Thx to the forum over the years

[nicebutdim]

I'm also curious why this ring needs to be wired in 4mm cable if the OP is confident of having overcome perceived issues with loss of ring continuity?

 

[loz2754]

I'm also curious why this ring needs to be wired in 4mm cable if the OP is confident of having overcome perceived issues with loss of ring continuity?

Because he's already got 4mm² cable for the cooker. Do try and keep up!

 

[mainline]

Hi, this is my first time here and third post, I was reluctant to subscribe as threads become circular and derailed going off the points far too much. I see that happening now. I never had the time to join in with threads, just wanting up to date info as my knowledge was of yesteryear. I did get the up to date info from the threads, then implemented it. I am giving the results.

I do not want to get into a circular argument, countering someone who wants to put two circuits in for everything, in case, creating redundancy. It is a 2 bed flat. All the flats I know have one lighting circuit. As it happens, I have light in the kitchen off the ring via the hob extractor fan. I also saw and bought on Ebay a 13A square pin to 5A round pin adapter, Rare items, so if my lights trip out for any reason, I can plug the table lamps into the ring's sockets.

I am designing for the here and now. What others like DIYers (I do not consider myself a DIYer) and 'muppets' do in the future is not my concern. You cannot always plan for the stupid.

The only future proofing I have, by default not design, is that I have a spare way in the main panel. If for any reason, such as maybe tripping of the ring as MA earth leakage is too high from additional appliance with electronics, the ring can be split into two radials by fitting another 32A DP AFDD and disconnecting behind one of the sockets giving lots of power at all the sockets. I have no tripping on the AFDD protected ring.

A broken ring of course is rare, if it does occur then I am covered as the cable is 4mm. It was also cheaper to keep all the cables carrying higher current (power), 4mm.

An AFDD is an MCB, RCD and arc fault detection all in one unit. Brilliant devices preventing fires.

Even if sockets were available with Wago/In-Sure lever connectors at the rear (from what I know only white MK are available) I would not run the rings current through the screwless socket. I would still use Wago/In-Sure lever connectors at the rear of the backbox to take the rings high current, keeping current only destined for a socket running through that sockets terminals. Eliminating a screwed connection at the rear of a socket is a clear plus, making the ring even more robust and bombproof. Additionally use screwless AFDDs if and when they are available then a ring as I described beats any bunch of radials hands down being 100% screwless.

I'm also curious why this ring needs to be wired in 4mm cable if the OP is confident of having overcome perceived issues with loss of ring continuity?

I would have done it differently as well.

I think lamp sockets are unless run off the lighting circuit and two way between the door and side of bed is pointless as a bed should have a double socket each side so could plug a lamp in there if wanting lamps on the ring.

4mm ring in a small flat is a total overkill.
A few 20 amp radials and a couple of lighting circuits would have been fine.

I seems that the over riding thought in using a ring is to cut down on the use of more AFDDs

Oops hang on the lights have tripped I’ll just try and find that adapter for the table lamps.

I’ve seen wagos melt and go open when using flex to an immersion heater.

More joints is less safe simple.

Hi, this is my first time here and third post, I was reluctant to subscribe as threads become circular and derailed going off the points far too much. I see that happening now. I never had the time to join in with threads, just wanting up to date info as my knowledge was of yesteryear. I did get the up to date info from the threads, then implemented it. I am giving the results.

I do not want to get into a circular argument, countering someone who wants to put two circuits in for everything, in case, creating redundancy. It is a 2 bed flat. All the flats I know have one lighting circuit. As it happens, I have light in the kitchen off the ring via the hob extractor fan. I also saw and bought on Ebay a 13A square pin to 5A round pin adapter, Rare items, so if my lights trip out for any reason, I can plug the table lamps into the ring's sockets.

I am designing for the here and now. What others like DIYers (I do not consider myself a DIYer) and 'muppets' do in the future is not my concern. You cannot always plan for the stupid.

