UK 3 x 2.5mm T&Es into one 13A socket. How do you do it?

[Mark42]

I've always disliked needing to wrangle three 2.5mm T&Es into one 13A socket.

The three solid cores rarely sit cleanly, and there's always the suspicion that at least one core is not being held properly:

Lately I've been doing this, using 5-way Wagos and bits of stranded 2.5mm single, fitted with ferrules, into the socket itself:

Of course that's more joints. Perhaps unnecessary joints. But it appears to me a more secure and more maintenance-free method.

I don't believe there's any regulatory reason why it can't be done like this.

What do others do/think?

 

[mainline]

Personally, I'm in favour of a light witch. Those heavy witches really bug me...

Yeah, it must be hell for the broomstick carrying the heavy ones.

 

[nicebutdim]

Ferrules on 7 stranded cable? I’m assuming that’s 6491X?

Or is it fine stranded?

Never noticed the ferrules. Can't imagine this being anything other than 6491.

 

[mainline]

Never noticed the ferrules. Can't imagine this being anything other than 6491.

Guess we have to wait for the OP to tell us.
He's probably busy at the moment with his pocket full of Wagos .

 

[oscar21]

Will you be going back to the jobs to correct them ?

Why would he go back and correct them, yes its a technical breach of the regs but there's nothing dangerous in what he's done, its still the same number of sockets in the circuit its just that the joint is in the wago and not the socket, those wagos can withstand about 100 amps before they melt according to several video's I've watched on them. I would only ever go back to a job if I realised I'd done something dangerous.

Saying that, its well over the top, those wagos are about 20p each, a pack of ferules, cable ties, 3 coils of conduit cable, might as well not bother doing the job at all. I don't get why people end up with spurs on new wiring anyway, I work with someone who always manages to do this, there is always a socket somewhere that has 3 cables at it on one of his re-wires, it cant be that hard to go in a circle can it

 

[Dustydazzler]

Pig tailing / splicing / the cables in the back of the box like this using Wagos really isn't an issue as long at the linking single cable is 2.5 or bigger and the OCPD is 32amps or lower.
Wagos are pretty much bomb proof and would run 30amps all day long without so much as breaking a sweat

 

[mainline]

Why would he go back and correct them, yes its a technical breach of the regs but there's nothing dangerous in what he's done, its still the same number of sockets in the circuit its just that the joint is in the wago and not the socket, those wagos can withstand about 100 amps before they melt according to several video's I've watched on them. I would only ever go back to a job if I realised I'd done something dangerous.

Saying that, its well over the top, those wagos are about 20p each, a pack of ferules, cable ties, 3 coils of conduit cable, might as well not bother doing the job at all. I don't get why people end up with spurs on new wiring anyway, I work with someone who always manages to do this, there is always a socket somewhere that has 3 cables at it on one of his re-wires, it cant be that hard to go in a circle can it

It was a question to the OP asking if he was going back to correct the non-compliant installation.

If you're happy to install from new, something that is non-compliant that's on you, personally I wouldn't do it because I wouldn't want anyone in the future to drop the socket and think WTF.

Doing what he did has made it less safe than joining them in the socket, he has introduced more joints and turned the original socket into a spur.

 

[Pretty Mouth]

It was a question to the OP asking if he was going back to correct the non-compliant installation.

If you're happy to install from new, something that is non-compliant that's on you, personally i wouldn't do it because I wouldn't want anyone in the future to drop the socket and think WTF.

Is it actually non-compliant though?

 

[mainline]

Is it actually non-compliant though?

I would say so as it's 2 spurs from one point of a ring final.

 

[Petej999]

Ferrules on 7 stranded cable? I’m assuming that’s 6491X?

Or is it fine stranded?

SLOWLY AND CAREFULLY

 

[oscar21]

It was a question to the OP asking if he was going back to correct the non-compliant installation.

If you're happy to install from new, something that is non-compliant that's on you, personally I wouldn't do it because I wouldn't want anyone in the future to drop the socket and think WTF.

Doing what he did has made it less safe than joining them in the socket, he has introduced more joints and turned the original socket into a spur.

I wouldn't do that either but if I did do something that later turned out to be a technical breach but was perfectly safe I wouldn't be going back to alter it. Especially after seeing the cowboy stuff from otheres that is churned out on a daily basis without a care in the world.

 

[Pretty Mouth]

I would say so as it's 2 spurs from one point of a ring final.

I don't think this is prohibited by appendix 15 though is it? It's not a spur off a spur, so shouldn't be issues with the cable overloading. The wagos wouldn't be subject to any more current in this arrangement than the terminals of the socket would be if the spur was terminated into the back of the socket, if you see what I mean.

 

[mainline]

I don't think this is prohibited by appendix 15 though is it? It's not a spur off a spur, so shouldn't be issues with the cable overloading. The wagos wouldn't be subject to any more current in this arrangement than the terminals of the socket would be if the spur was terminated into the socket, if you see what I mean.

One spur per socket outlet is compliant, basically this is now 2.

The load of the ring and the load from two spurs is now on the Wago the socket connection IMO is far more substantial than the Wago.

 

[timhoward]

One spur per socket outlet is compliant

I wouldn't choose to strongly say this as nothing normative in the regs states this. The normative reg tells us that the load in any part of the circuit shouldn't exceed the cable rating for long periods. So unless there are consistent loads I don't see how we can state the level of compliance for this sort of arrangement.

As a point of interest, if it had been one of these, would you still feel the same?

Surprisingly, as chunky as it looks it has a lower rating than those Wago connectors.

 

[mainline]

I wouldn't choose to strongly say this as nothing normative in the regs states this. The normative reg tells us that the load in any part of the circuit shouldn't exceed the cable rating for long periods. So unless there are consistent loads I don't see how we can state the level of compliance for this sort of arrangement.

As a point of interest, if it had been one of these, would you still feel the same?

View attachment 109280

Surprisingly, as chunky as it looks it has a lower rating than those Wago connectors.

Yes, I would feel the same, as I wouldn't run 2 spur sockets from one junction box.

Btw Wago 221 seem to vary in current rating, I've seen some rated at 20 amps some at 32 and some at 41.

 

[Pretty Mouth]

Yes, I would feel the same, as I wouldn't run 2 spur sockets from one junction box.

Btw Wago 221 seem to vary in current rating, I've seen some rated at 20 amps some at 32 and some at 41.

IIRC, the 4mm wago 221s are 32A, except when MF, when they are 20A.