Discuss Time to call it a day in the Commercial Electrical Advice area at ElectriciansForums.net

Welcome to ElectriciansForums.net - The American Electrical Advice Forum
Head straight to the main forums to chat by click here:   American Electrical Advice Forum

In what situation is it the best solution? (Or even a good solution for that matter.)

Well I'd argue that it is well suited in the environment I was in today. An old club with voids all over the place. They don't want conduit/trunking running on the surface everywhere, and it would have been impossible to install conduit/trunking in the void as a retrofit. Being able to rod T+E in the voids allows for progress to be made.
 
I have used it, if mechanical protected ie metal trunking etc, no problem. Easy to use in commercial refurbs .
So why wouldn't you use singles in a containment system like that mentioned?

Also the cpc size is often likely to be unsuitable for the fault levels encountered in non-domestic installations.
 
Well I'd argue that it is well suited in the environment I was in today. An old club with voids all over the place. They don't want conduit/trunking running on the surface everywhere, and it would have been impossible to install conduit/trunking in the void as a retrofit. Being able to rod T+E in the voids allows for progress to be made.
Why not use something like Hi-Tuff then with the same csa (and insulated) cpc as the live conductors. I presume you have allowed for non-combustible supports for the wiring system and tried to prevent acrid smoke in escape routes?
 
So why wouldn't you use singles in a containment system like that mentioned?

Also the cpc size is often likely to be unsuitable for the fault levels encountered in non-domestic installations.
So why wouldn't you use singles in a containment system like that mentioned?


Simply because it was not a full containment system. Using voids in ceiling, and stud work.
 
So why wouldn't you use singles in a containment system like that mentioned?

Also the cpc size is often likely to be unsuitable for the fault levels encountered in non-domestic installations.
I have never read so much twaddle in all my life. Fault levels in commercial are often similar to domestic with the same type of circuit protection. What Standards do you refer to, give us some numbers.
 
Fault levels in commercial are often similar to domestic with the same type of circuit protection.
And they are often much greater. If you look at the cable standards you will see that they are designed for domestic installations. You can claim that T&E in non-domestic installations is good practice all you want but it says more about you than me if you think that. It is frankly an abhorrent practice which only occurs because it is a cheap way of doing things - not because it is a good way.
 
And they are often much greater. If you look at the cable standards you will see that they are designed for domestic installations. You can claim that T&E in non-domestic installations is good practice all you want but it says more about you than me if you think that. It is frankly an abhorrent practice which only occurs because it is a cheap way of doing things - not because it is a good way.
An example would be dado trunking for a computer suite.
Where does it state and why not use twin and earth cables if seen fit.
Plenty of room in 100x 75mm trunking , capacity not exceeded to say you have to install singles is absurd
 
An example would be dado trunking for a computer suite.
Where does it state and why not use twin and earth cables if seen fit.
Plenty of room in 100x 75mm trunking , capacity not exceeded to say you have to install singles is absurd
Trunking is designed for singles - not for T&E. And in Dado T&E is so inflexible as to be completely unsuitable.
 
Trunking is designed for singles - not for T&E. And in Dado T&E is so inflexible as to be completely unsuitable.
So you wouldn't use trunking in domestic applications like trunking a twin and earth cable to a db for instance adding a circuit or if db is in a garage cables enter db on bare block work?
 
Also there is no reference method B for t&e suggesting that it was not conceived originally that people would start putting it in conduit etc.
Precisely - again this is because it is not intended for non-domestic installation methods.
 
So you wouldn't use trunking in domestic applications like trunking a twin and earth cable to a db for instance adding a circuit or if db is in a garage cables enter db on bare block work?
Mini-trunking is completely different to a proper metallic trunking system or dado trunking. So it's a bit of a silly point to make. There it is simply being used for tidiness and not as a containment system.
 
Mini-trunking is completely different to a proper metallic trunking system or dado trunking. So it's a bit of a silly point to make. There it is simply being used for tidiness and not as a containment system.
50 x 50 trunking is not mini trunking where the db is installed in say a garage on block work and the cables are installed in the said trunking entering the db.
Ref method B
 
50 x 50 trunking is not mini trunking where the db is installed in say a garage on block work and the cables are installed in the said trunking entering the db.
Ref method B
Again, you are not talking about a containment system but merely a way of keeping the cables tidy. A containment system is completely enclosed for a start.
 
Again, you are not talking about a containment system but merely a way of keeping the cables tidy. A containment system is completely enclosed for a start.
Look to say you would try and ram in twin and earth cables in say 20mm galv conduit on a conduit system is not the correct way however to say twin earth cables can't be installed in all commercial containment if installed correctly I don't agree with
 
@Sparkhe did I mention that we bicker a lot and forget all about the original post! Electricians - like housewives sometimes! No offence @Midwest!
 
Has no one brought up the issue that the loads are in excess of 2 Kw and require independant circuits, it sounds like the OP fed a 2way board from a 32amp mcb with 2,5cable now if that was a ringmain tap off then he has breached the regulation in the fact that the designed loads are in excess of 2kw and would need their own individual circuit.
If the OP has wired it direct from its own 32amp mcb then I still think the installation is in poor design, it's been stated that these toasters are rated at 16amp so this should be the designed load value not a clamped value, we do not have enough info on the toasters to comment any further but they could be power regulated to control the heat better or the voltage to the premises may have been lower than normal that day due to network loading and VD, what would happen if that was rectified in the future thus these toasters may draw more current and possible overload the cable.

You cannot even use the fixed load regulation to allow a higher rated OCPD than the cable because the cable does not meet the specified ampage of the toasters combined so I have to agree here its a poorly design and could become dangerous, regardless of still been on the 16th edition here, this shouldn't have been design this way even if your on the 15th edition on paper.
 
Has no one brought up the issue that the loads are in excess of 2 Kw and require independant circuits, it sounds like the OP fed a 2way board from a 32amp mcb with 2,5cable now if that was a ringmain tap off then he has breached the regulation in the fact that the designed loads are in excess of 2kw and would need their own individual circuit.
If the OP has wired it direct from its own 32amp mcb then I still think the installation is in poor design, it's been stated that these toasters are rated at 16amp so this should be the designed load value not a clamped value, we do not have enough info on the toasters to comment any further but they could be power regulated to control the heat better or the voltage to the premises may have been lower than normal that day due to network loading and VD, what would happen if that was rectified in the future thus these toasters may draw more current and possible overload the cable.

You cannot even use the fixed load regulation to allow a higher rated OCPD than the cable because the cable does not meet the specified ampage of the toasters combined so I have to agree here its a poorly design and could become dangerous, regardless of still been on the 16th edition here, this shouldn't have been design this way even if your on the 15th edition on paper.

Hi darkwood I see were you are coming from sounds about right. But I did not come off a ring main as that would have been stupid, it was from a 32amp mcb on a fuse board . So thanks for the input.
 

Reply to Time to call it a day in the Commercial Electrical Advice area at ElectriciansForums.net

OFFICIAL SPONSORS

Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Electrician Courses Green Electrical Goods PCB Way Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Pushfit Wire Connectors Electric Underfloor Heating Electrician Courses
These Official Forum Sponsors May Provide Discounts to Regular Forum Members - If you would like to sponsor us then CLICK HERE and post a thread with who you are, and we'll send you some stats etc
This website was designed, optimised and is hosted by Untold Media. Operating under the name Untold Media since 2001.
Back
Top
AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website. For the best site experience please disable your AdBlocker.

I've Disabled AdBlock