Have the rules for ring mains changed over the years?

[mainline]

No, no no! The standard radial test is only easier because you are not doing as much fault coverage.

Like I said, it's easier

 

[mainline]

That's quite a lot of socket circuits for the average kitchen. One for general purpose sockets, one for the dishwasher, one for the washing machine, one for the tumble drier. And there's nothing wrong with that, if that's how you like to install. But for me, I'd just install a ring final.

Actual nuisance tripping, where there is no fault present whatsoever, in my experience is very rare in domestic. It's true that more points will be lost if they are all on one circuit, but I think one circuit for the kitchen sockets and appliances is fine.

Safer? How so?


Can you offer a reliable source for this please? I don't believe it to be true.

Hager's take on it:
Contrary to common belief, AFDD’s do offer protection against arc faults in ring final circuits and to the equipment being fed from this circuit. A series arc fault in one leg however, is unlikely to be at a dangerous level so will not be detected.

We can show this by calculation.

First a radial:

Let's put a 32A load on it, and disconnect the circuit N conductor from the N bar in the CU. On energising the circuit, the potential difference between the disconnected N conductor and the N bar will be the full 230V. There is a potential for an arc to form, given just the right gap between them.

Next a ring, about 100m in length:

Absolute worst case scenario: let's put a 32A load a very short distance along one leg, and disconnect the N conductor of that leg from the N bar, leaving the N of the other leg in place. On energising the circuit, the current will flow the long way through the N conductor back to the N bar. The voltage drop across the 100m of N conductor would be:

V=IR
V= 32 X 0.89
V= 28.5V
(R based on 100m of 2.5mm conductor at 70deg. In reality, this would likely be running hotter as the conductor is overloaded, so the voltage drop would be a little more)

Now we have a potential difference between the disconnected N conductor and the N bar of just 29V. The potential for an arc to form between them is there, but it is much, much lower than for the radial based on the much lower V between them.

It could happen, though, therefore Afdds may not detect an arc fault on a RFC.

 

[mainline]

Found a bit of a write up.


Have we got it right or is this yet another UK outdated insular custom? In this paper I intend to show you the disadvantages of using ring circuits. Opinions I have formed as a result of problems experienced during many years of inspecting and testing electrical installations and training people to do it. David has pointed out that the original thinking behind the development of the 13 amp plug and socket system was for domestic premises – economy homes. Having read David’s paper, it seems to me that the introduction of ring circuits was almost an afterthought and that the original intention was for a socket to be used on a radial circuit. In my view it should have stopped at domestic premises. Other premises were only mentioned once in the history paper. However, over the years people have been brainwashed into believing that 13A sockets mean ring circuits.I have just recently even found a ring circuit supplying a single socket for a heating boiler. Hardly dangerous but demonstrates a complete lack of understanding by the installer, who incidentally was Part P registered.
Usage. Ring circuits are used almost everywhere in this country, and some others:Schools - laboratories and workshops Offices both large and small Hospitals – wards and surgical/treatment areas Retail premises, although some will not have ring circuits because of additional dangers and costs. Public buildingsAs well as Domestic At this point I would like to make it clear that I am not against ring circuits, there is aplace for them in modern installations provided they are properly designed inaccordance with BS 7671, carefully installed and tested as detailed in IEE Guidancenotes 3 or the On-Site Guide. If all three were properly applied some of the disadvantages would disappear.

Main Issues.
Safety is the main issue and safety being important becomes one of the main disadvantages. Ring circuits are misused and abused. They are installed without proper consideration as to their purpose and loading, additional points are frequently added as spurs without considering the existing layout of the circuit.They are used for heating circuits and IT circuits again, without considering the load or the need for secure protective conductor connections or reinforced cpcs.The ring circuits cost more to install than two radial circuits. Regulations – 433-02-04BS 7671. There are only four regulations that state requirements for ring circuits.The critical regulation is 433-02-04 which is probably largely ignored because it isoften impractical to apply. This regulation requires the load to be distributed aroundthe circuit so that the current in any part of the ring does not exceed the installedrating of the cable. This means that in a circuit intended to supply a washingmachine, tumble dryer and a dishwasher the points need to be wired so that the loadcurrent in both legs of the ring is shared as equally as possible. More often than not if you look around a kitchen you will find the washingmachine, dryer and dishwasher grouped around the sink, for obvious reasons. And if the sink does not happen to be more or less in the centre of the ring, one leg will carry more current than the other.

