New circuit design question

[RyanAspire]

Hi guys,

Have a job on next week for a friend, my usual industry is maintenance so want to be sure I am checking all the boxes here.

He intially measured the run out at 122m, which would require a 70mm cable due to volt drop, however its changed slightly and I have other queries...

He now has the main kiosk that UKPN have put the supply into with the 100A fuse, the meter company are coming to install next week. From there, there will be another 2 kiosks on the way to the last. So see below for the first query...

Main Incoming kiosk
|
|
20m
|
|
Kiosk number 2. Will have ring main circuit, lighting circuit and then circuit that carries on to Kiosk 3.
|
|
20m
|
|
Kiosk 3. Ring main circuit, lighting circuit and then circuit that carries on to Kiosk 4.
|
|
80m
|
|
Kiosk 4. Final kiosk, will have ring circuit and lighting circuit. Will also be powering a mobile home/static caravan that has power shower, washing machine, elec heaters etc (no gas here). There is a barn that will likely have power in the future for some tools.

My question here is with these various runs, each 'break in the total run will be protected by an RCD and MCB. would the cable have to be 70mm at all? Could it be 35mm all the way? as it is now a 20m run, then via an MCB, it would be another 20m run and then from there via another MCB it would be an 80m run to the final kiosk.

Another question, I will likely look to install a 30mA RCD in the first kiosk which will cover the whole system, is it worth installing further RCD's in the following kiosks as they will all be protected by the initial RCD. There is also a 30mA RCD already in the caravan consumer unit. I would prefer to avoid the nuisance trip of this initial RCD but obviously installing further 30mA RCD's in the other kiosks won't necessarily reduce the chance of unnecessary tripping, and time delay and greater RCD's aren't an option as each kiosk has final circuits.

Also, I'm sure i know what the answer is to this one....the supply is TNCS for reference, but I won't need an earth rod for caravan will I? I'm not looking to create a TT system or PME unless it is beneficial/regulation.

I don't want to sound stupid in this at all, just covering my tracks to ensure I am keeping to best practice. Thanks in advance guys!

Ryan

 

[Spoon]

What are the kiosks for?
What will they be powering?
I'm presuming each kiosk will have it's own small CU... What size breakers/RCBO's are you thinking of fitting in the CU?
If you are using armoured cable to feed these CU's in these kiosks then the cable will not need RCD protection. Therefore you can have a RCD for each kiosk CU or fit RCBO's.
If you just had the one RCD at the source then if there is a fault in any on the kiosks this will take down all the other kiosks.....

 

[RyanAspire]

Thanks for the response!

The kiosks are to house DBs yes, it is all on an acre or so of land and across it there is a log barn that will need lighting and sockets for general use, charging equipment etc, same for the second kiosk and the final one will have a DB in it as a fixed point for the caravan to connect too.

RCBOs is a more costly route, although I much prefer them, im trying to minimise cost. And RCDs my only thinking is for example, if the first RCD in the system is slightly more sensitive than the last than it may still trip despite where the fault may be. I will likely put RCDs in each DB but just trying to see if there is another plausible route is all.

Thanks for getting back ?

 

[dodger421]

My question here is with these various runs, each 'break in the total run will be protected by an RCD and MCB. would the cable have to be 70mm at all? Could it be 35mm all the way? as it is now a 20m run, then via an MCB, it would be another 20m run and then from there via another MCB it would be an 80m run to the final kiosk.

The volt drop from supply to end of run is still going to be the same, even if the distance between each point is shorter so you’ll still need to use 70mm all the way down to the last kiosk I believe.

 

[RyanAspire]

This is where my query comes in as I agree. But say if I had installed both runs of 20m (main kiosk to kiosk 2 and kiosk 2 to kiosk 3) now in 35mm, that would be fine. And then at a later date another electrician came to add to the install, he would be basing his volt drop calculations on 80m (kiosk 3 to the final kiosk) and not considering the 2x20m runs installed already? Am I right in thinking that way?

The volt drop from supply to end of run is still going to be the same, even if the distance between each point is shorter so you’ll still need to use 70mm all the way down to the last kiosk I believe.

 

[dodger421]

This is where my query comes in as I agree. But say if I had installed both runs of 20m (main kiosk to kiosk 2 and kiosk 2 to kiosk 3) now in 35mm, that would be fine. And then at a later date another electrician came to add to the install, he would be basing his volt drop calculations on 80m (kiosk 3 to the final kiosk) and not considering the 2x20m runs installed already? Am I right in thinking that way?