The only future proofing I have, by default not design, is that I have a spare way in the main panel. If for any reason, such as maybe tripping of the ring as MA earth leakage is too high from additional appliance with electronics, the ring can be split into two radials by fitting another 32A DP AFDD and disconnecting behind one of the sockets giving lots of power at all the sockets. I have no tripping on the AFDD protected ring.

A broken ring of course is rare, if it does occur then I am covered as the cable is 4mm. It was also cheaper to keep all the cables carrying higher current (power), 4mm.

An AFDD is an MCB, RCD and arc fault detection all in one unit. Brilliant devices preventing fires.

Even if sockets were available with Wago/In-Sure lever connectors at the rear (from what I know only white MK are available) I would not run the rings current through the screwless socket. I would still use Wago/In-Sure lever connectors at the rear of the backbox to take the rings high current, keeping current only destined for a socket running through that sockets terminals. Eliminating a screwed connection at the rear of a socket is a clear plus, making the ring even more robust and bombproof. Additionally use screwless AFDDs if and when they are available then a ring as I described beats any bunch of radials hands down being 100% screwless.

Cables have been terminated into sockets for decades and when done properly won’t fail it’s usually the socket pins themselves.

 

[Steve-S]

4mm t&e is stranded cable and more than flexible enough to dress neatly behind sockets, the terminals of which are more than capable of carrying the current intended to pass through them. I regularly wire sockets in 4mm pvc singles and sometimes tuff sheath cable which is solid core in 4mm.

I do occasionally find loose connections, but those are down to incompetence or DIY work, but those occasions are few and far between - perhaps because I mostly work in environments where people don't tinker with stuff they don't understand.

I stated previously that I didn't disagree with much of your reasoning, but would have done things differently and that's with good reason. While most appliances in the average home could easily run off one ring, customers might not like what eventually transpires when one appliance develops a fault.

I'm confident in my abilities where installation of fixed wiring is concerned, but less so about the long term reliability of domestic appliances.

Can a flat be successfully wired with a total of three circuits? Of course it can, but doing so may be less than ideal for a whole host of reasons.

Hi, When I was an electrician I saw far too many problems with sockets and their terminals. One was crushing the cables between the back of the backbox and the back of the socket, forcing cables partially out of terminals (common problem). To rectify is make it easy to push back the socket using 2.5mm flex. One solution is avoid high current through socket terminals. As a kid I could see it was a weak point. Another additional solution was avoid screwed terminals. I did all that. I explained all this in previous posts.

I found lots of loose connections, and also on my own installation ten years after installation, of which I used MK sockets which were the cream at the time.

If there is a fault on a ring it is a matter of unplugging all appliances, or switching off all sockets and fused spurs then switch back on. If fine then the wiring is fine. Then switch back on the appliances one by one to get the fault. Not a problem, not needing multiple rings or radials.

I share your concerns about reliability of domestic appliances, and their safety aspect. Cheap Turkish fridges prone to fires that would not even trip with an RCBO. Maybe an AFDD would trip. I read an AFDD would have tripped on the cheap fridge that caught fire in Grenfell, hence AFDDs at last in high rises, and 'recommended' on all circuits. AFDDs have made rings near bombproof, with adjustments as have outlined.

Flats and houses were successfully wired with three circuits for sure. I gave the example of the 4 bed house with five circuits, could have been four as the backup immersion was never ever used. We over engineer, creating excessive cost.

Mr Mainine, the circular argument is emerging. Read what I wrote it is all there. The 4mm was because of three points which I previously made:

1. It was cheaper to stadardise on the cooker radial and ring using one size of cable.
2. It also is a safety backup in case the ring is broken for any reason. The cable will not cook.
3. The ring can be split into two radials if the need is there and still deliver high volumes of power at all sockets being 4mm.

The Continental setup using expensive multiple circuits does not have the protection I have with only three. I could have gone all the way and had AFDDs on all three circuits, but cost was a consideration after the assessment of risk on the cooker and lighting circuits.