Disadvantage:
Not easy to achieve. Regulation 543-02-09Regulation 543-02-09. This regulation requires the protective conductor of a ring circuit to be wired in the form of a ring, unless it is formed by metal covering or ametal enclosure. Most people ignore the metal covering part and run separate cpcs for each circuit. Hence metal trunkings become half filled with green and yellow cables that are unlikely to ever see an amp in their whole existence. Disadvantage: Waste of cable and labour.Safety Many rings are wired incorrectly particularly by DIY persons. Sometimes however electricians can get it wrong. I have had electricians say to me “I can’t believe I did that” Even competent people make mistakes at times. Another disadvantage.A lack of understanding of the system is another problem. Unless a ring circuit is wired correctly with spurs restricted to 1 double point per spur,there is an increased fire risk due to overheating of cables and connections.If there are breaks in the conductors or loose connections in terminals there are both fire and shock risks.Testing The safety of a ring circuit relies on proper testing. It is a vital part of the installation process. If the correct testing method is not fully applied defects with the circuit are unlikely to be identified and corrected. This applies to both initial testing as well as periodic inspection and testing.Testing is however a time consuming and expensive operation, hence it is very often not done fully as prescribed in GN 3.History IEE Wiring Regulations - 13th Edition 1955 Regulation 505A test shall be made to verify the continuity of all conductors of every ring circuit installed in accordance with Regulation 114 (b)IEE Wiring Regulations - 14th Edition 1966 Regulation D 10A test shall be made to verify the continuity of all conductors (including the earth-continuity conductor) of every ring circuit.No test methods givenIEE Wiring Regulations – 15th Edition 1981 Regulation 613-2A test shall be made to verify the continuity of all conductors (including the protectiveconductor) of every ring final circuit. See Appendix 15.Appendix 15 showed a very detailed test method.WHY?There must have been a reason to introduce a specific test method in Appendix 15.Could it have been that the industry and consumers were having safety problems? It is clear to me that in the 25 – 30 years following the introduction of the ring circuit there must have been safety problems that were referred to the IEE for resolution andbecame the driver for the test we have today. I am sure that it could not have been simply 'a good idea at the time’ IEE Wiring Regulations – 16th Edition 1991 Regulation 713-03A test shall be made to verify the continuity of all conductors (including the protectiveconductor) of every ring final circuit.The test method was transferred from Appendix 15 to Guidance Notes 3.Test Methods The method introduced into the 15th edition called for a resistance measurement to be made at every outlet point first between phase and neutral and then between phase and cpc, with the conductors joined together at the distribution board. The text said that the resistance at the centre point of the ring would be equal to the sum of the phaseloop resistance and the neutral or cpc loop resistance, divided by four.This sent everybody running around like headless chickens looking for the mid-points of ring circuits. Consultants were marking the mid-points on drawings or instructing contractors to label the socket at the mid-point, or marking the mid-point on the ‘as installed’ drawings.What a lot of nonsense.If the text had said that the highest value of resistance measured between phase and neutral, or cpc, with the conductors joined at the distribution board, should be a quarter of the sum of the conductor resistances added together, and all other points would be of lesser value, it would have saved the industry a great deal of unnecessary work time and cost. Happily this method was changed for the 16th edition.The 16th Edition Method.The recommended and only proven method of testing involves breaking the ring,separating the conductors at either the distribution board or at a point, doing the tests and re-assembling the circuit after completing the tests. How can one be sure that the ring is complete after reassembly? Still a funny way of doing things! Is this a disadvantage? In many instances, probably most, ring circuits are not properly tested.Most people testing will test the ring ‘end to end’, many cannot be bothered to do the‘interconnected conductors’ test. Electricians freely admit this because testing eachpoint twice takes too long.None of the test results schedules that I have seen provide for the ‘interconnectedconductors’ test value to be recorded. This is an important record that demonstrates:a) the test has been done and b) the circuit is correctly wired.If suitable provision were made in the schedules of tests results there is a chance that the testing would be done properly.

