|
Low-profile electricals
I'm about to lose an existing double-gang wall socket behind a new wardrobe,
and would like to run a plugged-in extension lead from it to a new surface-mounted socket just beside the wardrobe. What little exposed flex there will be between the edge of the wardrobe and the new surface box can be trunked in, so I'm not concerned about exposing it to potential damage. I've been trying to find out if there's a surface-mount box (single-gang would do) with less protrusion than the usual 25mm (purely because it would look less clunky). And also if it's possible to get a conventional-type three-pin plug with less depth than the standard (since there's not going to be much clearance behind the wardrobe). I've looked in the obvious places but without luck; I wonder if I'm using the wrong search terms. Any pointers in the right direction would be very welcome. Thanks. |
Low-profile electricals
On Thu, 04 Mar 2021 16:14:36 +0000, Bert Coules wrote:
I'm about to lose an existing double-gang wall socket behind a new wardrobe, and would like to run a plugged-in extension lead from it to a new surface-mounted socket just beside the wardrobe. What little exposed flex there will be between the edge of the wardrobe and the new surface box can be trunked in, so I'm not concerned about exposing it to potential damage. I've been trying to find out if there's a surface-mount box (single-gang would do) with less protrusion than the usual 25mm (purely because it would look less clunky). And also if it's possible to get a conventional-type three-pin plug with less depth than the standard (since there's not going to be much clearance behind the wardrobe). I've looked in the obvious places but without luck; I wonder if I'm using the wrong search terms. Any pointers in the right direction would be very welcome. Thanks. I cut a hole in the back panel of the wardrobe so I could maintain access to the switches. |
Low-profile electricals
"jon" wrote:
I cut a hole in the back panel of the wardrobe so I could maintain access to the switches. I thought about that, but I'd still need to run to a more accessible socket. If a non-switched socket can be fitted to a shallower-than-normal box I'd happily use one, but is that possible? I've seen 16mm boxes but my impression is that they're only deep enough for (say) a light switch. |
Low-profile electricals
On 04/03/2021 16:14, Bert Coules wrote:
I'm about to lose an existing double-gang wall socket behind a new wardrobe, and would like to run a plugged-in extension lead from it to a new surface-mounted socket just beside the wardrobe. What little exposed flex there will be between the edge of the wardrobe and the new surface box can be trunked in, so I'm not concerned about exposing it to potential damage. I've been trying to find out if there's a surface-mount box (single-gang would do) with less protrusion than the usual 25mm (purely because it would look less clunky). And also if it's possible to get a conventional-type three-pin plug with less depth than the standard (since there's not going to be much clearance behind the wardrobe). I've looked in the obvious places but without luck; I wonder if I'm using the wrong search terms. Any pointers in the right direction would be very welcome. Thanks. How about using a 13A fused spur with flex outlet? It might be possible to take the flex to an extension socket (assuming it's allowed under regulations). No plug needed. -- Jeff |
Low-profile electricals
On 04/03/2021 16:14, Bert Coules wrote:
I'm about to lose an existing double-gang wall socket behind a new wardrobe, and would like to run a plugged-in extension lead from it to a new surface-mounted socket just beside the wardrobe. What little exposed flex there will be between the edge of the wardrobe and the new surface box can be trunked in, so I'm not concerned about exposing it to potential damage. I've been trying to find out if there's a surface-mount box (single-gang would do) with less protrusion than the usual 25mm (purely because it would look less clunky). And also if it's possible to get a conventional-type three-pin plug with less depth than the standard (since there's not going to be much clearance behind the wardrobe). I've looked in the obvious places but without luck; I wonder if I'm using the wrong search terms.Â* Any pointers in the right direction would be very welcome. Thanks. You can get 16mm boxes, but I don't think you'd get a socket in one. I've never seen a low profile plug, but what's stopping you putting a cutout in one edge of the existing socket to run a spur directly from the terminals to the new one? A bit of a bodge, but very practical. |
Low-profile electricals
Jeff Layman wrote:
