Ring main,going going gone

[westward10]

Should have asked him where this is quoted. It may not be a conventional circuit but it is not likely to give rise to danger if installed correctly.

 

[Wilko]

Wilko
Bit puzzled and not disagreeing in any way, but You mention R1+R2 for 100mts cable is less than 2 ohms.
Then in the next sentence r1+r2 is a bit less at 0.5 ohms both at 20degC.
It's probably me but can you explain what you mean ? sorry Mate just me wondering that's all.

Hi Pete - sorry, but I stuffed up the naming conventions this morning, which both your-good-self and Lee are being very polite about, thanks !
I'm back home now so I'll sit on the silly step for a while and drink my red medicine.

 

[DPG]

I still don't see how the regs prevent a ring of sockets being fed from a 6mm feed. And that's a how I picture a 'lollipop' circuit.

 

[telectrix]

i like lollipops:

 

[Octopus]

I’ve recently had my scheme assessment - and my assessor was pretty adamant that the reg prevents lollipops. It’s certainly how it reads to me...

Unless he can state reg number(s) to back that up, he's whistling out of his back end .....

 

[Pete999]

Hi Pete - sorry, but I stuffed up the naming conventions this morning, which both your-good-self and Lee are being very polite about, thanks !
I'm back home now so I'll sit on the silly step for a while and drink my red medicine.

Take a demerit House point Wilko, see me after School every day for a week for Lines, and chastisement

 

[Wilko]

I too think lollipops are ok. Here's a little article from ElecSa on the topic for our evening reading .
Hybrid ring/radial final circuits - https://www.voltimum.co.uk/articles/hybrid-ringradial-final-circuits

 

[Pete999]

I too think lollipops are ok. Here's a little article from ElecSa on the topic for our evening reading .
Hybrid ring/radial final circuits - https://www.voltimum.co.uk/articles/hybrid-ringradial-final-circuits

Wilko, it's not something I would do, and I agree it's not a detailed departure from 7671, do you not think this interesting article, is a case of ELECSA interpreting things for their own interests? just saying. Would love to hear your educated comments please, it's just that I have very little trust in what the Schemes have to say, Spin Doctors, spring to mind.

 

[Ian1981]

Wilko, it's not something I would do, and I agree it's not a detailed departure from 7671, do you not think this interesting article, is a case of ELECSA interpreting things for their own interests? just saying. Would love to hear your educated comments please, it's just that I have very little trust in what the Schemes have to say, Spin Doctors, spring to mind.

Why would this type of circuit arrangement benefit any of the schemes for their own interest?

 

[DPG]

Nobody has yet come up with a good reason or a good reg against such a circuit.

 

[Octopus]

Wilko, it's not something I would do, and I agree it's not a detailed departure from 7671, do you not think this interesting article, is a case of ELECSA interpreting things for their own interests? just saying. Would love to hear your educated comments please, it's just that I have very little trust in what the Schemes have to say, Spin Doctors, spring to mind.

Don't take this the wrong way but if you were still working and Mrs Jones is having a nice shiny kitchen and needs more sockets where the cooker used to be, and the CU is on the far side of the house, common sense says that considering a lollipop makes perfect sense ........ the other option, utilising the redundant 6mm cable would be to extend the circuit in 4mm and have a longer radial .............

 

[Ian1981]

Nobody has yet come up with a good reason or a good reg against such a circuit.

Because there’s nothing to prohibit it.

 

[Octopus]

Because there’s nothing to prohibit it.

Except muppet assessors who go around misleading people ........

 

[Ian1981]

Except muppet assessors who go around misleading people ........

I’m not sure anybody’s willing to challenge them on what they come out with to be honest.
If I install such a circuit and it’s then deemed unacceptable then I’d require the relevant regulation number(s) to back the claim.
If I’m in the wrong then I can’t complain about it really.
I’ve been to an Niceic tech talk recently and I definitely did not agree with everything said and I had my area assessors head in bits haha

 

[Pete999]

Why would this type of circuit arrangement benefit any of the schemes for their own interest?

Yes of course it would.

 

[Ian1981]

Yes of course it would.

Why?

 

[Pete999]

Don't take this the wrong way but if you were still working and Mrs Jones is having a nice shiny kitchen and needs more sockets where the cooker used to be, and the CU is on the far side of the house, common sense says that considering a lollipop makes perfect sense ........ the other option, utilising the redundant 6mm cable would be to extend the circuit in 4mm and have a longer radial .............

Not on my watch.

 

[telectrix]

Nobody has yet come up with a good reason or a good reg against such a circuit.

that's because there ain't one.

 

[Octopus]

Not on my watch.

So your option would be to suggest unnecessary "surgery" on a clients house ............................ madness.

 

[telectrix]

to take this a step further.... a 2.5mm ring final, run under the upstairs floor, with single 2.5mm drops to each socket (connections suitably terminated in M/F enclosures), so each socketoutlet would be a single point spur, no reg. to prevent this. would you do it?