# Kitchen Lights



## Noel (16 Jan 2005)

Having put up with two single light bulbs in our kitchen for the last 10 years I reckoned, with some encouragement....., that's it's the right time to upgrade. Want the recessed spot light type. Few questions -

230v direct or transformer type?

will ceiling insulation effect cooling/heat build up?

been reading about GU10 (?) bulbs and longevity and cost to replace. Presume you get what you pay for?

any credence in the theory that a dimmer set low (like soft start) will make the bulbs last longer?

Essentially, I know very little about such lights. So any first hand knowledge (including fitting) would be appreciated

TIA

Noel


----------



## Chris Knight (16 Jan 2005)

Noel,

I know sweet Fanny about the electrical side of these things but I am a very disappointed user of them! 

1. They don't seem to last long. Either the bulbs or the transformers blow

2. Dimmer switches are always making a buzzing noise or switching the lights off at some point during their traverse from min to max.

3. They can be hard to grasp when trying to change the bulbs


----------



## johnelliott (16 Jan 2005)

Downlighters are a bunch of c**p. Do not fit them. If you want halogens then I would suggest the type that swivel and are usually mounted 3 on a short rail, external, 240 volt no transformer. Available very resonably priced from B&Q etc. 
Probably not as much light overall as a neon tube, so you will probably want lights under the wall units as well
John


----------



## Anonymous (16 Jan 2005)

I would have expected a dimmer to extend bulb life in 240V lamops but not transformer lamps

Reason is the resistance of a bulb is at it's lowest when cold and so the current is higher at switch-on (ohms law I=V/R), however, as the bulb warms the resistance increases a lot (positive temperature coefficient) and the current reduces. A dimmer could supply low voltage at first until the bulb warms up and so there is less surge current and thus less strain on the bulb.

This is why bulbs almost always blow at switch-on


----------



## Bean (16 Jan 2005)

I fitted some to my kitchen over two years ago, not had a bulb blow yet, the transformers are quiet and fitted in the ceiling void. but not close to the lights due to the heat given off, they also give out plenty of light (50W). I over specced the transformers by assuming I would be using 6 50W bulbs instead of the 4 used. Not sure if that is significant in the lack of noise.
All of the components came from Screwfix, the lights are used a lot as we seem to congregate in the kitchen. However I do believe that transformers can be a bit of a lottery.

Bean


----------



## Anonymous (16 Jan 2005)

Don't forget that as the kitchen is considered to be a wet area then it is covered by the new building regulations part P which came into force on Jan 1st.

No problem with you doing the work to change the light fittings, but you are required to report it to the local council so that they can send someone out to inspect it - at a sizeable cost which could be up to £200.

http://www.handymac.co.uk/PartP.asp

Andrew


----------



## mudman (18 Jan 2005)

Got four downlighters in our kitchen and they are tagged for removal and destruction when we get around to doing the kitchen. Will be replacing with good old fluorescent light.
Were installed by previous occupants and cast horrible shadows just where you don't want them, the units keep dropping out and hanging by the wire and it seems a very short interval between bulbs going.


----------



## Bean (18 Jan 2005)

Mudman
we planned the position and angle very carefully to minimise the casting of shadows, its important as we discovered from a friends house where the kitchen company just banged four in the ceiling.

Bean


----------



## Anonymous (18 Jan 2005)

Noel,

We have had 12v halogen lights in our kitchen for some years. Eventually, the transformers packed up and I replaced them with transformers from Screwfix. 

The lights now seem very dim and I suspect that the transformers are not giving out 12 volts. One of these days I will get round to checking the voltage - and of course if they need replacing I will have to pay a fortune to get a qualified(?) electrician to replace them.

Howard


----------



## Vormulac (19 Jan 2005)

I have halogen downlighters in my lounge and dining room, they were installed by the previous owners and I've now been there four years without having to change any of them. No discernable hum from the dimmers either.

On the other hand, they installed ordinary mains voltage spots in the kitchen and the pippers blow on an infuriatingly regular basis!

V.


----------



## Les Mahon (19 Jan 2005)

I've get hologen downlighters in bathroom and living room, and under the units in the kitchen... also have installed then in 3 other houses. The transformers can blow, especially is they are let get too hot - make sure if you are putting them in the ceiling space that you put them above the insulation. I've never had to replace the bulbs in any of them over the last 3 years.