Typical Faults Found

The most dangerous fault:
Cross connections between two ring circuits or a ring and a radial so that the over-current and fault current protection is compromised becoming as much as 60 or 64 amps, disconnection times are completely blown and circuit isolation relies on 2 devices rather than a single device. Interconnections occur usually in distribution boards but can easily occur when ring circuits cables are installed in trunkings.
In one hospital, sockets mounted in dado trunking were intended to be connected alternatively to essential and non-essential supplies distribution boards. The circuit cables were inter-connected between the two boards. Would have had an interesting result if the circuits had been connected to different phases.
Other Faults
Incomplete ring on one or all circuit conductors – broken loops Part of a ring missing, a link cable having been left out, resulting in two 2.5mm2
cables being protected by a single 32 A protective device
Loose Connections due to conductors crammed into back boxes that are too small, especially for spurs, one cable not secured and overcrowded distribution boards.
Too many spurs on a ring, and spurs on spurs - risk of over-heating
Spur cables too long. A ‘ring’ wired as a figure of eight, risk of overloading 1 leg of the ring
Break or loose connections in the live conductors, 3 conductors in one terminal, one loose. Overheating likely to cause a hot spot at a termination that may eventually burn out or cause a fire.
Break or bad connection in the cpc due to loose screws or over zealous tightening, thus increasing Zs of the circuit so that the limiting value is
exceeded and the 0.4 second disconnection time is not achieved.
Incorrect polarity. All these could cause danger and are therefore serious disadvantages. They would be eliminated by applying the correct testing methods.
Testing ring circuits can take 5 or 6 times longer than testing radial circuits, and if any of the above defects are present fault finding can take a considerable time and become very expensive. Fault finding on radial circuits is relatively simple and quick.
Big disadvantage to the installer. Who pays in the long run?
Disadvantages galore, can’t happen with radials Installation
Consider the disadvantages with circuit wiring:
A 32A ring circuit serving 100m2 uses more cable and therefore takes longer to install
than 1 x 32 A radial circuits serving 100m2
A 32A ring circuit serving 100m2 uses more cable and therefore takes longer to install
than 2 x 20A radial circuits each serving 50m2 the latter having a higher loading
capacity of 40A.
Ring circuits wired with 3 single core 2.5 mm2 cables drawn into a straight run of
conduit or trunking take much longer to install than radial circuits wired with 3 single
core 4.0 mm2 cables.
Each of these situations use less of the worlds resources of copper.
To my mind, in offices, workshops, classrooms and laboratories the only justification
for installing a ring circuit is where a single circuit is run completely around the room.
If it is necessary to install all 6 conductors in a single run of conduit or trunking then 2
radial circuits are much more practical and cost effective.
I have discussed this with many engineers who all agree with this philosophy. I know
that some engineers will not consider using ring circuits in commercial installations.
Additional points. Domestic and commercial consumers have a multitude of low-current
appliances. New installations need many sockets and flexibility is needed to
allow furniture to be moved around and for future alterations and additions.
Extending or breaking into a ring circuit is not a straight forward exercise.
Many domestic ring circuits have been modified incorrectly by DIY persons
and are no longer a ring and are probably unsafe.
More often than not, particularly in domestic premises, additional points are installed
as spurs from the ring or spurs from spurs, with total disregard for the existing load
and usage. This can, depending on the load, change the balance of the circuit.
I am sure that nobody ever tests the ring continuity and layout prior to installing an
additional point. I am equally sure that very few people install an additional point by
diverting the ring cables to include it in the ring. Furthermore I am certain that very
few people, especially DIY, ever apply the ring test after installing the additional
point.
Unless thorough testing is carried out on a new or particularly a modified ring
circuit, wiring faults may go undetected and invalidate the basic safety
principles of the system.
Another potential danger and disadvantage.
Training
It has been said many times that if electricians are trained properly the problems
would not exist. I do not disagree with that. An apprentice who is brought up with the
system should understand the correct installation methods, however testing is a
different issue. I have found that some electricians, who may be exceedingly good
tradesmen, have great difficulty in grasping the test method and the benefits of doing
the test, and are likely to give up. Others swallow it whole and become very
competent testers.
A big disadvantage for some.
Other Options: Radial and Tree Circuits
There are good reasons for considering the use of other types of circuits
IEE Guidance Notes show radial circuits in the conventional circuit arrangements.
• 32 A ring – 7 kW – 100 m2
• 32 A radial – 7 kW – 100 m2
• 20 A radial – 4.5 kW – 50 m2
In my view
• 2 x 20A radials better than 1 x 32A ring
A 20 A circuit to serve 50 m2 floor area and a 32 amp circuit, 100 m2. These are
based on the maximum anticipated load in these areas not exceeding 5 kW or 7 kW
respectively.
The limiting factor in such areas is the cable length - voltage drop and the earth loop
impedance of the circuit. Voltage drop is unlikely to be a problem neither will earth
loop impedance because in the near future all such circuits will require RCD
protection. The limiting factor need only be the maximum anticipated load that would
be used in the area. It is now recommended that kitchens are treated as a separate entity and have at
least one ring circuit. 2 x 20 A radial circuits in a kitchen will use less cable than a ring circuit and
provide greater capacity as long as care is taken to ensure that fixed loads such
as washing machines, driers etc are not all on one circuit.
Tree Circuits
A tree circuit is simply a radial circuit with branches. A 20 A tree circuit wired with
2.5 mm2 cables would be far more versatile than a straight radial circuit and probably
far more practical. Points could be placed economically wherever they may be used,
the limitation would still be the maximum load likely to be used in the area, not the
number of sockets.
Controls Ring circuits do not readily facilitate separate control of groups of socket
outlets. Radial and Tree circuits do.
This added bonus gives an opportunity to control sections of the circuit separately
with switches and timers.
In Commercial buildings by Building management systems
In domestic buildings – Smart Homes – Home Bus Systems, automatic and telephone
control.
Applications
Typically a standard 3 bedroom domestic property could be adequately served by
2 x 20 A 2.5 mm2 radial or tree circuits, and
1 x 32 A 4.0 mm2 radial or tree circuit in the kitchen.