How about using a 13A fused spur with flex outlet? It might be possible to take the flex to an extension socket (assuming it's allowed under regulations). No plug needed. +1 Any socket is going to be at least as deep as the pins on the plug, so there's a limit to how slim you can be. Using a fused spur avoids the depth of both the pins on the plug and the screw terminals inside the plug. (Can you fit a fused spur inside a 16mm box?) Theo |
Low-profile electricals
Jeff Layman wrote:
How about using a 13A fused spur with flex outlet? It might be possible to take the flex to an extension socket (assuming it's allowed under regulations). No plug needed. That's a nice idea. But the soon-to-be-hidden switched socket is a double; is it possible to replace that with a single fixed spur? |
Low-profile electricals
Steve Walker wrote:
I've never seen a low profile plug... Annoyingly, I used to have one (and possibly several) branded, of all things, "BBC" - possibly dating from the time when the Corporation did actually have all manner of equipment manufactured to its own specs. ...but what's stopping you putting a cutout in one edge of the existing socket to run a spur directly from the terminals to the new one? A bit of a bodge, but very practical. The main thing stopping me is that it would indeed be a bit of a bodge (albeit one safely hidden away)... |
Low-profile electricals
In article ,
Bert Coules wrote: Steve Walker wrote: I've never seen a low profile plug... Annoyingly, I used to have one (and possibly several) branded, of all things, "BBC" - possibly dating from the time when the Corporation did actually have all manner of equipment manufactured to its own specs. Yes, I think I've got one or two of those, but they fell out of favour. If you used a decent thickness of mains cable the retaining screw, not going right down, punched hole in the top cover. -- from KT24 in Surrey, England "I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle |
Low-profile electricals
On 04/03/2021 16:56, Bert Coules wrote:
Jeff Layman wrote: How about using a 13A fused spur with flex outlet? It might be possible to take the flex to an extension socket (assuming it's allowed under regulations). No plug needed. That's a nice idea.Â* But the soon-to-be-hidden switched socket is a double; is it possible to replace that with a single fixed spur? It is if you use modular parts But why not just do away with the double socket, joint through with wago connectors and run a bit of 2.5mm T&E to the new socket and fit a 2g blanking plate over the old socket? -- Adam |
Low-profile electricals
ARW wrote:
But why not just do away with the double socket, joint through with wago connectors and run a bit of 2.5mm T&E to the new socket and fit a 2g blanking plate over the old socket? That's probably the most straightforward suggestion so far; thanks, Adam. |
Low-profile electricals
In article , Bert Coules
wrote: ARW wrote: But why not just do away with the double socket, joint through with wago connectors and run a bit of 2.5mm T&E to the new socket and fit a 2g blanking plate over the old socket? That's probably the most straightforward suggestion so far; thanks, Adam. I did soemthing like that when we moved into this house, so we could put a piano against one wall. Didn't use WAGOs since they weren't aroungb in 1977 -- from KT24 in Surrey, England "I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle |
Low-profile electricals
On 04/03/2021 16:14, Bert Coules wrote:
I'm about to lose an existing double-gang wall socket behind a new wardrobe, and would like to run a plugged-in extension lead from it to a new surface-mounted socket just beside the wardrobe. What little exposed flex there will be between the edge of the wardrobe and the new surface box can be trunked in, so I'm not concerned about exposing it to potential damage. I've been trying to find out if there's a surface-mount box (single-gang would do) with less protrusion than the usual 25mm (purely because it would look less clunky). And also if it's possible to get a conventional-type three-pin plug with less depth than the standard (since there's not going to be much clearance behind the wardrobe). I've looked in the obvious places but without luck; I wonder if I'm using the wrong search terms.Â* Any pointers in the right direction would be very welcome. Thanks. Is there any reason why you don't spur off the current twin socket and sink another socket horizontally? Especially if depth is an issue? |
Low-profile electricals
On 04/03/2021 18:05, Bert Coules wrote:
