Ring main,going going gone

[cliffed]

My tutors told me to use this as a rule of thumb and you shouldn't go wrong, for a ring final circuit "1 roll of 100m cable = 1 ring final circuit", if that's wrong I stand corrected, but my tutors swore by this rule of thumb.
Found this remark on another forum,using 100m, that ring main ain’t gonna go far.
I usually have 2 rolls on the go.

 

[Toneyz]

There was some published 16th ed. electrical theory books that had some tables in them based on cable size, protective device and incoming earthing arrangements etc by Trever E. Marks.

 

[Marcus Vaughan]

If 543.2.9 is the one about conductors in ting finals being connected end to end then that still allows for a lollipop circuit. It's just that the ring is fed from another length of cable. Apologies if I've misunderstood your post.

That other length of cable would need to be to a distribution board - then the ‘circuit’ starts from there. I think the reg. refers to when people try to run a bit of cable into a junction box then start a ring from there - which is what the word ‘lollipop’ means to me. I think ‘lollipops’ are not allowed.

 

[DPG]

I think a circuit g fed from a feeder cable is allowed. Say for example a kitchen ring fed from a 6mm cable which feeds a now redundant Cooker outlet.

 

[Octopus]

I don’t know about feared, but it was pointed out to me recently that lollipop circuits are not compliant. Reg 543.2.9 in the 18th. Not sure about previous editions to be honest.?

Not sure I agree with that .............

A lollipop circuit isn't a ring final circuit

 

[Marcus Vaughan]

Not sure I agree with that .............

A lollipop circuit isn't a ring final circuit

Interesting - thanks Murdoch - but I think it’s more ring than radial. Why bother having two legs in a ring from that connection point? To share the load? To use smaller cable? If so - isn’t that what a ring is for.

I’ve recently had my scheme assessment - and my assessor was pretty adamant that the reg prevents lollipops. It’s certainly how it reads to me...

Must have been discussed before?

 

[westward10]

Should have asked him where this is quoted. It may not be a conventional circuit but it is not likely to give rise to danger if installed correctly.

 

[Wilko]

Wilko
Bit puzzled and not disagreeing in any way, but You mention R1+R2 for 100mts cable is less than 2 ohms.
Then in the next sentence r1+r2 is a bit less at 0.5 ohms both at 20degC.
It's probably me but can you explain what you mean ? sorry Mate just me wondering that's all.

Hi Pete - sorry, but I stuffed up the naming conventions this morning, which both your-good-self and Lee are being very polite about, thanks !
I'm back home now so I'll sit on the silly step for a while and drink my red medicine.

 

[DPG]

I still don't see how the regs prevent a ring of sockets being fed from a 6mm feed. And that's a how I picture a 'lollipop' circuit.

 

[telectrix]

i like lollipops:

 

[Octopus]

I’ve recently had my scheme assessment - and my assessor was pretty adamant that the reg prevents lollipops. It’s certainly how it reads to me...

Unless he can state reg number(s) to back that up, he's whistling out of his back end .....

 

[Pete999]

Hi Pete - sorry, but I stuffed up the naming conventions this morning, which both your-good-self and Lee are being very polite about, thanks !
I'm back home now so I'll sit on the silly step for a while and drink my red medicine.

Take a demerit House point Wilko, see me after School every day for a week for Lines, and chastisement

 

[Wilko]

I too think lollipops are ok. Here's a little article from ElecSa on the topic for our evening reading .
Hybrid ring/radial final circuits - https://www.voltimum.co.uk/articles/hybrid-ringradial-final-circuits

 

[Pete999]

I too think lollipops are ok. Here's a little article from ElecSa on the topic for our evening reading .
Hybrid ring/radial final circuits - https://www.voltimum.co.uk/articles/hybrid-ringradial-final-circuits

Wilko, it's not something I would do, and I agree it's not a detailed departure from 7671, do you not think this interesting article, is a case of ELECSA interpreting things for their own interests? just saying. Would love to hear your educated comments please, it's just that I have very little trust in what the Schemes have to say, Spin Doctors, spring to mind.

 

[Ian1981]

Wilko, it's not something I would do, and I agree it's not a detailed departure from 7671, do you not think this interesting article, is a case of ELECSA interpreting things for their own interests? just saying. Would love to hear your educated comments please, it's just that I have very little trust in what the Schemes have to say, Spin Doctors, spring to mind.

Why would this type of circuit arrangement benefit any of the schemes for their own interest?

 

[DPG]

Nobody has yet come up with a good reason or a good reg against such a circuit.