There was an article in the Sunday Times about downlighters inserted into a
ceiling breaking the fire protection between floors and that a back guard is
required.

I've just had a good look at a typical B&Q 50W 50mm halogen downlighter and
can't see where this break is. The bulb is presumably inert to fire and the
surround is brass. The clip ensures a fairly airtight join.

What exactly is the problem ?

On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 20:14:55 -0000, "G&M" wrote:

There was an article in the Sunday Times about downlighters inserted into a
ceiling breaking the fire protection between floors and that a back guard is
required.

I've just had a good look at a typical B&Q 50W 50mm halogen downlighter and
can't see where this break is. The bulb is presumably inert to fire and the
surround is brass. The clip ensures a fairly airtight join.

What exactly is the problem ?

They're not actually fireproof though. They need to be totally sealed,
which they're not.
I don't think the bulb is particularly resistant to fire either IMO.
...

SJW
A.C.S. Ltd.

G&M wrote:

There was an article in the Sunday Times about downlighters inserted into a
ceiling breaking the fire protection between floors and that a back guard is
required.


Oho. I had teh ruddy building onspector round and he sprung that one one
me too. First I had heard of it.



I've just had a good look at a typical B&Q 50W 50mm halogen downlighter and
can't see where this break is. The bulb is presumably inert to fire and the
surround is brass. The clip ensures a fairly airtight join.

What exactly is the problem ?



As I understand it, its the hole in the plasterboard ceiling that is teh
problem. Flames below lick through teh cracks and set light to the
joists,...etc.


I'd welcome any info on this. I am faced with removing 25 of teh buggers
now he's got this bee in his bonnet, and retrofittng guards...

On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 20:44:35 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

I'd welcome any info on this. I am faced with removing 25 of teh buggers
now he's got this bee in his bonnet, and retrofittng guards...

You appear to need some of these:

http://tinyurl.com/34r6g

PoP

-----

My published email address probably won't work. If
you need to contact me please submit your comments
via the web form at http://www.anyoldtripe.co.uk

I apologise for the additional effort, however the
level of unsolicited email I receive makes it
impossible to advertise my real email address!

The Natural Philosopher wrote in message ...
Oho. I had teh ruddy building onspector round and he sprung that one one
me too. First I had heard of it.
I'd welcome any info on this. I am faced with removing 25 of teh buggers
now he's got this bee in his bonnet, and retrofittng guards...



Well, I hadn't heard of this one, but looking at the relevant bit of the
building regs, there is a requirement for 15 minutes for passage of flame
and 30mins for collapse, between floors. You might get away with it if its
the roof above, or perhaps a bathroom (using the "not an inhabited room"
ploy). If you have used plastic lamp fittings, I think you are stuffed. If
the fittings are in metal housings, then I reckon you could get away with
silicone sealing the fitting to the surrounding plasterboard. The
interesting one is what is the passage of flame time of a wood panelled
ceiling, with floorboards above? The relevant BS used to be BS476, I don't
know what it is now.

Regards
Capitol

"Capitol" wrote in message
...

The Natural Philosopher wrote in message ...
Oho. I had teh ruddy building onspector round and he sprung that one one
me too. First I had heard of it.
I'd welcome any info on this. I am faced with removing 25 of teh buggers
now he's got this bee in his bonnet, and retrofittng guards...



Well, I hadn't heard of this one, but looking at the relevant bit of the
building regs, there is a requirement for 15 minutes for passage of flame
and 30mins for collapse, between floors. You might get away with it if its
the roof above, or perhaps a bathroom (using the "not an inhabited room"
ploy). If you have used plastic lamp fittings, I think you are stuffed. If
the fittings are in metal housings, then I reckon you could get away with
silicone sealing the fitting to the surrounding plasterboard. The
interesting one is what is the passage of flame time of a wood panelled
ceiling, with floorboards above? The relevant BS used to be BS476, I don't
know what it is now.

Have a look at
http://www.dorset-technical-committe...ts/report8.asp

Kev

The Natural Philosopher wrote
G&M wrote:

There was an article in the Sunday Times about downlighters inserted into
a ceiling breaking the fire protection between floors and that a back guard is
required.

Oho. I had teh ruddy building onspector round and he sprung that one one
me too. First I had heard of it.

I'd seen the two types, shielded and not shielded. Unfortunately i'd
already fitted the unshielded in a wooden ceiling.

The instructions specified minimum gaps above the light to allow for
heat dissipation, which I complied with. But it doesn't instil
confidence. In mitigation, this light is in a loo cubilcle, so it
won't be on for long periods of time (hopefully !).

Looks like PoP's sheilds would do the trick in this case, but at 9
quid a throw, it's be cheaper to buy the shielded in the first place.

Cheers

Paul.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
G&M wrote:

What exactly is the problem ?



As I understand it, its the hole in the plasterboard ceiling that is teh
problem. Flames below lick through teh cracks and set light to the
joists,...etc.