I also found that the ones under the cabinets in the kitchen (which are 10W) get dimmer the further they are from the transformer! I think it is something to do with the cable not being beffy enough, though I have checked and the cable is not getting warm which was my worry. If anyone has ideas I'd be delighted to hear them before I go fishing new cable through the wall space.

Les


----------



## Anonymous (19 Jan 2005)

Don't forget that if you are putting downlighters in you have to fit covers:

http://www.tlc-direct.co.uk/Main_Index/ ... index.html

You also need to use chocboxes to attach any lighting in the ceiling void:

http://www.tlc-direct.co.uk/Products/CHOCBOX.html

An ordinary terminal block, even wrapped in tape, isn't good enough to satisfy the regulations. The chocboxes have cable strain relief built in.

And as I commented earlier, you can do the work yourself, but thanks to part P which came into play on Jan 1st you will have to notify the local council. They will send out a tame spark to inspect and test the installation, and then provide you with a certificate (or not, if he decides the work isn't up to scratch).

It can work out expensive! If you don't follow the rules and there is an incident (e.g. fire) then your building insurers might get choosey about whether they want to pay out.....

Andrew


----------



## Noel (19 Jan 2005)

Andrew, understand all the consequences of the new regs. My sparky friend will do all the final checks etc. Council will not be involved.
Wonder if the new regs apply overhere? We're usually about 5 - 10 years behind the UK. At the moment they're talking about introducing water charges in a few years. Next thing they'll want to bring in poll tax or community charge, whatever it's called. At the moment all we pay is rates and that's about £400 a year, crazy.

Cheers

Noel


----------



## Anonymous (19 Jan 2005)

Sorry Noel, I have no idea where you are based but it is obviously outside of the UK mainland.

Andrew


----------



## DaveL (19 Jan 2005)

HandyMac":3cccs8a2 said:


> Sorry Noel, I have no idea where you are based but it is obviously outside of the UK mainland.
> 
> Andrew



Andrew,

Look at the panel next to the post:

Noely
Moderator







Joined: 07 Aug 2003
Posts: 1004
Location: Limavady, N. Ireland


If the member has filled in the information on their profile it will be displayed for all to see. :wink:

Therefore I know you claim to be in Bracknell, Berkshire. :shock:


----------



## Noel (19 Jan 2005)

Thanks Dave, at times I do feel as if I live in a foreign country...
The view out the back makes up for it.
So, Andrew, out of curiosity, are the new regs applicable over here?

Noel


----------



## Anonymous (19 Jan 2005)

DaveL":3gv3nz13 said:


> Look at the panel next to the post:



Homer Simpson has got the response I need..... 

Andrew


----------



## Anonymous (19 Jan 2005)

Noely":1pzbqlur said:


> So, Andrew, out of curiosity, are the new regs applicable over here?



As far as I know, no. But watch out for this becoming an EU directive in due course, then it might be.

I won't get started on what I think of this appalling legislation, but believe me I am dead set against it. Principle is fine (saving lives), but they could easily have achieved that goal without all the red tape.

And it is apparently to save 2.6 lives a year in the UK, lives that are due to faulty wiring installations. Now call me a cynic, but when people find out how much it is going to cost to get the certification carried out they will probably say "sod that" and do the job themselves. End result, more darwin candidates.

Andrew


----------



## Les Mahon (20 Jan 2005)

Noely,

last time I checked N. Ireland was in the UK! you mean you have your own building regs?

Les


----------



## Noel (23 Jan 2005)

Hi Les, how's sunny Cork? I think we are part of UK. Really depends who you're talking to or who you are watching on TV.........
Building regs could well be different from the UK. As I mentioned we are well behind in most things (and long may it last...).

Noel


----------



## Les Mahon (24 Jan 2005)

Hi noely,

Sunny, don't make me laugh! though at least the rain stayed away long enough this w/e for the foundations of my new workshop to get dug  

I had forgotten when posting the previous post that I actually did a job for some part of the civil service in belfast - known as construction services, so I guess they do have there own building regs (Otherwise there was alot of people in a building not doing very much)...


----------



## RogerS (30 Jan 2005)

so in part P, does the P stand for Pathetic, Problematic or just Plain Pointless.

Reading a thread that I started on the Which forums the sane consensus is that we're all going to ignore it.