No, you have to consider volt drop from the supply in all cases.

So the later electrician has to either connect directly at the supply for his 120m run or do a bit of work to calculate (or measure) the impedance of the existing 40m of 35mm and then work out what size cable he needs to ensure his final circuits can meet the 3% or 5% volt drop if he’s looping from the last kiosk. That may mean connecting say a 90mm to the existing run to keep the volt drop sensible at the end of the line.

At least that is my understanding of it, that the volt drop calculation includes all of the wiring from the supply to the furthest point of the final circuit.

 

[David Prosser]

This is where my query comes in as I agree. But say if I had installed both runs of 20m (main kiosk to kiosk 2 and kiosk 2 to kiosk 3) now in 35mm, that would be fine. And then at a later date another electrician came to add to the install, he would be basing his volt drop calculations on 80m (kiosk 3 to the final kiosk) and not considering the 2x20m runs installed already? Am I right in thinking that way?

No you need to take in the whole length of the run for the voltage drop calculation.

 

[westward10]

For a submain you should consider a vd of 2% to give some leeway to the final circuits. To install an rcd at source seems a crazy thing to do.

 

[Lucien Nunes]

Most of the load seems to be at the remote end of the cable so the VD is nearly as high as if it were a single run of the full length. Obviously if the load were more evenly spread along the length you could assess it as being centred at the halfway point and halve the VD result. If there is significant design load at the other points it might pay to calculate each cable run separately with the total load it carries, then add the VDs of the three runs for the final answer.

No idea why you are wanting an RCD at the intake. Surely you just put whatever protection is appropriate at each DB for the circuits it supplies?

 

[RyanAspire]

Sorry guys, I mistyped at work! The RCD won't be at the intake, it will be at the first DB and then the circuit will continue from there via an MCB which will be downstream from this RCD.

Just for clarity I completely agree that 70mm should be the case all the way, i was just wondering if I was misinterpreting the regs or not.

The majority of the load will be at the furthest end of the install yes, but i am trying to future proof too incase they should want to add any other equipment at the other DBs.

Thanks everyone for the feedback though ?

 

[GBDamo]

What load is going on the final kiosk? 70mm SWA, buried is good for 70ish amps @ 120m

All this 70 Amps may not be needed at the final kiosk, how many?

You may find you can run 70mm to the first two kiosks then 50mm to he final.

(Numbers not calculated, just to show the principle)

 

[RyanAspire]

Sorry guys, I mistyped at work! The RCD won't be at the intake, it will be at the first DB and then the circuit will continue from there via an MCB which will be downstream from this RCD.

Just for clarity I completely agree that 70mm should be the case all the way, i was just wondering if I was misinterpreting the regs or not.

The majority of the load will be at the furthest end of the install yes, but i am trying to future proof too incase they should want to add any other equipment at the other DBs.

Thanks everyone for the feedback though ?

However I'm considering the option of no RCD at the first and second DBs and use RCBOs and then one RCD at the final kiosk

 

[RyanAspire]

What load is going on the final kiosk? 70mm SWA, buried is good for 70ish amps @ 120m

All this 70 Amps may not be needed at the final kiosk, how many?

You may find you can run 70mm to the first two kiosks then 50mm to he final.

(Numbers not calculated, just to show the principle)

Yeah i considered that too as I think i calculated at 100m that 50mm would be fine. I had said this but they decided to go ahead and purchase the whole run in 70mm

 

[Lucien Nunes]

it will be at the first DB and then the circuit will continue from there via an MCB which will be downstream from this RCD.

Why do you want another MCB in line with the run of the distribution circuit? Its size is likely to be dictated by VD not current rating, so it won't need fusing down anywhere and therefore won't be affected by the RCDs in the DBs.

 

[RyanAspire]

Why do you want another MCB in line with the run of the distribution circuit? Its size is likely to be dictated by VD not current rating, so it won't need fusing down anywhere and therefore won't be affected by the RCDs in the DBs.

The size is definitely determined by the VD. I don't want an issue downstream i.e cable damage to take out the intake fuse?