ARW wrote: But why not just do away with the double socket, joint through with wago connectors and run a bit of 2.5mm T&E to the new socket and fit a 2g blanking plate over the old socket? That's probably the most straightforward suggestion so far; thanks, Adam. I did exactly the same thing today as part of the round tuit to finish the utility room. The washing machine socket would have been behind the sink so a couple of horizontal cuts with a multi tool, some SDS bashing, some out of date bonding and a little bit of "easy fill" - 2 hours from start to end, and a little painting tomorrow. |
Low-profile electricals
In article ,
Bert Coules wrote: Jeff Layman wrote: How about using a 13A fused spur with flex outlet? It might be possible to take the flex to an extension socket (assuming it's allowed under regulations). No plug needed. That's a nice idea. But the soon-to-be-hidden switched socket is a double; is it possible to replace that with a single fixed spur? Could you make one up using grid components? -- *A cubicle is just a padded cell without a door. Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
Low-profile electricals
Fredxx wrote:
Is there any reason why you don't spur off the current twin socket and sink another socket horizontally? Especially if depth is an issue? None, beyond the mess and inconvenience in a completed and decorated room. Thanks for the thought. |
Low-profile electricals
On 04/03/2021 23:47, Bert Coules wrote:
Fredxx wrote: Is there any reason why you don't spur off the current twin socket and sink another socket horizontally? Especially if depth is an issue? None, beyond the mess and inconvenience in a completed and decorated room. Thanks for the thought. That is largely down to the wall. I presume this is brick and plaster? If you like new tools: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqGoEuTAJE4 |
Low-profile electricals
On 5 Mar 2021 at 00:08:14 GMT, "Fredxx" wrote:
On 04/03/2021 23:47, Bert Coules wrote: Fredxx wrote: Is there any reason why you don't spur off the current twin socket and sink another socket horizontally? Especially if depth is an issue? None, beyond the mess and inconvenience in a completed and decorated room. Thanks for the thought. That is largely down to the wall. I presume this is brick and plaster? If you like new tools: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqGoEuTAJE4 If it were soft blocks or bricks and the room was furnished I think I'd rather spend a few minutes longer and produce a lot lest dust using a few pilot holes and a cold chisel. -- Roger Hayter |
Low-profile electricals
On 04/03/2021 16:14, Bert Coules wrote:
I'm about to lose an existing double-gang wall socket behind a new wardrobe, and would like to run a plugged-in extension lead from it to a new surface-mounted socket just beside the wardrobe. What little exposed flex there will be between the edge of the wardrobe and the new surface box can be trunked in, so I'm not concerned about exposing it to potential damage. I've been trying to find out if there's a surface-mount box (single-gang would do) with less protrusion than the usual 25mm (purely because it would look less clunky). And also if it's possible to get a conventional-type three-pin plug with less depth than the standard (since there's not going to be much clearance behind the wardrobe). I've looked in the obvious places but without luck; I wonder if I'm using the wrong search terms.Â* Any pointers in the right direction would be very welcome. Thanks. Why not do the job properly and chase cable into the wall and use a flush socket? after all the mess you make will be covered by the wardrobe anyway -- To ban Christmas, simply give turkeys the vote. |
Low-profile electricals
|
Low-profile electricals
On 04/03/2021 23:47, Bert Coules wrote:
Fredxx wrote: Is there any reason why you don't spur off the current twin socket and sink another socket horizontally? Especially if depth is an issue? None, beyond the mess and inconvenience in a completed and decorated room. If I'd let that stop me I'd never have gotten anything done at all. Very early on I realised that if you want to do anything in a house that involves pipes or wires, you either track them round the surface or you dig in, put them where they should be, and face the fact that making good the surface finish is an inevitable and major part of the job. filler sander and paint to match the old, and if you paper, keep a roll back just in case... I am delighted to be able to match 20 year old paint perfectly Thanks for the thought. -- €œSome people like to travel by train because it combines the slowness of a car with the cramped public exposure of €¨an airplane.€ Dennis Miller |
Low-profile electricals
Many thanks for all the new replies.
Mess concealed by a wardrobe is still mess! That cutter tool is clever, but I'd like to see it in use on harder blocks. And "Continue until the correct depth is reached" is a glib way of covering a tricky part of the operation, isn't it? |
Low-profile electricals
Thanks, Brian.