I just can't see this. Given a piece of plasterboard or a thick piece of
glass housed in brass, which do you thnk wil burn first ?

Somehow I think building control have got the wrong end of the stick here.

"PoP" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 20:44:35 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

I'd welcome any info on this. I am faced with removing 25 of teh buggers
now he's got this bee in his bonnet, and retrofittng guards...

You appear to need some of these:

http://tinyurl.com/34r6g

These are for commercial premises to meet much stricter regs. I'm sure they
are great but they wouldn't even fit in the 5.25" voids above my ceilings.

On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 22:30:06 -0000, "G&M" wrote:

These are for commercial premises to meet much stricter regs. I'm sure they
are great but they wouldn't even fit in the 5.25" voids above my ceilings.

Smaller versions are available (and a bit cheaper):

http://www.qvselectricalwholesale.co...GHTING_10.html

Look about halfway down the page.

PoP

-----

My published email address probably won't work. If
you need to contact me please submit your comments
via the web form at http://www.anyoldtripe.co.uk

I apologise for the additional effort, however the
level of unsolicited email I receive makes it
impossible to advertise my real email address!

PoP wrote:

On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 20:44:35 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:


I'd welcome any info on this. I am faced with removing 25 of teh buggers
now he's got this bee in his bonnet, and retrofittng guards...


You appear to need some of these:

http://tinyurl.com/34r6g

PoP


None of those will fit. I only have the depth of celing joist and the
hole through which the units were fitted to work wih. The units have
been installed over a year now and teh previous BCO never ever mentiobed
this requirment. To fit what your URL show would require me to remove
and replace ceilings in six rooms.



-----

My published email address probably won't work. If
you need to contact me please submit your comments
via the web form at http://www.anyoldtripe.co.uk

I apologise for the additional effort, however the
level of unsolicited email I receive makes it
impossible to advertise my real email address!

Capitol wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote in message ...

Oho. I had teh ruddy building onspector round and he sprung that one one
me too. First I had heard of it.
I'd welcome any info on this. I am faced with removing 25 of teh buggers
now he's got this bee in his bonnet, and retrofittng guards...




Well, I hadn't heard of this one, but looking at the relevant bit of the
building regs, there is a requirement for 15 minutes for passage of flame
and 30mins for collapse, between floors.


Ah.

You might get away with it if its
the roof above,


The inspector was not worried about flame leaping into the loft, under
the thatched roof. Only leaping intop the inter-floor space,

or perhaps a bathroom (using the "not an inhabited room"
ploy).


The fittings are all in corridoors, and bathrooms and a seldom used
kitchen, but does that refer to the room below or tha room above?


If you have used plastic lamp fittings, I think you are stuffed. If
the fittings are in metal housings, then I reckon you could get away with
silicone sealing the fitting to the surrounding plasterboard.


They aleady are in most casessince the gibbons of electricians failed to
install them neatly.

The
interesting one is what is the passage of flame time of a wood panelled
ceiling, with floorboards above? The relevant BS used to be BS476, I don't
know what it is now.


The more interesting one in my case is a ceiling composed only of oak
beams. with plasterboard between, and the floor laid entirely on top of
the beams.





Regards
Capitol

On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 10:10:13 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

None of those will fit. I only have the depth of celing joist and the
hole through which the units were fitted to work wih. The units have
been installed over a year now and teh previous BCO never ever mentiobed
this requirment. To fit what your URL show would require me to remove
and replace ceilings in six rooms.

See my other response - the covers shown on the following web page
might assist you:

http://www.qvselectricalwholesale.co...GHTING_10.html

These also appear to be cheaper.

PoP

-----

My published email address probably won't work. If
you need to contact me please submit your comments
via the web form at http://www.anyoldtripe.co.uk

I apologise for the additional effort, however the
level of unsolicited email I receive makes it
impossible to advertise my real email address!

The Natural Philosopher wrote in message ...

The more interesting one in my case is a ceiling composed only of oak
beams. with plasterboard between, and the floor laid entirely on top of
the beams.


Provided the plasterboard is filling the gaps between the beams and close to
the floor above, then this is deemed to meet the requirements AIUI. I was
referring to having a bathroom above the light when I suggested the not an
inhabitable room ploy. I'm not sure if there isn't a foam filler, which it
might be possible to inject around the fittings to provide the flame seal
being requested. It would have to retain it's shape under flame conditions.
I guess it might be silicone. I have seen wood coatings which paint on to
give, say 15 minutes, fire protection. Can anyone else think of something
easy?

Regards
Capitol

Kev wrote in message ...

Have a look at
http://www.dorset-technical-committe...ts/report8.asp


Thanks.

Hmm. Very relevant. I know of one installation of about 10 large 240V units
in a victorian house which is being rented!! I think I need to consider what
to do about that one.

I have some difficulty in believing the 400 degrees figure quoted for low
voltage lamps unless there is a fault in the fixture. At these temperatures,
the life expectancy of the lamps would only be a few hours.

Regards
Capitol