----------



## Anonymous (30 Jan 2005)

HandyMac":3mamijab said:


> And it is apparently to save 2.6 lives a year in the UK, lives that are due to faulty wiring installations. Now call me a cynic, but when people find out how much it is going to cost to get the certification carried out they will probably say "sod that" and do the job themselves. End result, more darwin candidates.
> 
> Andrew



I do not agree with your sentiment at all and do not really see why you are so worked up about it.

I think that the reason behind part P is to catch and prosecute COWBOYS who go around pretending that they are qualified electricians and putting peoples lives at risk due to their incompetence, lack of training and ignorance of even basic electrical theory or IEE wiring regulations!!!

'you don't need a piece of paper to fit a socket.....blah...blah.. blah...'

I started out in my career as a time-served industrial electrician with a 232 craft certificate and am absolutely APPALLED at the things I have seen unskilled people do over the last 24 years.

To *safely* carry out electrical installations and *thoroughly* test them requires specialist knowledge (not just a bit of common sense)- usually gained by spending years working with a qualified electrician or electrical engineer on a recognised training course or apprenticeship with electrical theory taught too.

The only people who have need to worry about the part P regulation are those not qualified to do the job



2.6 people killed each year by poor electrical work is 2.6 too many.


----------



## RogerS (30 Jan 2005)

Actually the figure of 2.6 has, I think, been taken out of context. below is an extract from the findings

91. The RIA was criticised by 89% of those who gave an opinion on the document. The primary concern was the inclusion of accident figures from portable and non-portable appliances when Approved Document P is only applicable to fixed electrical installations. Table 1a in the RIA shows that 76% of fatal accidents and 74% of non-fatal accidents will not be directly affected by the introduction of the Part P proposals as they are not part of the fixed installation and hence outside the scope.

92. The public respondents focussed on the cost of the small number of accidents attributable to fixed installations (approximately 24% of fatalities and 26% of non-fatal accidents) and suggested that the savings in Table 2 in the RIA should exclude portable and non-portable appliances, making a saving of only £38m rather than £104m for an average of 2.6 deaths and 447 accidents per year. Whilst commenting on savings, some respondents queried the source of the 20% saving in accidents quoted in paragraph 33 of the RIA.

The inference is that the stats on which this has been based is flawed and there are actually NO accurate figures anywhere that show ANY deaths due to faulty wiring.

How many deaths from DIY? Falling off ladders etc? We've lost all sense of proportion in this country.


----------



## Alf (30 Jan 2005)

rsinden":25qtuesa said:


> The inference is that the stats on which this has been based is flawed and there are actually NO accurate figures anywhere that show ANY deaths due to faulty wiring.


Not for nothing is there that famous aphorism; "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." :roll: 

Cheers, Alf


----------



## Anonymous (30 Jan 2005)

Tony":1epdxfh7 said:


> I do not agree with your sentiment at all and do not really see why you are so worked up about it



Fact: Millions of UK taxpayers pounds have been spent setting up this scheme. Those same millions of pounds would have been better put buying cat scanners (etc) for hospitals where many more lives would be saved. I am fed up to the back teeth with government spending MY money on ill-thought out schemes.

Fact: The costs for the homeowner or rental property entrepreneur will be significantly increased as a result of Part P coming onto the statute books, with respect to work that needs to be carried out. The purchase (and sale) of any future home that YOU might seek to be involved in will be affected.

Fact: Homeowners and property developers faced with the exhorbitant cost of getting work carried out to comply with Part P might be inclined to do the work themselves "to save a few bob". More lives at risk, etc.

Fact: Cowboys will increase, not decrease, as a result of Part P. They will introduce themselves along the lines of "look mate, I can do that job for 50 quid cash so long as I don't have to mess around with that stupid Part P paperwork, alternatively I'll do the job for £250". Which option would you choose if it was your own personal money?

Fact: There is no evidence whatsoever that Part P will save a single life. The converse is true, as above - more people will be tempted to carry out unsafe enhancements to their electrical systems than before.

Fact: Instead of requiring honest tradesmen to join a quango (or trade union by the back door), wouldn't it have been far simpler to insist that any works carried out were done according to BS7671 - the 16th edition wiring regulations? Why does it need a quango to confirm that the electrician is okay to carry out electrical work? An electrician who has served his time and has all the relevant bits of paper simply doesn't need a quango to say he knows what he is doing.

Fact: Do the quango take responsibility if their member screws up and causes injury or loss of life? (The answer is no).

