0.5mm T&E cable now available.

[Dustydazzler]

I would love to try 0.5mm T&E if it were available , think how neat you could clip it in a loft you could get 2 cables under a 1.5 clip

 

[7029 dave]

Wouldn't cost so much if you measured a run incorrectly.

HHD is never going to live that down

 

[mattg4321]

They did a good job. Where did they get the 0.5mm T&E? It was obviously thinner than the 1.00mm cable.

The points is, is that 0.5mm and a 2A MCB or RCBO (which are available) would be perfectly safe using 0.5mm cable. The max current draw of 0.5mm is approx 3A. 50 LEDs consumes 150 watts. So well within safety limits.

I would not go less than 1.00mm simply because that is the lowest T&E available.

Just looked like 1mm2,1.5mm2 and 2.5mm2 cables to me.

They pretended the 1mm2 was actually 0.5mm2 and the 1.5mm2 they pretended was 1.0mm2

 

[westward10]

HHD is never going to live that down

'Here lies the man who though the meter yet walked the yard'

 

[Lucien Nunes]

+1 to them for an April fools idea that actually makes for interesting discussion.

One problem with a very small cable is its lack of mechanical strength. Although @John-SJW is quite right that it could be installed in an electrically safe manner, it might be too flimsy without additional mechanical protection, at which point the advantage of economy is lost.

The reduction in overall size is moot; it might not be possible to reduce the radial thickness of the insulation and sheath, for both mechanical and electrical strength reasons, in which case the overall dimensions would be only slightly smaller than that of 1.0. The volume of plastic dominates in the small sizes under consideration, unlike say 70mmsq where the copper dominates over the plastic.

 

[Dustydazzler]

Also a lot of ham fisted DiYers and some ham fisted sparks struggle to make off 1mm connections without mashing the ---- out the copper conductor. So getting them to make of 0.5mm cable would be near impossible for them...

I do like the idea of 0.5mm cable for domestic lighting but the cost saved on cable over a basic rewire compared to 1mm would probably only be £10 , so hardly worth it in the grand scheme

 

[John-SJW]

+1 to them for an April fools idea that actually makes for interesting discussion.

One problem with a very small cable is its lack of mechanical strength. Although @John-SJW is quite right that it could be installed in an electrically safe manner, it might be too flimsy without additional mechanical protection, at which point the advantage of economy is lost.

The reduction in overall size is moot; it might not be possible to reduce the radial thickness of the insulation and sheath, for both mechanical and electrical strength reasons, in which case the overall dimensions would be only slightly smaller than that of 1.0. The volume of plastic dominates in the small sizes under consideration, unlike say 70mmsq where the copper dominates over the plastic.

CH control wiring on retros is done using flex.

A two bedroomed flat with a 2A RCBO or MCB using 0.5mm, as been mentioned, can do the lighting for sure. 0.5mm has a maximum current load of about 3A. If there was 50 5w LED lights in the flat, it would be highly unlikely we know, it would be 250 watts, which is about 1 amp. Totally safe.

The thinner cables would be a dream to wire up inside single light switches with Wagos inside for the switched live, and easy to run being so thin. A 50m reel of three core 0.5mm cable with an insulated CPC is about £16.50. A 50m reel of 1.00mm T&E is about £22 plus earth sleeving. Using ferrules obviously would be a more professional job.

Nothing says in the regs you cannot use flex for house wiring. In a 3 bedroom house, one lighting circuit with a 2A RCBO or MCB in 0.5mm for downstairs with the same upstairs. Very safe.

The only problem is it may encourage cowboy work. If that is a problem. Also electricians will perceive it deskills their job.

 

[nicebutdim]

CH control wiring on retros is done using flex.

That sort of makes Lucian's point about the ratio of plastics to copper and flex has an even greater CSA than T&E. While I enjoy the theraputic qualities of crimping ferrules on flex, it adds considerably to installation time.

 

[John-SJW]

One point raised. I prefer having a lighting junction in the light switch backbox rather than at the ceiling rose. It is easier to fit and fault find. Using T&E and a Wago in the light switch backbox made matters tight in there. 0.5mm and Wago in the backbox, makes it all so much easier.

Just thinking of positives of using 0.5mm over 1.00mm or 1.5mm T&E.

 

[John-SJW]

That sort of makes Lucian's point about the ratio of plastics to copper and flex has an even greater CSA than T&E. While I enjoy the theraputic qualities of crimping ferrules on flex, it adds considerably to installation time.

But the conductors are thinner when working inside backboxes and no earth sleeve needed. The flexible CPC conductor is ideal for connecting to metal backbox terminals. Pulling either of them will be similar. Then 0.5mm is cheaper.

An April Fool's joke sparked some positive thought.

 

[DPG]

One point raised. I prefer having a lighting junction in the light switch backbox rather than at the ceiling rose. It is easier to fit and fault find. Using T&E and a Wago in the light switch backbox made matters tight in there. 0.5mm and Wago in the backbox, makes it all so much easier.

Just thinking of positives of using 0.5mm over 1.00mm or 1.5mm T&E.

I think most people have moved on from 3 plating at the rose now to be honest. Light fitting design and smart switches drove that.

 

[nicebutdim]

One point raised. I prefer having a lighting junction in the light switch backbox rather than at the ceiling rose. It is easier to fit and fault find. Using T&E and a Wago in the light switch backbox made matters tight in there. 0.5mm and Wago in the backbox, makes it all so much easier.

Just thinking of positives of using 0.5mm over 1.00mm or 1.5mm T&E.

But the conductors are thinner when working inside backboxes and no earth sleeve needed. The flexible CPC conductor is ideal for connecting to metal backbox terminals. Pulling either of them will be similar. Then 0.5mm is cheaper.

An April Fool's joke sparked some positive thought.

Comparing like with like, there's no benefit to flex in terms of size, but obviously there would be where conductor CSA is reduced. The downside to fine flex within back boxes is a greater likelihood of damage - from both DIY and 'professional' workmanship alike.

 

[pc1966]

I have seen a bathroom light fed with 0.5mm flex (stuff like pendant lights, etc) from a FCU outside of the small room. Now had they only changed the 13A fuse for 3A...

 

[HappyHippyDad]

So, can we start using this 0.5mm then?

 

[HappyHippyDad]

So, can we start using this 0.5mm then?

Changed my mind.
Can't pluck up the courage to pretend I'm that silly.
Close though