Live To The Lights Or Switch (Lighting Circuit)

[OnlQQker]

So an electrician on a job I was working on took the live lighting cable to the switches and then off to the lights. This was the first time I'd seen this and he said it made it much easier to add more lights to the cable plus tap into it if somebody wanted to put in a 2 gang for an outside light.


This made a lot of sense so just wondered why I had only ever seen the lighting cable looped to the lights and then each light down to the switch.

Would it be less cable required?

 

[telectrix]

on domestics, the loop at lights was the most common method from 1960's on; more recently, with the advent of downlights, looping at switches became more common. these days it's used even more where smart switches require a N. for the past year or so, whichever method ! use, I run a 3 core/E from switch to light, so that both points have a N (or perm L) if required.

with industrial and commercial where singles are run in containment. it's always been the norm to run L to switch to light, and the N looed direct through lights. ( except where EMs are required).

 

[radiohead]

Some old timers tend to faint at the mention of a neutral at a switch, although they are never able to give a satisfactory reason as to why it's allegedly bad practice. Increasingly the advantages of looping through the switch in many situations are being realised.

 

[telectrix]

you does wots best for the situation, we are adaptable... like wiska boxes, but not so rigid.

 

[freddo]

It makes swapping the lights for modern decorative ones much easier too, that often barely have enough room to connect one cable.

 

[OnlQQker]

on domestics, the loop at lights was the most common method from 1960's on; more recently, with the advent of downlights, looping at switches became more common. these days it's used even more where smart switches require a N. for the past year or so, whichever method ! use, I run a 3 core/E from switch to light, so that both points have a N (or perm L) if required.

with industrial and commercial where singles are run in containment. it's always been the norm to run L to switch to light, and the N looed direct through lights. ( except where EMs are required).

That's quite genius actually. Adding an outside light to an existing switch would be so much simpler and still only the one cable to put into the wall!

 

[Lucien Nunes]

they are never able to give a satisfactory reason as to why it's allegedly bad practice

I think this harks back to the days of tumbler switches and wooden pattresses, where there is no back box in which to contain any loop-through terminals. To avoid Scruits or whatever floating about in the wall, it was preferred to send to the switch only conductors that connected to its own terminals.

 

[Andy78]

My house lighting system is very annoying for additions. Ex council wired in sheathed singles. No neutrals at switches and no perm live at lights.

 

[lozarus]

I often hear references to this practi e being either age related or region related. Truth be told I think installers have always just done whatever best, or personal preference. My house was built in 1982 and had absoloutely zero modifications when I got it. Downstairs was wired neutral to switches, upstairs was wired loop in to roses (and a fair few diagonal runs to things like the cooker outlet, as discussed in a previous post)

 

[westward10]

This was neatly tucked in behind a tumbler switch I recently replaced.

 

[Dabbers]

Me personally i use both methods so for argument sake i would feed the lights in the hall and not the switch because you may well have 2 way up and down plus an external light so you end up with a very busy switch then into the kitchen i may feed the light switch as 3 plating down lights is a pain in the arse and bathrooms I tend to feed the Fan Isolator switch that gives me more options especially in rented properties as you can configure the Fan isolator switch so that unless they have the fan on they won't have lights, landlords love that helps reduce mould in your in an owned hole you would not do that! hope this helps!

 

[radiohead]

I think this harks back to the days of tumbler switches and wooden pattresses, where there is no back box in which to contain any loop-through terminals. To avoid Scruits or whatever floating about in the wall, it was preferred to send to the switch only conductors that connected to its own terminals.

I quite agree, however we now use arrangements where an additional connector on the N is no problem. but the 'bad practice' prejudice persists with some.

 

[Baddegg]

This was neatly tucked in behind a tumbler switch I recently replaced. View attachment 55384

Find that quite regularly down here, nearly always in the houses of the old ex dock yard sparks.....second pic please put the lid back on one pretend it’s not there ?

 

[littlespark]

When I was training late 80’s, was told by the tradesman never have a neutral at the switch. Loop in at light or jointbox. It was literally battered into us.
Might have been the way back then with the use of architrave switches and 12mm deep back boxes. No space for any extra cables.

In more recent times, neutrals looped at switches. Partly for smart switches requiring neutrals, but mainly for ease of:

A. Making your complicated joints at a normal position instead of up a stepladder, working above yourself.

B. Likelihood of homeowner changing a light fitting and not having space for 3x t&e

 

[7029 dave]

I remember at college it was taught only to have Live conductors at light switch, and in all text books we worked from.
Times have changed I have always used all methods loop in at ceiling/switches/jb method.