Twist or no twist

[cliffed]

Remembering back when I first started electrical 1970 the guys always twisted cables, one piece of green sleeving & twisted like a corkscrew,so tight when you separated them they bust off @ the ends.
2.5 mm twisted @ sockets & in connectors...these days wagos come to the rescue,does anyone twist the earth“s now @ sockets.
Just wondering I know it’s a No No with the new lads now.

 

[littlespark]

I don’t know if it’s been mentioned earlier, but previously twisted conductors don’t hold well in MF connectors such as WAGO.

You need to cut back to find a straight bit of copper

 

[telectrix]

I don’t know if it’s been mentioned earlier, but previously twisted conductors don’t hold well in MF connectors such as WAGO.

You need to cut back to find a straight bit of copper

just had similar with lighting cpc's twisted. 3 conductors in 1 sleeve. replacing 11 standard rose/pendants with fancy lights. took ages to untwist and straighten the cpc's. should have been finished by 3. finally packed up tools at 10 past 6. 3 hours drinking time wasted.

 

[Dustydazzler]

Do the twist ...

 

[ipf]

How often are the sockets untwisted for test? I would guess only if an open ring was seen at the CU and other means of isolating the break had failed (e.g. wander lead, or shorting L-E on one leg and looking for the open L-E to short L-E at sockets, etc), so probably infrequent.

Twisting the CU wires would be an major reliability issue for EICR, etc, as they need to come out and be separated every time, but also most CU terminals are much better are taking and reliably clamping two wires than socets, etc.

Yes, that's the whole point. What I'm saying is that it was done without thought for any future inspection. Look at #14 photo, 30 years old and looks solid as a rock, done properly.......but , who can be sure, eh? And that's why inspections are insisted upon.
You inspect that (#14) visually. Dismantle at your own peril. Just put the g/sleeving back on.

I'm not saying it's correct these days, and hate it personally, but that's the way things were.

 

[Mike Johnson]

The IET "On Site Guide" shows conductors twisted together on page's 106 and 107 for continuity testing, that could be taken as approval of the method.

 

[DPG]

The IET "On Site Guide" shows conductors twisted together on page's 106 and 107 for continuity testing, that could be taken as approval of the method.

Just symbolic, to indicate a connection though? Not advice on how permanent connections should be made.

 

[Lister1987]

just had similar with lighting cpc's twisted. 3 conductors in 1 sleeve. replacing 11 standard rose/pendants with fancy lights. took ages to untwist and straighten the cpc's. should have been finished by 3. finally packed up tools at 10 past 6. 3 hours drinking time wasted.

Make it into a drinking game, untwist drink, untwist drink ?

 

[Mike Johnson]

Just symbolic, to indicate a connection though? Not advice on how permanent connections should be made.

If so they could have diagrammatically shown as in BS7671 in a terminal block, no need to have shown conductors twisted together and given tacit approval to the method of connection.

 

[DPG]

If so they could have diagrammatically shown as in BS7671 in a terminal block, no need to have shown conductors twisted together and given tacit approval to the method of connection.

I agree to be honest. I don't think it is a good idea showing it like this.

 

[ipf]

I agree to be honest. I don't think it is a good idea showing it like this.

It's poor, that.

Just watch....next amendment it'll be a lever wago with IET labelling.......

 

[Lister1987]

The IET "On Site Guide" shows conductors twisted together on page's 106 and 107 for continuity testing, that could be taken as approval of the method.

Isn't the OSG about 30 years old now? Are we suprised that a few relics and former practices, incorrect information etc (spanning several editions and seemingly not picked up) are still in it?

 

[DPG]

Isn't the OSG about 30 years old now? Are we suprised that a few relics and former practices, incorrect information etc (spanning several editions and seemingly not picked up) are still in it?

But as it gets revised it should be kept up to date.

 

[loz2754]

But as it gets revised it should be kept up to date.

It should. Maybe one of its editors is a secret Twister.

 

[Mike Johnson]

Perhaps so, it's as about as out of date as Chubby Checker. ?