Tails or armoured?

[Sb8389]

Hi guys,
I have job on to install a consumer unit, the problem is I'm unsure weather to supply the consumer unit with meter tails or an armoured.
the setup is the meters are outside on the garage wall and the consumer unit is on the other side of the garage fed in 10mm tails currently. The distance from the meter to the CU is abou 5 metres max.
Im going to put a 80amp switch fuse in the garage back to back with the meter, but I'm unsure on what would be best to supply the CU in.
i was either thinking maybe using trunking across garage joists enclosing 25mm tails or would armoured be more suited. The customer is using there own CU which ain't metalclad and the gap to fit the board wouldn't allow an adapt box to be fitted aswell.
so all I'm asking is would the meter tails in trunking be the best method or should I look for an alternative.
any suggestions from experience appreciated.

 

[Essex_]

It has it's place as long as the appropriate glands are being used. Definitely not an SWA replacement. Next you will be saying FP200 cannot be classed as having an earthed metallic sheath either.

 

[spark 68]

It has it's place as long as the appropriate glands are being used. Definitely not an SWA replacement. Next you will be saying FP200 cannot be classed as having an earthed metallic sheath either.

SY is meant to be a control cable, the outer serving is not meant to be used as a CPC, it has a core for that, the outer is actually a screen/shield.

 

[Essex_]

SY is meant to be a control cable, the outer serving is not meant to be used as a CPC, it has a core for that, the outer is actually a screen/shield.

I am aware but things move on. I have read some threads on here where people are using buried FP200 to get away with not installing RCD protection. I almost fell off my chair when I read that. Turns out the cable can NOW be used for that (I personally would not though). FP200 certainly was not designed for this purpose either. Things change. I personally only use SY for connecting external equipment instead of standard flex cable.

 

[Geordie Spark]

nit picker! lol.

We in the posh North East would say "Pedant". Not only does it sound "posh" but it is also more economical - using 6 letters instead of 9 and one space.:laugh:

 

[spark 68]

I am aware but things move on. I have read some threads on here where people are using buried FP200 to get away with not installing RCD protection. I almost fell off my chair when I read that. Turns out the cable can NOW be used for that (I personally would not though). FP200 certainly was not designed for this purpose either. Things change. I personally only use SY for connecting external equipment instead of standard flex cable.

I am not aware the covering of FP200 can be used as a CPC or be really classed as an Earthed metallic covering in that context either, there is flexi-shield that complies to that definition, of which the BS number escapes me for the moment.

 

[davesparks]

I am not aware the covering of FP200 can be used as a CPC or be really classed as an Earthed metallic covering in that context either, there is flexi-shield that complies to that definition, of which the BS number escapes me for the moment.

The foil in fp200 is an earthed metallic covering and does comply for protection with regards penetration by metallic objects. This information is in the data sheet.

 

[Essex_]

The foil in fp200 is an earthed metallic covering and does comply for protection with regards penetration by metallic objects. This information is in the data sheet.

Gobsmacking

 

[davesparks]

Gobsmacking

What is? The fact that the foil layer is compliant or that someone has actually checked the data sheet and not just made assumptions based on their opinions

 

[telectrix]

We in the posh North East would say "Pedant". Not only does it sound "posh" but it is also more economical - using 6 letters instead of 9 and one space.:laugh:

9 and 1 space. that's all your fingers and thumbs. any more, you'd need to take yer socks off. :smilielol5::smilielol5::smilielol5:

 

[spark 68]

The foil in fp200 is an earthed metallic covering and does comply for protection with regards penetration by metallic objects. This information is in the data sheet.

New one on me then, it may well do for lowish power fire alarm circuits EM lighting and so forth, as far as I was aware flexishield or whatever had a different BS number to satisfy that requirement (no RCD requirement).

 

[shanky887614]

I am aware but things move on. I have read some threads on here where people are using buried FP200 to get away with not installing RCD protection. I almost fell off my chair when I read that. Turns out the cable can NOW be used for that (I personally would not though). FP200 certainly was not designed for this purpose either. Things change. I personally only use SY for connecting external equipment instead of standard flex cable.

sy isnt uv rated though

 

[LeeH]

It has it's place as long as the appropriate glands are being used. Definitely not an SWA replacement. Next you will be saying FP200 cannot be classed as having an earthed metallic sheath either.

The gland you will be referring to will be a CXT gland that CEF and the likes offer. They are ****e and if you are using them outdoors more fool you.

The screen will rusty in no time and most SY will turn white and crack after a year or 2.

 

[Essex_]

What is? The fact that the foil layer is compliant or that someone has actually checked the data sheet and not just made assumptions based on their opinions

That the foil layer is compliant.

 

[123]

That the foil layer is compliant.

Why wouldn't it be?

Do you think a screw won't go through a SWA almost as easily? I can assure you that it will!

 

[Essex_]

I am swerving this one now.