 

[mainline]

 

[pc1966]

Found a bit of a write up.

That is mostly rubbish I'm afraid.

On-Site Guide. If all three were properly applied some of the disadvantages would disappear.

That applies to EVERY DAMN CIRCUIT.

In one hospital, sockets mounted in dado trunking were intended to be connected alternatively to essential and non-essential supplies distribution boards. The circuit cables were inter-connected between the two boards. Would have had an interesting result if the circuits had been connected to different phases.

Again that is simple incompetence and shows a complete lack of any form of proper testing.

Break or bad connection in the cpc due to loose screws or over zealous tightening, thus increasing Zs of the circuit so that the limiting value is
exceeded and the 0.4 second disconnection time is not achieved.
Incorrect polarity. All these could cause danger and are therefore serious disadvantages. They would be eliminated by applying the correct testing methods.

Exactly the same for a radial. In fact on the CPC front worse.

Testing ring circuits can take 5 or 6 times longer than testing radial circuits, and if any of the above defects are present

Only because you are testing more than R1+R2 for a radial.

Much of our labour comes from agencies and you get what you are sent. In London
you hardly ever hear English spoken on construction sites. Electricians trained in EU

Is that you Farage?

countries other than Ireland will not have heard of ring circuits. They may be very
good competent tradesmen in their own countries but never-the-less are not competent
to install socket circuits in this country.

Again, this is people who are not competent to do the job. If you do not know and understand UK wiring regs and practice you have absolutely no job doing it. Same for UK tradespeople working in USA not knowing the NEC, or in EU, etc.

Europeans do not understand ring circuits. This also applies to Australians, New
Zealanders and South Africans many of whom come to this country to make a

Of course not because they don't use them. Why, because they do not have fused plugs. That is fundamental to the use of 32A supply for end appliances in the UK. It is why we can have a socket off a 40-50A cooker supply, etc.