|
Low-profile electricals
A solution to one part of the project has presented itself: it turns out
that the wardrobe has a slightly recessed back, which means there is just about enough clearance for a conventional-thickness plug in the existing socket. In the apparent absence of surface-mounted sockets with less protrusion than normal, it looks as if I'll have to go with the smallest available option, which seems to be a 25mm box and a surface plate as slim as possible. Thanks to all for the thoughts and advice. |
Low-profile electricals
On 05/03/2021 08:54, Bert Coules wrote:
A solution to one part of the project has presented itself: it turns out that the wardrobe has a slightly recessed back, which means there is just about enough clearance for a conventional-thickness plug in the existing socket. In the apparent absence of surface-mounted sockets with less protrusion than normal, it looks as if I'll have to go with the smallest available option, which seems to be a 25mm box and a surface plate as slim as possible. Thanks to all for the thoughts and advice. A belated thought. What you have in mind means moving the wardrobe if the fuse in the plug goes. That's probably a *very* remote possiblity these days. But Sod's law may apply. Of course moving the wardrobe may not be a problem (now and in the fuure). But the risk wd be avoided if you ran a spur. -- Robin reply-to address is (intended to be) valid |
Low-profile electricals
On 05/03/2021 00:08, Fredxx wrote:
On 04/03/2021 23:47, Bert Coules wrote: Fredxx wrote: Is there any reason why you don't spur off the current twin socket and sink another socket horizontally? Especially if depth is an issue? None, beyond the mess and inconvenience in a completed and decorated room. Thanks for the thought. That is largely down to the wall. I presume this is brick and plaster? If you like new tools: Â* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqGoEuTAJE4 These may be OK in soft blocks but are useless in bricks or dense blocks. |
Low-profile electricals
On 05/03/2021 09:19, Robin wrote:
On 05/03/2021 08:54, Bert Coules wrote: A solution to one part of the project has presented itself: it turns out that the wardrobe has a slightly recessed back, which means there is just about enough clearance for a conventional-thickness plug in the existing socket. In the apparent absence of surface-mounted sockets with less protrusion than normal, it looks as if I'll have to go with the smallest available option, which seems to be a 25mm box and a surface plate as slim as possible. Thanks to all for the thoughts and advice. A belated thought.Â* What you have in mind means moving the wardrobe if the fuse in the plug goes.Â* That's probably a *very* remote possiblity these days. But Sod's law may apply. Of course moving the wardrobe may not be a problem (now and in the fuure).Â* But the risk wd be avoided if you ran a spur. .... or: use a multitool to make a hole in the back of the wardrobe, fix some small battens around the back edge of the hole and use mirror screws to fix the piece you've cut out back in place |
Low-profile electricals
On 05/03/2021 10:31, wrote:
On 05/03/2021 00:08, Fredxx wrote: On 04/03/2021 23:47, Bert Coules wrote: Fredxx wrote: Is there any reason why you don't spur off the current twin socket and sink another socket horizontally? Especially if depth is an issue? None, beyond the mess and inconvenience in a completed and decorated room. Thanks for the thought. That is largely down to the wall. I presume this is brick and plaster? If you like new tools: Â*Â* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqGoEuTAJE4 These may be OK in soft blocks but are useless in bricks or dense blocks. And if you are only doing one or two in soft blocks, it's quicker and cheaper to use a router with an old bit, rather than making a trip and buying the special tool. |
Low-profile electricals
|
Low-profile electricals
Robin wrote:
What you have in mind means moving the wardrobe if the fuse in the plug goes. It's an excellent thought. I might simply cut an access hole in the back of the wardrobe. |
Low-profile electricals
On 05/03/2021 11:16, Bert Coules wrote:
wrote: ... or: use a multitool to make a hole in the back of the wardrobe, fix some small battens around the back edge of the hole and use mirror screws to fix the piece you've cut out back in place Or simply cut the hole.Â* Who's going to see it? and it leaves easy access to the switch in case of emergency :) -- Robin reply-to address is (intended to be) valid |
Low-profile electricals
On 04/03/2021 23:47, Bert Coules wrote:
Fredxx wrote: Is there any reason why you don't spur off the current twin socket and sink another socket horizontally? Especially if depth is an issue? None, beyond the mess and inconvenience in a completed and decorated room. Thanks for the thought. If you wallpapered it that might be a reason. If you still have the remains of the wall paint (everyone does keep the remnants 'just in case' don't they?) then this is not really an issue. |
Low-profile electricals
On 05/03/2021 08:54, Bert Coules wrote:
A solution to one part of the project has presented itself: it turns out that the wardrobe has a slightly recessed back, which means there is just about enough clearance for a conventional-thickness plug in the existing socket. In the apparent absence of surface-mounted sockets with less protrusion than normal, it looks as if I'll have to go with the smallest available option, which seems to be a 25mm box and a surface plate as slim as possible. Thanks to all for the thoughts and advice. Cut a hole in the side of the new wardrobe and fit a back box into it, with a flush fitting twin socket connected to a 3 pin plug in original socket with some suitably rated flex. |
Low-profile electricals
Andrew wrote:
Cut a hole in the side of the new wardrobe and fit a back box into it, with a flush fitting twin socket connected to a 3 pin plug in original socket with some suitably rated flex. An elegant idea, but unfortunately the sides of the new wardrobe will not be accessible. I have to run to a new wall-mounted socket. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:45 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 DIYbanter