 

[nicebutdim]

Hi, When I was an electrician I saw far too many problems with sockets and their terminals. One was crushing the cables between the back of the backbox and the back of the socket, forcing cables partially out of terminals (common problem). To rectify is make it easy to push back the socket using 2.5mm flex. One solution is avoid high current through socket terminals. As a kid I could see it was a weak point. Another additional solution was avoid screwed terminals. I did all that. I explained all this in previous posts.

I found lots of loose connections, and also on my own installation ten years after installation, of which I used MK sockets which were the cream at the time.

If there is a fault on a ring it is a matter of unplugging all appliances, or switching off all sockets and fused spurs then switch back on. If fine then the wiring is fine. Then switch back on the appliances one by one to get the fault. Not a problem, not needing multiple rings or radials.

I share your concerns about reliability of domestic appliances, and their safety aspect. Cheap Turkish fridges prone to fires that would not even trip with an RCBO. Maybe an AFDD would trip. I read an AFDD would have tripped on the cheap fridge that caught fire in Grenfell, hence AFDDs at last in high rises, and 'recommended' on all circuits. AFDDs have made rings near bombproof, with adjustments as have outlined.

Flats and houses were successfully wired with three circuits for sure. I gave the example of the 4 bed house with five circuits, could have been four as the backup immersion was never ever used. We over engineer, creating excessive cost.

Mr Mainine, the circular argument is emerging. Read what I wrote it is all there. The 4mm was because of three points which I previously made:

1. It was cheaper to stadardise on the cooker radial and ring using one size of cable.
2. It also is a safety backup in case the ring is broken for any reason. The cable will not cook.
3. The ring can be split into two radials if the need is there and still deliver high volumes of power at all sockets being 4mm.

The Continental setup using expensive multiple circuits does not have the protection I have with only three. I could have gone all the way and had AFDDs on all three circuits, but cost was a consideration after the assessment of risk on the cooker and lighting circuits.

The problems you describe resulted from poor design and blind implementation of that design.

Increased cable size does not resolve the issue of crushed and cut cables - all things being even it would increase the risk, so I'll assume you chased in appropriately sized boxes and avoided the issue in the same manner as any other competent person would.

I'll also assume the lever connectors used are rated for full potential circuit current for the type of conductor selected. That's another rabbit hole I'm happy to avoid.

We've had another member, who posted from a couple of different accounts, propose an almost identical installation to your own, with sockets spurred from lever connector joints, minimal number of circuits to reduce afdd cost etc. That member also shunned discussion of their ideas, but it must be understood that this is a discussion forum, where members share opinions, and not an online pulpit toward which no dissent can be directed.

I repeat again that I'm happy for you to install as you see fit, but the rest of us are obliged to take many other factors into consideration.

 

[Steve-S]

I’ve seen wagos melt and go open when using flex to an immersion heater.

New to me. Was it undersized? Why did it melt? The feedback on Wago types of lever connections is solid and positive. One Youtube video tests a Wago and other types connectors, with the Wago only melting after around 70 amps when after around 10-11 minutes.

It is best you read and get the points put across. I don't fully disagree with what you have posted, but most of I do. I am not into repeating myself.

 

[nicebutdim]

New to me. Was it undersized? Why did it melt? The feedback on Wago types of lever connections is solid and positive.

Better to select on the basis of specification, than feedback.

 

[mainline]

New to me. Was it undersized? Why did it melt? The feedback on Wago types of lever connections is solid and positive.

It's quite well known that especially push fit wagos are better when used with solid core rather than flex.

 

[mainline]

We've had another member, who posted from a couple of different accounts, propose an almost identical installation to your own, with sockets spurred from lever connector joints, minimal number of circuits to reduce afdd cost etc. That member also shunned discussion of their ideas, but it must be understood that this is a discussion forum, where members share opinions, and not an online pulpit toward which no dissent can be directed.

I didn't like to say

 

[James]

Have seen them fail with built in connectors on fluorescent light fittings many times over. They are not the solution to every problem.
however they are good and I do use them when the application is suitable.