Ring or Radial

[Nugot747]

Hi,

Been out of the industry for 20 years and have found an interesting spark on YouTube who is very entertaining, he made a comment on one of his videos, Rings Vs Radials, would be interesting to see your views this in todays world.

 

[Pete999]

Hi,

Been out of the industry for 20 years and have found an interesting spark on YouTube who is very entertaining, he made a comment on one of his videos, Rings Vs Radials, would be interesting to see your views this in todays world.

Would be interesting to hear your views, my view is that each wiring method has it's own upsides and downsides, I was brought up on the onset of Ring FCs so I am maybe biased in favour of Rings, although radials do have their place.

 

[westward10]

There has been a few threads on this topic this one is five pages long.

I never install ring circuits, the potential for danger is unacceptable

I’d like to know if anyone else here refuses to install ring circuits in domestic premises. For me it’s either a 20a radial / tree circuit with 2.5mm, or a 32 radial / tree circuit with 4.0mm. Frankly I’m tired of finding broken ring circuits on 32a CB’s, as well as mismatches on end to end...

www.electriciansforums.net

 

[westward10]

And here is another one.

Radial vs Ring in a standard 3 bed

Afternoon all. I normally cable my first fixes in a standard 3/4 bed as follows: Ring up Ring down Kitchen ring. I was at a trade show the other day and got talking to a few people and they said they only use a ring in the kitchen. Radials up and down. Got me think what’s the standard? I know...

www.electriciansforums.net

 

[Nugot747]

Cheers, should have searched the forums.

 

[static zap]

Hi,

Rings Vs Radials, would be interesting to see your views this in todays world.

This is not meant as a dig.
The Search performance/relevance on this site has gone thru vast improvements very recently.
(It was a painfully bad experience- That may have lodged in your mind !)

 

[AJshep]

Its funny how people get told something and run with it...
I've been told but some clever fool that I shouldn't use 1mm cable for lights. When I asked why he said, "got told it by my QS".
When I asked him to show me the calculations to say that it's wrong he couldn't, basically he's just regurgitating information incorrectly.

This RFC stuff is the same IMO it pops up alot and many people seem to get concerned about their RFC getting overloaded, IMO. They haven't designed their instals very well !
I'd argue a 2.5mm 20amp RFC will nearly always be safer than a 4mm 32amp radial that some people favour and would need carefully calculating anyway, its also safer than a 2.5mm 16amp radial in many ways as at least you have 2 CPC at each outlet.

Nothing wrong with either, sometimes its a lot easier to put in a radial.

 

[AJshep]

Is this the youtube video

 

[Silly Sausage]

Nothing wrong with either, sometimes its a lot easier to put in a radial.

Run a parallel cable and alternate outlets

 

[MJPD29]

It depends on the situation and requirements really, I am a supporter of the ring but obviously if it was for say 2 outside sockets along I would install a radial for ease

 

[Nugot747]

Ok after reading the other threads and the concerns that it the rings get broken and then you have an over sized breaker protecting the circuit, would the best option not be to have a ring with a 20amp breaker so if the ring gets broken it does have a breaker that still would stop overload?

Maybe a silly comment.

 

[telectrix]

Ok after reading the other threads and the concerns that it the rings get broken and then you have an over sized breaker protecting the circuit, would the best option not be to have a ring with a 20amp breaker so if the ring gets broken it does have a breaker that still would stop overload?

Maybe a silly comment.

not silly, but rings are designed to cope with up to 32A continuous. if you have several juice hungry appliances, such as washing machines and fumble dryers, soon exceed the 20 A.

 

[Andy78]

Ok after reading the other threads and the concerns that it the rings get broken and then you have an over sized breaker protecting the circuit, would the best option not be to have a ring with a 20amp breaker so if the ring gets broken it does have a breaker that still would stop overload?

Maybe a silly comment.

Those concerns are scaremongering and contain unfounded fears.
We design circuits to function as designed, not faulty. If a circuit is installed correctly it won't become faulty. If someone incompetent alters it to make it faulty then that is also something we cannot and should not design for. Any circuit can become faulty if altered incorrectly.

 

[Risteard]

Ok after reading the other threads and the concerns that it the rings get broken and then you have an over sized breaker protecting the circuit, would the best option not be to have a ring with a 20amp breaker so if the ring gets broken it does have a breaker that still would stop overload?

Maybe a silly comment.

Not much point to a ring final circuit if you are going to restrict it to 20A though.

 

[static zap]

I'm wondering about the maths of a broken conductor.

RFC 1:3 of more danger+Multiple redundency.

Radial 1:3 chance of extreme danger/power loss.

(Trusting power loss-means fault=less testing?)
--it's much more complicated 2/3 to 2/3 !
(Stats were never my strong point )