If there is an issue at the end of the mobile home on the SWA that isn't protected via MCBs along the way then I don't want the fault path to go all the back and blow the 100A fuse that UKPN will then need to come and replace at cost and downtime without power too. At least via this route the power upstream should remain intact and also help to identify the location of a fault too

 

[westward10]

What design current are you basing the vd on.

 

[richy3333]

Also, I'm sure i know what the answer is to this one....the supply is TNCS for reference, but I won't need an earth rod for caravan will I? I'm not looking to create a TT system or PME unless it is beneficial/regulation.

ESQCR prohibits the use of PME for pikey vans. Start banging those rods in!

 

[Spoon]

The size is definitely determined by the VD. I don't want an issue downstream i.e cable damage to take out the intake fuse?

If there is an issue at the end of the mobile home on the SWA that isn't protected via MCBs along the way then I don't want the fault path to go all the back and blow the 100A fuse that UKPN will then need to come and replace at cost and downtime without power too. At least via this route the power upstream should remain intact and also help to identify the location of a fault too

Ok, so if I understand this correctly, Kiosk 1 is purely for the incoming supply, so main fuse and meter?
From this kiosk, you are going to supply CU's in each of the other kiosks? If this is true then the supply is much longer than 3 meters so you will have to fit a fused isolator.
Again mate, as I asked in post #2, what power requirements are needed for each kiosk?

 

[RyanAspire]

Ok, so if I understand this correctly, Kiosk 1 is purely for the incoming supply, so main fuse and meter?
From this kiosk, you are going to supply CU's in each of the other kiosks? If this is true then the supply is much longer than 3 meters so you will have to fit a fused isolator.
Again mate, as I asked in post #2, what power requirements are needed for each kiosk?

Kiosk 1 incoming from UKPN with meter and fused isolator as you say
Kiosk 2 ring main circuit and lights
Kiosk 3 ring main circuit and lights
Kiosk 4 provide power for mobile home

All of these are subject to potential increase in the future, not sure what and when, that will obviously be decided at a later date but its good to make sure it is there and possible to do in the future. Its all minimal power required except for the mobile home for obvious reasons. I wouldn't want to drastically reduce the cable size downstream for the reason of future proofing, my question was purely based on curiosity of the regs.

Each of the kiosks besides the first will need RCD protection because there are final circuits which will all be outside. We have also established that 70mm is correct as i had spec'd (this was just a query to understand if i had misinterpreted the regs).

But one of the reasons we seperate circuits is for the same reason, so one issue doesn't take out everything else, hence I want to put the supply on MCB at each kiosk, to avoid that happening. Do you feel this is wrong and if so, why?

Just trying to see everyone's views on it and what reasons they would have to disagree on that too. We're all here to learn ?

 

[westward10]

We haven't established 70mm is correct as we do not have enough information. So the supply to the kiosks from kiosk 2 will be rcd protected?

 

[RyanAspire]

We haven't established 70mm is correct as we do not have enough information. So the supply to the kiosks from kiosk 2 will be rcd protected?

I have based it on 100A. And yes, that's what I am intending, albeit I may change the circuits to RCBOs at each kiosk instead of a main RCD. Except for the consumer unit in the mobile home

 

[westward10]

Bad idea giving the other kiosk supplies rcd protection if they do not require it. Do the external lights require rcd protection?

 

[loz2754]

Call me out on this if y'all feel I'm too harsh...
But surely this is basic bread and butter circuit design 101.
Which any trained electrician should be able to do, it's part of the job.
I think we're seeing far too much of this "design by internet forum" approach.

 

[RyanAspire]

Call me out on this if y'all feel I'm too harsh...
But surely this is basic bread and butter circuit design 101.
Which any trained electrician should be able to do, it's part of the job.
I think we're seeing far too much of this "design by internet forum" approach.

I wouldn't call you out for it, you would be right had I asked this without having a clue but I haven't stated that anything I'm doing is drastically any different to what others have said. I was just asking a question as I felt maybe the wording in the regulations could portray a different scenario.

The RCD query was more to ensure I wasn't missing anything obvious as I am trying not to overspend on the job.

And obviously the earthing question was more as I've never worked with mobile homes/caravans and its good to get some more background from those that may know more about it. Albeit it seems that what I 'knew' to be correct, is.

 

[RyanAspire]

Bad idea giving the other kiosk supplies rcd protection if they do not require it. Do the external lights require rcd protection?