Fact: How would you feel if you had a major operation in a hospital, like a stomach tumour removed, and shortly afterwards a quango insisted that you go back in so that the quango inspector can check the surgeon did his job properly? Or you have your car MOT'd, and a month later you've got to take a day off work so that an independent assessor can check the MOT was done properly?

As I have said so many times, I applaud any measures which improve safety. What I don't approve of is busy-body policitians who prance about introducing new laws believing that they are doing a public service, when the opposite is so true.

Andrew


----------



## Anonymous (30 Jan 2005)

HandyMac":2z46w2ko said:


> Fact: Millions of UK taxpayers pounds have been spent setting up this scheme. Those same millions of pounds would have been better put buying cat scanners (etc) for hospitals where many more lives would be saved.



Now we are back to the 'don't send probes to Titan as the money could be spent elsewhere' argument. Money must be spent on many things, not all diverted to one.




> Fact: Homeowners and property developers faced with the exhorbitant cost of getting work carried out to comply with Part P might be inclined to do the work themselves "to save a few bob". More lives at risk, etc.



Not at the risk of prosecution - they will be found out if they intend to move house.



> Fact: Cowboys will increase, not decrease, as a result of Part P.



I agree, more cowboys will appear - in prison!



> Fact: There is no evidence whatsoever that Part P will save a single life. The converse is true, as above - more people will be tempted to carry out unsafe enhancements to their electrical systems than before.



Electricity IS DANGEROUS and all installation and repair work needs regulating



> Fact: Instead of requiring honest tradesmen to join a quango (or trade union by the back door), wouldn't it have been far simpler to insist that any works carried out were done according to BS7671 - the 16th edition wiring regulations?



Now this I don't believe!!!!!!! It is already a requirement that work complies with 16th edition - failure to do so will lead to prosecution should anybody be injured or placed in danger.




> As I have said so many times, I applaud any measures which improve safety. What I don't approve of is busy-body policitians who prance about introducing new laws believing that they are doing a public service, when the opposite is so true.



I applaud the measures too. These measures, although not ideal, will be an improvement


----------



## Shady (30 Jan 2005)

Got to disagree with you on this one, Tony - from 2 angles:

a) I strongly suspect that Andrew is correct - over-zealous intrusion in an essentially 'un-enforcable' aspect of any nationwide issue is a recipe for cowboy/shady dealing. Your implication that 'they will be caught when they sell the house' is a typical example of the busybody mentality: if this legislation is really about saving lives, it would be far more relevant to educate all the older couples who never intend to move - so will never 'be caught', but are precisely the poor sprouts who will now be priced out of employing a tradesman, and will therefore 'bodge' the job as the only way of doing it... Just like the gun laws post Dunblane, I guarantee you that there will be no appreciable reduction in electricity related deaths as a result of this, and quite possibly an increase. In addition, most of us - and I include myself - will probably say, 'stuff that, I'll take a chance on what's gonna happen in 3, 5, or 10 years time when I sell, have the lights/sockets I want now, and bluff the issue - go on mister government fool - prove I did it'....

b) My home is my castle - call me old fashioned, but if I want to build an unsafe shambles that will kill me, then it's my problem and caveat emptor when I come to sell... I am quite happy that contractors should be regulated - if I pay a tradesman, he should be able to meet appropriate standards. If, however, I myself wish to put a stupid stairwell in, or have live wires in the bathroom, then quite frankly, the state can keep its damned nose out. If, in due course, a buyer is stupid enough to buy such a house without a good structural survey, then he can inherit the issues with my best wishes. (I should add that I don't condone any such thing, but the point stands) - behind my front doors, the over-intrusive, profligate, nannying swine who can't even let me change a window or re-wire a plug without sticking their noses in can sod off. Again, Andrew's point is relevant. The money spent regulating this piece of stupidity could do a lot of genuine good where it's needed. 

It is simply absurd to tell me whether a plug is correct or not at pain of law, just as the ludicrous new regs on windows are driven in part by a craven, vote driven refusal to acknowledge the need for nuclear power as the only logical answer to global warming.

Sorry, this is a rant, and I doubt you really mean what your answer implies - but as the most over-regulated, un-free nation in any notional 'democracy', we are becoming incapable of saying 'enough' to our 'elected servants'....