The limiting factor in such areas is the cable length - voltage drop and the earth loop
impedance of the circuit. Voltage drop is unlikely to be a problem neither will earth
loop impedance because in the near future all such circuits will require RCD

That is written as if VD will be solved by the use of RCDs, either incompetence on the behalf of the writer, or weasel words at best. just compare cable length limits of RFC with radial of same cable.

Controls Ring circuits do not readily facilitate separate control of groups of socket
outlets. Radial and Tree circuits do.

How often do you need to control a group of sockets?

 

[westward10]

Did you actually read read it.

 

[littlespark]

Did you actually read read it.

I couldn’t be arsed arsed

 

[7029 dave]

I couldn’t be arsed arsed

Same same

 

[nicebutdim]

I couldn’t be arsed arsed

I tried, and God knows I like information, but found it tough going.

From what I did read, the main issues were a result of poor workmanship or circuit design.

 

[Pretty Mouth]

It could happen, though, therefore Afdds may not detect an arc fault on a RFC.

A low-level serial arc fault (below the threshold needed to operate the AFDD) can occur in a radial circuit too. So 'AFDDs may not detect an arc fault in a radial circuit' is also true.

As I understand it:
AFDDs should operate where there is arcing at dangerous levels, whether the circuit is a ring or radial. They shouldn't operate where there is an absence of arcing at dangerous levels. The nature of ring finals means that arcing at dangerous levels is less likely. This doesn't mean that AFDDs are any less effective when installed on a ring final.

(whether or not AFDDs work as intended is another discussion)

 

[mainline]

That is mostly rubbish I'm afraid.

That applies to EVERY DAMN CIRCUIT.


Again that is simple incompetence and shows a complete lack of any form of proper testing.

Exactly the same for a radial. In fact on the CPC front worse.

Only because you are testing more than R1+R2 for a radial.

Is that you Farage?

Again, this is people who are not competent to do the job. If you do not know and understand UK wiring regs and practice you have absolutely no job doing it. Same for UK tradespeople working in USA not knowing the NEC, or in EU, etc.

Of course not because they don't use them. Why, because they do not have fused plugs. That is fundamental to the use of 32A supply for end appliances in the UK. It is why we can have a socket off a 40-50A cooker supply, etc.

That is written as if VD will be solved by the use of RCDs, either incompetence on the behalf of the writer, or weasel words at best. just compare cable length limits of RFC with radial of same cable.

How often do you need to control a group of sockets?

Any valid points to comment on

 

[timhoward]

Any valid points to comment on

In general by the time you’ve run a 3rd radial
into a kitchen the “it uses more cable” argument gets a bit weaker.
The “other faults” section of that post seems to contain a list where most of the issues could occur on radial circuits too, and then ends with a “can’t happen with radials”.

Let’s face it, nothing is foolproof for a sufficiently talented fool. Most installers are either competent to install rings and radials or shouldn’t be installing either.

I couldn’t do a CU change last week because smoke alarm wiring managed to interconnect no less than 5 circuits in a most creative way and unraveling it wasted an entire day of my time. Things like live from light switch, N from nearest socket.
In houses like that I appreciate ring circuits all the more as I can prove what the hapless former occupant didn’t get around to wrecking.

 

[Lucien Nunes]

Sorry, some of that stuff in post 53 is nonsense or applies just as much to radials as to rings. I can't be bothered to unpick it for critique.

 

[pc1966]

Any valid points to comment on

Comments were already made. I started another thread on design and practice.

 

[narkedatninety]

Yes I still call it a ring main, is that what is now called a ring final?

You'll find a ring final circuit in a house. You'll find a ring main circuit at e.g a substation on a housing estate.

 

[Mike Johnson]

EU standards are: no more than twelve sockets (outlets) on a 20amp 2.5mm cable, and no more than eight sockets (outlets) on a 16map 1.5mm circuit, the standards have recently been updated to include a double socket is regarded as two outlets, and yes most EU CU's are much bigger especially as most white goods are to be wired separately.

 

[rewireIT]

I did the 16th and it was a Ring Final back then but nearly everyone called it a Ring Main , heck most people still call it a Ring Main

It really is about time the RFC / Ring Main was ditched as they simply aren't needed in this day and age

I've thrown one in today for a run of 3 sockets in a school that are going to have a TV plugged in and occasional hoover.

