Difference between revisions of "Talk:Cable Routes and Protection"
ARWadsworth (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
The "safe zones" for cables in walls have not altered with the 17th. The only new requirement made in the 17th was the RCD requirement.--[[User:ARWadsworth|ARWadsworth]] 11:21, 20 October 2010 (BST) | The "safe zones" for cables in walls have not altered with the 17th. The only new requirement made in the 17th was the RCD requirement.--[[User:ARWadsworth|ARWadsworth]] 11:21, 20 October 2010 (BST) | ||
+ | |||
+ | Maybe, but neither of those address the point I was making, which is that existing cabling does not need to made to comply. Misunderstanding that causes a lot of problems for householders that are no wiser. | ||
+ | [[User:NT|NT]] 19:49, 20 October 2010 (BST) |
Latest revision as of 18:49, 20 October 2010
Scope of requirement
Just a quick note because this point is much misunderstood. The requirements of the 17th only apply when a cable is newly installed. The listed requirements don't apply to existing installs, and there is in most cases no good reason to upgrade them. NT 23:37, 19 October 2010 (BST)
I think Adam planned to have this one mainly cover the mechanical aspects of cable protection - the allowable zones etc. The bit that is there is an intro summary to highlight the different interpretations of "protection". --John Rumm 01:32, 20 October 2010 (BST)
The "safe zones" for cables in walls have not altered with the 17th. The only new requirement made in the 17th was the RCD requirement.--ARWadsworth 11:21, 20 October 2010 (BST)
Maybe, but neither of those address the point I was making, which is that existing cabling does not need to made to comply. Misunderstanding that causes a lot of problems for householders that are no wiser. NT 19:49, 20 October 2010 (BST)