----------



## Anonymous (30 Jan 2005)

I have deleted my post

It was originally meant to be tongue-in-cheek but clearly did not come across as such - I'm very tired


----------



## Shady (30 Jan 2005)

> (I should add that I don't condone any such thing, but the point stands)



Don't cherry pick to suit your argument when I make it quite clear that I would not seek to achieve such a stupid state of affairs.. That point was about the individual freedom we should be allowed within our own domain. 

You are presumably a keen woodworker, as you moderate and read here. There are far more DIY/woodworking related accidents than 'pure' electircal each year. Accordingly, your logic implies that all DIY and all amateur woodworking should be banned, because that would save a number of people from death or mutilation each year. Would you actually support that?

I have no further to say either, as I enjoy this board, but would close with the line 'moderation in all things' - whether enjoying a hobby or passing legislation.


----------



## Noel (30 Jan 2005)

Any chance of having me thread back?


Noel


----------



## Anonymous (30 Jan 2005)

sorry


----------



## Anonymous (30 Jan 2005)

Tony":28m4lrwo said:


> Not at the risk of prosecution - they will be found out if they intend to move house



How does that work then? There will be some magical new regulation requiring that an electrical inspection of a home involves lifting every floorboard and accessing every nook and cranny where cables might be run? A full 16th edition test costing hundreds of pounds to go with the new sellers pack? How's about those older properties built before 16th edition that don't comply with the regs then? Full rewire jobbie?



> Now this I don't believe!!!!!!! It is already a requirement that work complies with 16th edition



Sorry, but you are just plain wrong on this score. I did my C&G2381 certification course two years ago and one of the things that was drilled into us by the instructor was that 16th edition was and still is advisory, not compulsory. There is no legal requirement whatsoever that an electrician (cowboy or otherwise) applies the regs to electrical work that they carry out. They'd be silly if they didn't take account of it, but if they thought wiring a cooker circuit with 1.0mm was okay..... (I am kidding with that latter point, honest - please no-one assume that's okay! ).

It is of course factual that if a fatality were to occur then the learned prosecutor would be thumbing thru his C&G2381 binder as he asks you pointed questions during your stint in the witness box. But failure to comply with the contents of the binder is not actually illegal, never has been. If you, as a super-dooper trained spark with all the qualifications under the sun, made an informed decision based upon your wide personal experience which were in contravention of the regs then you would be on safe ground (pun not intended).

Incidentally, and purely for the record, prior to attending the C&G2381 course I had visions of taking on any electrical work going. Had been doing so for over 30 years and thus far no-one had been fried. What C&G2381 taught me above all else was that I was going to leave any serious electrickery to time served sparks. Since the day I got my C&G2381 certificate I have very deliberately turned away any electrical work which was not simple in nature - change a socket for a new one, install a loft light, that sort of thing is fine. Full electric rewire, no. I don't change consumer units. Anything involving running new cabling I would be particularly choosey about. Not because I don't think I can do a good job - but because I know enough about my limitations to know that I'm not qualified to go tinkering in those areas.

Why did I take that decision? Well a couple of things got home to me during the course. The first was earthing regulations, I really hadn't realised there were several different ways to provide a CPC to a home (TN-C, TT, etc). And then diversity - you mean I can safely wire up a cooker with 2.5mm and not 4mm or 6mm? And you can do it in a domestic premises (maybe!), but not in the same house with the same cooker used as a boarding property? As you can imagine, if I'm that flimsy on the regs then I really shouldn't be in there doing that stuff - so I don't. I am very, very glad I did my C&G2381 because it kept me well out of cowboy country  (anyone need a stetson? ).

Qualifications wise I'm fine. Experience wise, well I haven't done the apprenticeship bit and would be completely wrong to suggest that I'm the big hitter in the sparky industry.



> I applaud the measures too. These measures, although not ideal, will be an improvement



The world waits with baited breath on that score.

What Part P does is similar to requiring you to prove to an independent inspector that you know how to fill your car with fuel. And the inspector will make annual visits each year to ensure that you do know how to fill the car with fuel. Sad fact is that if they were really serious about electrical work then they'd have brought in arrangements similar to Australia and other countries - where the DIYer is simply not allowed to do anything - must be done by a fully qualified spark every time. Now, whilst that might have ruled me out changing the odd light fitting (hence cramping my ability to earn a living), I would have been fully supportive of that.

I could actually become Part P qualified if I had a mind to be. But finding £1000 a year to be part of the quango jet-set isn't on the horizon, and never will be.