Probably not. The RCD idea was mainly so if there was more circuits in the future then it wouldn't entail more RCBOs (at higher cost) or if a different spark comes in and tries rewriting the wheel to get more money from the job too. I think seperate RCBOs is the way forward though to prevent the 'nuisance trip' scenario

 

[RyanAspire]

Also, I'm sure i know what the answer is to this one....the supply is TNCS for reference, but I won't need an earth rod for caravan will I? I'm not looking to create a TT system or PME unless it is beneficial/regulation.

ESQCR prohibits the use of PME for pikey vans. Start banging those rods in!

I've got the mallet ready ?

 

[loz2754]

I wouldn't call you out for it, you would be right had I asked this without having a clue but I haven't stated that anything I'm doing is drastically any different to what others have said. I was just asking a question as I felt maybe the wording in the regulations could portray a different scenario.

The RCD query was more to ensure I wasn't missing anything obvious as I am trying not to overspend on the job.

And obviously the earthing question was more as I've never worked with mobile homes/caravans and its good to get some more background from those that may know more about it. Albeit it seems that what I 'knew' to be correct, is.

Fair comment.
Perhaps if we had been presented with a more or less complete design, with a request for alternative thoughts and ideas, I would not have got the wrong idea. My apologies.

 

[RyanAspire]

Fair comment.
Perhaps if we had been presented with a more or less complete design, with a request for alternative thoughts and ideas, I would not have got the wrong idea. My apologies.

I get what you mean though, when I did my 18th edition I'd say half the class were struggling with it, and i really couldnt grasp it, I wonder how they got through college and then couldn't handle the easiest hurdle of the lot, that is what worries me.

I like the forums for being able to answer these queries though, sometimes for me, like this, it's just curiosity that you're not being a complete idiot about things ?

 

[Spoon]

I have based it on 100A. And yes, that's what I am intending, albeit I may change the circuits to RCBOs at each kiosk instead of a main RCD. Except for the consumer unit in the mobile home

Kiosk 1 incoming from UKPN with meter and fused isolator as you say

You are fitting a fused isolator, so you will not have 100A

 

[pc1966]

What is the load at each of the kiosks? What you really want to avoid is any selectivity issues where a major fault on one takes out the lot.

At the origin you should have your own switched-fuse so you are in control of the current limit (or badger the DNO to agree their fuse is OK for protection, I know which is easier...) and check that the sub-main is going to disconnect in 5s or less if there is a fault. Probably with 70mm and TN-C-S supply that is going to be OK, but get the Ze at the incoming point and check the fuse requirements.

If none of your kiosks has an expected load above 60A then you would be best to chain the supply from the incoming 100A (fused) line to each one and have a fused cut-out (or another fused-switch) at 60A to feed the local CU, that way even a major fault will not take out the incoming DNO & switched-fuse's fuses.

As above, if you are feeding caravans they are not permitted to be from TN-C-S so at the last leg you should be making it a TT supply with local earth rod(s) to be OK, and RCD protection before the feed to the caravans. Just search for "IET caravan power" and you should find an article on that top of the list.

 

[RyanAspire]

You are fitting a fused isolator, so you will not have 100A

Based the calcs on 100A. Really can't help but feel youre here to call me out rather than help?

 

[Spoon]

Based the calcs on 100A. Really can't help but feel youre here to call me out rather than help?

I think you have misread my posts mate. I have given you good info.
You say the main fuse is 100A and you are fitting a fused isolator, therefore the fused isolator can't be 100A as you would not have any discrimination mate. It has to be lower than 100A.
A few people have asked for more info on what power the kiosks are designed at, and rightly so. The more info we have the more we can help.

 

[pc1966]

You say the main fuse is 100A and you are fitting a fused isolator, therefore the fused isolator can't be 100A as you would not have any discrimination mate. It has to be lower than 100A.

There is no requirement for the fused isolator to protect the DNO side, that have their own fuse. It is so you can justify protection of the sub-main without relying on the DNO's permission.

True it won't provide selectivity at the DNO if you use the same value (assuming it meets the sub-main disconnection times) but if you are likely to blow the DNO fuse without a major sub-main fault (pick-axe through it, etc) you have under-specified the supply in the first place!

That is why I suggested a 60A fused-switch at each take-off point, as that should provide selectivity with the incoming fuses of both DNO and a customer.

