Iwire, I appreciate your input.... but I believe I have been mis-understood.

I put things in "discussion" for.... well, discussion. That's also why I often have thread titles with question marks.

Please do not read anything more into this. If I post "Subject to damage?", I am asking the quwetion- not saying "Aha! Caught you!"

We all, as part of out work, make design choices. Even with the best intent, we sometimes guess wrong. We won't know that until after the fact.

Surface mount pipe is an example. I actually like this arrangement. In general, I prefer it to most other methods.

Yet, if I visit an existing situation, and see a section of pipe that has been ripped off the wall, I have to ask "Why?" Simply putting it back on the wall is probably just gong to make sure it gets ripped out again.

I consider such damage to be proof that the original choices were incorrect. Perhaps another method, or another pipe routing, can prevent the damage from happening all over again.

You might even apply this principle to receptacle and light placement. The use of extension cords and table lamps just might be an indicator that some of the early desing decisions could have been improved upon.

You're quite right; I am just another sparky. It does not bother me that there are better sparkies out there; that there are worse terrifies me! [Linked Image]
Part of 'learning' is recognising that the process never stops. One of the things we can do is re-visit existing jobs, and see how the original choices performed.

It's not just about passing inspection. Nor is it about following the prints. Rather, it's about making the installation serve the customer- not the other way around.