Andrew


----------



## Anonymous (30 Jan 2005)

Noely":21s572ll said:


> Any chance of having me thread back?



Yes, of course old chap. Now that the red rags have stopped fluttering and there are some interesting bovine creatures with dangly bits on the horizon..... 

Andrew


----------



## Shady (30 Jan 2005)

Sorry to all, lost it there after a **** week.

Noely: 

1) I love them - good light, stylistically neutral but compatible with any decor...

2) Frankly, I've noticed no significant diff between these, normal, and 'long life' bulbs in day to day use.

3) Check the manufacturers' instrs re matching transformers/bulb ratings and dimmers - some cheaper dimmers won't work with low voltage sets.

4) I always use low voltage, with transformers. They do get hot - make sure insulation is 'cut back' around them. (I work on at least a foot clearance)

5) Fitting (mechanically) is easy: bore a hole with a drill, enlarge as necessary, and most have a spring loaded 'push-fit' system to lock the housing in. (In modern plasterboard ceilings, I've actually done the entire fitting with a single 'leatherman tool' before now in extremis) I've never had one 'fall out'. If you're unsure, do get a leccy friend to show you how to wire them up: despite my issue with Tony's view on legislation, I completely share his view on safety: it ain't worth dieing for the sake of 50 quid (or punts....)

HTH: in my view, they're a cost effective and relatively easy to configure lighting source, that will not clash horribly with decor from a victorian/shaker kitchen to a post modernist brushed steel minimalist temple...


----------



## RogerS (30 Jan 2005)

Are halogen lights 'dimmable'? I seem to remember being instructed that they weren't as they needed to operate at maximum temperature for the 'halogen cycle' to work otherwise they failed pronto.

Mind you..that was a log,long time ago and so I could be OOD

Roger


----------



## Noel (30 Jan 2005)

Thankyou Shady, a concise and informative reply. I'll have a go.

Noel


----------



## mudman (31 Jan 2005)

rsinden":151htwh1 said:


> Are halogen lights 'dimmable'? I seem to remember being instructed that they weren't as they needed to operate at maximum temperature for the 'halogen cycle' to work otherwise they failed pronto.
> 
> Mind you..that was a log,long time ago and so I could be OOD
> 
> Roger



Haven't read any of this thread but was in B&Q in Merthyr today and whilst looking for a 12V 5W halogen for my daughter's 'piggy light' noticed a chunky looking one that professed to be 'dimmable'. Noted it as unusual and then noticed this post. Small worl hey?


----------



## Anonymous (31 Jan 2005)

Andrew

We should leave it here

However



> drilled into us by the instructor was that 16th edition was and still is advisory, not compulsory.



Your instructor was ill informed. Although the 16th edition is not _actually _ law, non-compliance with it *is* illegal should anything happen as a result of that non-compliance, ergo, it is law in all but name :wink: 

This extends to anyone working on the installation. If a fatality occurs due to poor workmanship or non-compliance with regs, for example, then the _last qualified person to work on that equipment_ is responsible for the defect and will be prosectuted for 
a) not spoting it
b) not fixing it

I have been an electrical engineer for over 20 years and this has been the case all through that time


----------



## Shady (31 Jan 2005)

Tony, hope you got my PM - seemed to take forever to go.

Rgds,

Shady


----------



## woodshavings (31 Jan 2005)

I installed halogen downlighters in the kitchen a few months ago. I used the Screwfix kits - 3 off 20 watt fittings plus electronic transformer for £10. 

I have 14 lamps, split between the two original lighting circuits, a dual dimmer replacing the original switch. The dimmer works fine.

The lamp fittings fit a 68 mm hole. The transformers will also fit through this hole size. I could not get easy access to the floorboards above the kitchen ceiling so I cut slots across the floor joists from the ceiling side where the low voltage connecting cables needed to cross the joists, with a simple replastering job over these areas when finished.

In 3 months, I have had one bulb failure. The lamps "soft start" because of the dimmer and are usually run just below full power. I think this prolongs the bulb life. The 20 watt bulbs do not generate excessive heat - they sit in the "free air" in the ceiling space and show no signs of overheating.

HTH 

John


----------



## Anonymous (31 Jan 2005)

Ooooh, this is too good to miss....