 

[Spoon]

There is no requirement for the fused isolator to protect the DNO side, that have their own fuse. It is so you can justify protection of the sub-main without relying on the DNO's permission.

True it won't provide selectivity at the DNO if you use the same value (assuming it meets the sub-main disconnection times) but if you are likely to blow the DNO fuse without a major sub-main fault (pick-axe through it, etc) you have under-specified the supply in the first place!

That is why I suggested a 60A fused-switch at each take-off point, as that should provide selectivity with the incoming fuses of both DNO and a customer.

Ok, so in past posts, if someone was to extend their tails from the meter to the CU, and it goes over 3 meters they have been told that they need to install a fused isolator. Why doesn't this apply here then? The principle is the same.
Or have I misread something...

 

[David Prosser]

Ok, so in past posts, if someone was to extend their tails from the meter to the CU, and it goes over 3 meters they have been told that they need to install a fused isolator. Why doesn't this apply here then? The principle is the same.
Or have I misread something...

Yes you have missed the bit that says "There is no requirement for the fused isolator to protect the DNO side". Not there is no need for a fused isolator. The point being they can have 100A fuses the same as the DNO.

 

[pc1966]

As above, my comment was on the fuse size aspect.

 

[pc1966]

A quick look at 70mm has that run coming in at around 0.63 * 122 = 0.077 ohms R1+R2 if 3-core, and a 100A fuse to blow in 5s or less is around 0.3 ohms Zs max, so you need to check the supply Ze is no more than about 0.2 ohms otherwise you are going to need to do something else (e.g. 300mA delay RCD) to meet disconnection limits.

While 2-core is cheaper by a bit, the armour is around 2 ohm/km so the run would have R1+R2 of around 0.277 ohms leaving practically nothing for supply Ze & 100A fuse protection.

 

[Spoon]

Yes you have missed the bit that says "There is no requirement for the fused isolator to protect the DNO side". Not there is no need for a fused isolator. The point being they can have 100A fuses the same as the DNO.

Now I'm confused.
So you are saying that a fused isolator is required, due to the distance from the meter to the first CU.
What's the point in putting in a 100A fuse. We have always recommended a fuse lower than the main fuse size?

 

[David Prosser]

kiosk one can have 100A fuse switch giving you better flexability with your selectivity futher down the chain.

 

[Spoon]

kiosk one can have 100A fuse switch giving you better flexability with your selectivity futher down the chain.

But if there is a fault then either the main fuse or the isolator fuse could blow..

 

[David Prosser]

But if there is a fault then either the main fuse or the isolator fuse could blow..

If there was a fault it could blow the DNO fuse even if you put 80A or 63A fuses in the SFI.

 

[pc1966]

Now I'm confused.
So you are saying that a fused isolator is required, due to the distance from the meter to the first CU.
What's the point in putting in a 100A fuse. We have always recommended a fuse lower than the main fuse size?

You have every right to be confused, as the regulations on it are a bit convoluted!

Normally you must provide an OCPD when there is a change in the CCC of the cables (434.2) and you must provide a means of isolation (462.1) and it has to be appropriate for the type of customer/user (e.g. 537.2.8).

When you have tails or sub-main longer then 3m it is regarded as part of the installation so it has to be isolatable without pulling the DNO fuse, so you need a switch.

Now the DNO provides a fuse but it is for the protection of their network, not the customer's. However, if the DNO agrees that their fuse is acceptable protection you can omit the OCPD (433.3.1 section (iii) and 434.3 section (iv)) and get away with only a switch.

Generally getting the DNO to provide an agreement in writing as part of your system design is going to cost you time and effort and probably it is cheaper to simply ignore the omission rule and put in a switched-fuse instead of just a switch.

Now how big a fuse? Well you have a couple of factors to consider:

• The fuse must provide adequate protection of the sub-main under fault conditions, so (probably) 5s or less to meed ADS (assuming 411.3.2.3)
• The design musty have overload protection for the sub-main, probably by the incoming fuse, unless it is certain the nature of the loads (or totals of DB breaker currents, etc) cannot overload the cable so fault protection is sufficient (433).
• It is best if you achieve selectivity with the DNO fuse so after a major fault you just change the fuse under your control.

The first point has to be met, so if you have a high Ze and/or long sub-main so R1+R2 significant your choice is going to be either reducing the fuse size, or going to a delay RCD to earth fault protection.

