!

 

[Rockingit]

I've just started to switch over from Click to Hager accessories as 'stock standard' and all the Hager ones have a neutral terminal on light switches which is interesting to this debate. Must admit, I've always done either loop at ceiling OR switch depending on the nature of the building etc, and have never really thought about just using 3c as switch drops when loop at ceiling. I'll have to have a think about that one.

 

[spark 68]

Why 3c ?, the way I read it you either use the 'standard' 3 plate method (looping at lights), or provide PL + N on one (or two T&E if you are feeding the next switch) T&E feeding the switch/switches and one SL and N feeding the lights as you would if you were using grid switches (looping at the switch) for the more modern/awkward light fittings.

3c has it's uses if you needed a PL+SL+N, otherwise why mix the methods of looping at both the switch and the light ? you would not really gain anything by doing this.

 

[shanky887614]

I've just started to switch over from Click to Hager accessories as 'stock standard' and all the Hager ones have a neutral terminal on light switches which is interesting to this debate. Must admit, I've always done either loop at ceiling OR switch depending on the nature of the building etc, and have never really thought about just using 3c as switch drops when loop at ceiling. I'll have to have a think about that one.

those hager switches sound good for loft lights then

 

[driverman]

That's a joke, because once upon a time they would pull you up for running neutrals down at switch position.

Exactly.....trained Lecy Board, we were hammered if ever a neutral was taken to a light switch! Also all light switches had to be 4'6" from F/f/L. but like every thing else, things move on.

 

[shanky887614]

Exactly.....trained Lecy Board, we were hammered if ever a neutral was taken to a light switch! Also all light switches had to be 4'6" from F/f/L. but like every thing else, things move on.

never heard f/f/l?

why not ffl? easier toto figure out as finished floor level

 

[driverman]

never heard f/f/l?

why not ffl? easier toto figure out as finished floor level

Not sure where you coming from here. What I was getting at, tongue in cheek really...Light switches now are lower , elbow height. In my day, had to be 4' 6' shoulder height. If it wasn't 4' 6" whist training, electrician would ------- me.

 

[shanky887614]

Not sure where you coming from here. What I was getting at, tongue in cheek really...Light switches now are lower , elbow height. In my day, had to be 4' 6' shoulder height. If it wasn't 4' 6" whist training, electrician would ------- me.

ironically all our sensors are placed at 4'6" lol

we only get moaned at if its not right on newbuilds, on oldhouses its upto the client