> This extends to anyone working on the installation. If a fatality occurs due to poor workmanship or non-compliance with regs, for example, then the last qualified person to work on that equipment is responsible for the defect and will be prosectuted for
> a) not spoting it
> b) not fixing it



Does that mean that if in the meantime an UNqualified person worked on (it) then the qualified person would still be responsible?

The lawyers are going to have a field day....


----------



## Anonymous (31 Jan 2005)

And back to the thread....

Having burned out a lot of transformers in my day, I apply a simple rule to low-voltage lights on dimmers, which is that I use a transformer with at least a 50% margin of error. Note also that there really are two types of transformers, those that are dimmable and those that are not. Buy the right one for your application!

My kitchen runs plain old incandescent fittings, 600W of them on three units of four bulbs each. (It's a big kitchen). Problem is, dimmers at that size come expensive and they don't last 5 minutes.


----------



## Anonymous (31 Jan 2005)

Tony":t4f38odb said:


> Andrew
> 
> We should leave it here



Agreed.



> Your instructor was ill informed. Although the 16th edition is not _actually _ law, non-compliance with it *is* illegal should anything happen as a result of that non-compliance, ergo, it is law in all but name :wink:



I think you are agreeing with me actually - "it isn't law but in the event you implement something that doesn't comply...." 

Let's give it a rest now - I suspect the other natives of this forum are getting restless and boiling a big VAT ready to chuck us in.... 

Andrew


----------



## Anonymous (1 Feb 2005)

Incidentally,I have been listening to various rants on the screwfix forum regarding part p.One of the sparks decided to test out how it would work.He rang his local building dept. and said he was the customer who had recently had work done by an unqualified electrician.They said fine we can send someone out to check the work and you pays us lots of money.when he asked if the inspector would be fully trained he was told that they used one of their building inspectors who had been on a three day course.I am now going to retire to my rubber room and put my new jacket on-the one with the long sleeves which fasten at the back.


----------



## Anonymous (1 Feb 2005)

harry":2u32j4kv said:


> when he asked if the inspector would be fully trained he was told that they used one of their building inspectors who had been on a three day course



Silly isn't it?

30 years experienced spark does a bit of wiring.
20 year old Uni grad with 3 days experience verifies it's okay.

"Sorry missus, can't issue the certificate 'cuz the spark don't know wot he's doin', see. I just got a belt off that 'ere light fitting when I took the cover off, that didn't 'appen on me course 'cuz we weren't allowed near electricity so there must be electricity goin' spare in 'ere sumwhere".

How stupid. The C&G2381 course for the wiring regs is a couple of days. The C&G2391 inspection and testing course which a spark has to have is 5 days. And the inspector who has to say everything is okay has no experience whatsoever and gets half the training.

Move over in that room mate. There'll be a few more along shortly.....

Andrew


----------



## trevtheturner (1 Feb 2005)

Beaurocracy gone mad isn't it :evil: .

Just bought 100m of twin & earth, red & black, in case I want to install more sockets/lighting in the workshop, or indoors, in the future. Mind you, it will be completed by 31.12.2004 - and who is going to prove otherwise :wink: . Also, I'd sooner have it inspected by the likes of you, Andrew, than some L/A chinless wonder!

Do hope you sort your lights okay, Noel.

Cheers,

Trev.


----------



## Noel (1 Feb 2005)

Thanks for all the posts about me kitchen. Will go for the transformer (oversized) type.

Noel


----------



## Shady (1 Feb 2005)

Noely, as a lot of the posts here suggest, I've found it impossible to beat screwfix for value for money on something like this..


----------



## Martin (3 Feb 2005)

HandyMac":1aw3vg3p said:


> harry":1aw3vg3p said:
> 
> 
> > when he asked if the inspector would be fully trained he was told that they used one of their building inspectors who had been on a three day course
> ...



I'm sorry, but all this belly-aching about the new part-P regs really does seem rather over the top. I think you're over-simplifying the issue - building inspectors are rarely 20yr old graduates who've had a 3 day training course. They're more likely to be 40+ qualified engineers who "know a thing or two". They're likely to be just as experienced as you were in the field of electrical installation prior to you taking your electrical regs exams.

If they make a mistake and fail to issue a certificate then the issue is easily solved - the sparky comes back and verifies the non-compliance - if there's a dispute, it's surely very easily solved....

I for one am in favour of tighter regulation, and with good reason. I've been looking to re-wiring my workshop and got my brother (who used to be a sparky) to take a look. It seems that the previous owner, in taking an electrical feed to the garage, has basically taken a spur off a 13A socket and used it to feed not only the sockets but also the 5A strip lights.