The second point is usually met on long cables if voltage drop and fault-disconnection times are being met, but again is something that the designer has to have factored in.

The third point is not essential, as the DNO network is protected by their fuse, and really the design of the installation should not be such that is is likely to overload the supply. But if you want to achieve this by fuses you are looking to a 1.6:1 ratio or more (so 63A if DNO is 100A, etc) or going down the delay RCD route (as it is most likely going to clear before the DNO fuse goes expect for a high PFC, but of course only for faults to earth, not overload).

Here the OP has other issues, the tapping off of other supply kiosks allows for them to have fuses that are selective against the DNO/incoming fuse, so the total loss of supply would only be if the sub-main was damaged.

But the details of loads, etc, are not here and I am getting hungry so time to stop rambling!

 

[RyanAspire]

Thanks everyone for replies!

I don't expect the load at any kiosk to exceed 10A, except for the last kiosk which will be around 40A I would suspect, but again, there may be more in the future (there is a barn close to the final kiosk which will likely want lighting and sockets in eventually.

I have decided to go for an 100A switched fuse after the meter. 100A main isolator in kiosk 2 and 3. With the feed from kiosk 2 down to 3 via an 80A MCB. Then from kiosk 3 to the final kiosk via a 63A MCB. All lighting circuits on MCB and the rings on RCBOs. At the final kiosk will be a 30mA RCD which will feed a future ring and lighting,it will also serve a 32A MCB which will go onto a hookup point (which will have an RCD within too as regs state the static caravan must have its own RCD supply). My understanding from looking at the IET page someone kindly put up is from here I will run the SWA to the DB in the final kiosk as normal, from there I will only run L+N to the hookup point from where I can then connect an earth rod, with live, neutral and earth from here supplying the static caravan.

Does all this sound about right? Also with regards to Ze, DNO has kindly noted by their fuse that Ze is 0.14.

Again thanks everyone for the input. I don't think I was much different from people's responses but it's definitely given me some clarity on some things and help me make subtle adjustments, especially with regards to the static caravan having never supplied one. Also within BS7671 could it maybe be seen as a grey area? There is 708 (i think) which is regarding caravan parks and camping parks or 721 (again I think) which appears to relate to the actual internal installation of a caravan. In this instance, it isn't deemed as a caravan park as it is one residential static caravan on the property of its owner. Albeit I appreciate 708 is the closest regulation covering this application

 

[dodger421]

I’m willing to be proven wrong but I think you’ll struggle to find an MCB that will accommodate 70mm and fits in a standard CU or DB. Most MCB’s I’ve seen only accommodate up to 25mm.

As for the run to the caravan point, yes you can run a 2-core SWA but you still need to earth the armour at the supply end but isolating it from the enclosure at the hookup.

 

[RyanAspire]

I’m willing to be proven wrong but I think you’ll struggle to find an MCB that will accommodate 70mm and fits in a standard CU or DB. Most MCB’s I’ve seen only accommodate up to 25mm.

As for the run to the caravan point, yes you can run a 2-core SWA but you still need to earth the armour at the supply end but isolating it from the enclosure at the hookup.

I don't believe you will be proven wrong, I've looked and looked and looked! The only two options I see I have is either terminal blocks in the DB (70mm in 25mm out) or the preferred option, reducing pins.

 

[westward10]

Are these single phase boards, 70mm? good luck.

 

[Spoon]

If there was a fault it could blow the DNO fuse even if you put 80A or 63A fuses in the SFI.

So because there may be a very slim change of the main fuse blowing with a 63A fuse in the SFI, then you choose to do no selectivity whatsoever... Interesting.... Not something I would do.

 

[RyanAspire]

80A switched fuse is what I meant too

 

[RyanAspire]

Are these single phase boards, 70mm? good luck.

They are, i have looked to buying ones on the larger side to help with the cable size. Is there an easier/better alternative?

 

[pc1966]

They are, i have looked to buying ones on the larger side to help with the cable size. Is there an easier/better alternative?

How about using a branch joint to bring off some 25mm SWA that connected to your kiosk:
https://www.cef.co.uk/catalogue/pro...-resin-joint-kit-for-cables-up-to-70mm-4-core

Wrangling 70mm won't be fun and few terminal blocks, etc, are going to take that large a cable in double. Also that kit means no joints along the length to slightly less chance of an overheating terminal, etc.