Neutrals at switches

[Guest 004]

Went to a job today, twin and earth, and it had been wired 2 plate, which of course meant that all the switches had the neutral taken to them.

WTF, if I had done that in my apprenticeship I would have been kicked off site.

Is this how things are done now, god I hope not.

 

[Hawk81]

Why?? Because that is my honest opinion of this wiring method, so why would i change my opinion, certainly not going to change it based on what's been written here... And as i said, i'm not going to change your opinion, that this is a good wiring method, ...end of as far as i'm concerned!!!

As far as ''Surely you can see that pic of the switch was down to poor design as is the idea of 7 cables at a light, therefore that is not a reason to rubish this method.'' that to me, is just making excuses and ignoring the fact that this is exactly what's going on out there. As for the multiple cables at the light, I already stated i think, that the 7 cables thing was bad design at work...

Well you are entitled to your opinion but you can not back up your claim to it being bad practice so therefore it is wrong of you to say it is.

 

[Electricalserv]

fail.

.

O.k so you also want to stop takeing CPC's to switches and when someone wants a chrome switch adding you tell them they need a rewire....Absolute nonsense....

And if you are wiring loops in switches you are always going to have CPC's there anyway...so bit of a numb nut scenario really wasn't it.

 

[aptsys]

When did I say anything about not taking CPCs to switches?

 

[Electricalserv]

When did I say anything about not taking CPCs to switches?

Tell me, what did your fail comment follow up....Mine and novus's discussion on removing cpc cables from switch's.....and why it is different having cpc's linked by a connector block and not neutrals aswell. Because neutrals needent be there and this only enforces the fact that there is not enough room at the switch because the CPC is already Connector blocked.

Major fail on your behalf

 

[Adam W]

O.k so you also want to stop takeing CPC's to switches and when someone wants a chrome switch adding you tell them they need a rewire....Absolute nonsense....

And if you are wiring loops in switches you are always going to have CPC's there anyway...so bit of a numb nut scenario really wasn't it.

Yes it is absolute nonsense - it makes about as much sense as not wanting to take a neutral to the switch because then the switch box would be a joint box.
Do you see? If you're connecting a cpc in there why not a neutral? Having everything in the switch pattress saves having to stuff it all behind a wall light together with a bit of connector block for a live loop.

There is one switch in a room whereas there might be 9 downlighters and maybe several wall lights to boot - trying to find which one the live loops in would be akin to a game of deal or no deal.

 

[Electricalserv]

Yes it is absolute nonsense - it makes about as much sense as not wanting to take a neutral to the switch because then the switch box would be a joint box.
Do you see? If you're connecting a cpc in there why not a neutral? Having everything in the switch pattress saves having to stuff it all behind a wall light together with a bit of connector block for a live loop.

There is one switch in a room whereas there might be 9 downlighters and maybe several wall lights to boot - trying to find which one the live loops in would be akin to a game of deal or no deal.

No I don't.....Connecting the CPC by connector block is actually needed as there is no termination for it on plastic backboxes so its needed. Neutrals need not be there at all and by adding more and more connector blocks you are removing space which means there is a more likely hood that a cable with break or come loose.

You would usually find the loop at the nearest light...it would make sense

 

[Engineer54]

Well you are entitled to your opinion but you can not back up your claim to it being bad practice so therefore it is wrong of you to say it is.

When having neutral conductors present (which will always in a form of a joint, wiring in T&E) in a switch box, when there is no need for them to be there is a bad practice. Filling up switch back boxes with joints is bad practice, Having dimmer switches in switch boxes with neutrals present, is bad practice. Confusion of conductor colours, in 2 x 2 way wiring switches where neutrals are present can be classed as bad practice...

Haha, and now were hearing about it's good to mix wiring methods, ....well maybe for the installer, certainly not for the poor sod that comes along later when one of his joints fails, or whatever!!! And all this is now classed as good wiring methods?? Thanks, but No Thanks!!!!

 

[Adam W]

No I don't.....Connecting the CPC by connector block is actually needed as there is no termination for it on plastic backboxes so its needed. Neutrals need not be there at all and by adding more and more connector blocks you are removing space which means there is a more likely hood that a cable with break or come loose.

You would usually find the loop at the nearest light...it would make sense

There's no need for a permanent live at the light though. One of the loops has to go somewhere whether it's the live at the light or the neutral at the switch. The benefit of having the neutral at the switch is it keeps the connections simple at the light (1 cable, 2 if there are more than one fitting), which is a bonus where there's no rose and minimal space as is the case with modern fittings.
Looping the live at the rose is fine when you've just got a simple pendant, but all too often the householder will want to change that for 'something more modern' which could well be a fitting without a loop terminal and/or with a transformer built into the base which restricts the space available for extra wires, ie the requirements have changed, which is the argument for taking a cpc to a class 2 switch.

It seems the only benefit of always looping the live at the light is that certain older electricians understand it because they're used to it.

 

[aptsys]

It seems the only benefit of always looping the live at the light is that certain older electricians understand it because they're used to it.

Sounds about right!

 

[Electricalserv]

There's no need for a permanent live at the light though. One of the loops has to go somewhere whether it's the live at the light or the neutral at the switch. The benefit of having the neutral at the switch is it keeps the connections simple at the light (1 cable, 2 if there are more than one fitting), which is a bonus where there's no rose and minimal space as is the case with modern fittings.
Looping the live at the rose is fine when you've just got a simple pendant, but all too often the householder will want to change that for 'something more modern' which could well be a fitting without a loop terminal and/or with a transformer built into the base which restricts the space available for extra wires, ie the requirements have changed, which is the argument for taking a cpc to a class 2 switch.

It seems the only benefit of always looping the live at the light is that certain older electricians understand it because they're used to it.

I am not an older spark but I do agree with you in that sense. Its what you get taught and anything else seems foreign to you. I just don't like the idea of potentially havig so many cables in such a small space.

 

[malcolmsanford]

Not sure this indictment of old Electricians is merited guys .........................you seem to forget the older we are the more changes to the industry we have had to encompass ..............I started on the 14th and now on the 17th, so we have had to change in many ways from our initial training.

 

[Adam W]

Hence why I remembered to include the word 'certain' so as not to give the impression I was tarring all old electricians with the same brush.
The example that sprang to mind was when I working on an industrial job and the 2 old sparks (in their 60s) had a massive falling out over how to wire a 2 way lighting circuit in singles; they each accused the other of only knowing one method.

 

[malcolmsanford]

Hence why I remembered to include the word 'certain' so as not to give the impression I was tarring all old electricians with the same brush.
The example that sprang to mind was when I working on an industrial job and the 2 old sparks (in their 60s) had a massive falling out over how to wire a 2 way lighting circuit in singles; they each accused the other of only knowing one method.

Lol I often think many of us do need tarring

My post was a little tongue in cheek ,and I agree entirely we old codgers can be stuck in our ways ...............but I bet you find that our "good practice" methods are still safe today as they were .............hmm let's say few years ago.

E54 is the neutral and earth rods, and to be fair to him I can see where he comes from, that was how we were taught ................mine is fly earths in back boxes ..........I hate not seeing them and I fit them in boxes if I don't see them.

A bad habit I have, and still do have is twisting CPC together and sleeving as one ........I know it makes testing harder, but that was the way I was taught and I have to think not to do it.

Now i'm going to shuffle back into the corner for a game of Doms with the old lads

 

[Adam W]

I can understand fly leads to the backboxes - that's something I like to see as well. Twisting wires together though is a big no - if I saw you doing that I'd have to tut at you.

 

[chiplard]

Round and round and round and round and round!!!!!!!!!!!