The long and short of it being that said strip lights could burn the garage down before the fuse box would stop them. I expect it's likely to be a DIY job, but for my money it's a good example of why new regulations like Part P are necessary...


----------



## Anonymous (3 Feb 2005)

Martin":2bwogg2m said:


> The long and short of it being that said strip lights could burn the garage down before the fuse box would stop them. I expect it's likely to be a DIY job, but for my money it's a good example of why new regulations like Part P are necessary...



And how exactly do you imagine that Part P will stop this sort of thing happening?

Householder who feels the need to wire something up "ooh, better not, Part P will stop me!". Absolute rubbish. People will carry on regardless. And in my opinion the situation will worsen - not improve. People who would have been happy paying up to 50 quid to have some lights swapped over won't be so happy if the final bill is going to exceed £200 are they? Do you really think that will force them to keep their old light fittings? What will they do then? Simple - they will have a go themselves more often. What a brilliant result for a piece of legislation that was supposed to make things safer!

We live in an increasing nanny state. I have never objected to tightening up of rules on things like electricity, but to pretend that someone is going to stop being stupid because of some badly thought out legislation defies belief.

What is so wrong about this attempt at legislation is that a fully qualified and experienced spark will be unable to carry out electrical work despite his many years of experience. Are you claiming this is a good thing, that because he doesn't have the union card that he's not competent to do a good job? Of course not.

How's about government introduced new law that said you can't drive a car unless you belong to the AA or RAC? It's really no different to requiring a time-served spark having to join NICEIC.

And who is actually paying for this tripe? Government? Nope, they don't have any money to spend 'cos it's all ours anyway. Electricians? Haha! No chance. It's joe public who are footing the bill for this ridiculous legislation, and it's yet another stealth tax removing money from your wallet.

Remember that on top of the annual £350 fee to belong to NICEIC (£650 in the first year of applying), the electrician has to take a day out each year to escort the NICEIC inspector to review jobs that the spark recently completed - to make sure they are up to scratch. Good thing? Yeah, great. There are maybe 200 working days a year, so increase costs by 0.5% to cover this extra days loss each year. Add another half percent for joining NICEIC. So spark costs go up by 1% just to stay level. That's a cost that will be passed on to the consumer, and no doubt used as a convenient excuse to up costs even more.

Andrew


----------



## Alf (3 Feb 2005)

I think maybe the Part P discussion has been done to death now. Can we move on?

Cheers, Alf


----------



## Martin (3 Feb 2005)

Alf":3r03itd8 said:


> I think maybe the Part P discussion has been done to death now. Can we move on?
> 
> Cheers, Alf



Agreed - sorry Alf. I'll keep it short.

Andrew - my main point is that regulations _such as_ part P are needed (I agree that it's flawed in many areas, but then so is most legislation initially). It's always surprised me the amount of leeway afforded under the DIY banner. If my house burned down as a result of this botch job and I or my wife died as a result, who would be to blame? Surely people buying houses need better protection, and if you agree with that then it can only come through greater regulation (but I'm not necessarily saying Part P is the answer in this particular case).

Martin.


----------



## Adam (3 Feb 2005)

Alf":voimkc6t said:


> I think maybe the Part P discussion has been done to death now.



Yep. I think we must have just about exhausted it now? Surely?

Adam


----------



## Taffy Turner (3 Feb 2005)

Yes, but what implications will Part P have on the use of a dado cutter? :roll: :roll: 

(That should stoke things up again!!!!!)


----------



## Anonymous (3 Feb 2005)

Taffy stop it  

I have to second Alf,

With moderators hat on I am asking you all to let this one end here and now please


----------



## Anonymous (3 Feb 2005)

I hear ye, I hear ye. And I finished several days ago. Then someone crept in and rattled me cage guvn'r. Honest. Wife and two kids to support, please don't send me down..... ;D

Now about that last point..... 

Andrew


----------



## Newbie_Neil (3 Feb 2005)

HandyMac":212cjspd said:


> I hear ye, I hear ye.



Thanks
Neil


----------



## Shady (3 Feb 2005)

Will it stop me stealing all my electricity for free by hurling a weighted wire coat hanger on the end of some twinflex over the nearby high voltage pylon line??? :wink:


----------