 

[mainline]

EU standards are: no more than twelve sockets (outlets) on a 20amp 2.5mm cable, and no more than eight sockets (outlets) on a 16map 1.5mm circuit, the standards have recently been updated to include a double socket is regarded as two outlets, and yes most EU CU's are much bigger especially as most white goods are to be wired separately.

I doubt the op would find that statement very useful.

 

[mainline]

I never understood people that say 'Near Miss'
Like when planes get to close and they report it as a 'Near Miss'

If I was looking up and saw 2 planes that was extremely close together. I would tell everybody afterwards that the 2 planes nearly hit each other, not that they nearly missed each other.

Bit off topic, but as long as you know what it means, doesn't really matter about anything else!

But you wouldn’t say when trying to shoot someone that that was a near hit.

 

[Mike Johnson]

I doubt the op would find that statement very useful.

The discussion went to the number of sockets on a radial so thought it would add to the knowledge of those that don't know the standards in the EU.

 

[mainline]

We seem to have a knack in this country of having limited space for consumer units, and the luxury of 3 RCBOs for a kitchen may not be a given.
Of late, for living rooms and bedrooms I’ve been doing radials, and kitchens usually an rfc.
I don’t mind testing rings - there is something nice about confirming the connections are all good on the points that will regularly see the most current draw.

Bear in mind that the use of rcbos save at least 4 ways in a split load board.

 

[pc1966]

The discussion went to the number of sockets on a radial so thought it would add to the knowledge of those that don't know the standards in the EU.

I guess it helps with the greater debate around UK plugs & sockets: that the fused nature allows higher feed circuits (20A or 32A common, of course maybe 45A cooker) and in turn a much higher diversity of load sharing, compared to "rest of world" practice.

 

[rewireIT]

I guess it helps with the greater debate around UK plugs & sockets: that the fused nature allows higher feed circuits (20A or 32A common, of course maybe 45A cooker) and in turn a much higher diversity of load sharing, compared to "rest of world" practice.

I just think the rest of the world proves there's no need for them.

What are people plugging in in reality? Even in a kitchen how often are you gonna have a blender a toaster a kettle a water distiller or whatever all running simultaneously? And for how long? 20a 2.5mm radials do the job perfectly well for the rest of the house.

Even having a 20a radial in a living room, 5 sockets, TV, maybe DVD player (who even still has those?) couple of laptops, a phone, and maybe a lamp plugged in, what's the draw?

Unless electric heating's being plugged into multiple sockets on the same radial there's zero need for rings. Again, Europe/RoW proves it.

 

[pc1966]

I just think the rest of the world proves there's no need for them.

You might want to read over this before wading in:

Ring Final Circuit (RFC) versus Radial. Yes, again.

This is a topic that comes up a lot and seems to attract near-religious levels of fever in how folks argue over the choice of circuit for UK sockets. However, often the arguments are ill-informed or they veer off in to pointless corners, or sometimes get personal. This is my attempt to put a lot...

www.electriciansforums.net

 

[rewireIT]

I don't know why my opinion offends you but ive read all the arguments for ring finals and Europe proves them straw clutchy at best.

I hold the same opinion as John Ward, I'm sure he's credentialed enough to hold the opinion that rings are stupid and pointless in most situations.

You might want to read over this before wading in:

Ring Final Circuit (RFC) versus Radial. Yes, again.

This is a topic that comes up a lot and seems to attract near-religious levels of fever in how folks argue over the choice of circuit for UK sockets. However, often the arguments are ill-informed or they veer off in to pointless corners, or sometimes get personal. This is my attempt to put a lot...

www.electriciansforums.net

 

[pc1966]

I don't know why my opinion offends you but ive read all the arguments for ring finals and Europe proves them straw clutchy at best.

If I was to say "Driving on the left is stupid and pointless, Europe proves that" would you consider it a sound argument?

 

[davesparks]

I just think the rest of the world proves there's no need for them.

I agree there is no 'need' for them, in as far as agreeing that it is perfectly possible to have a functioning electrical installation without ring final circuits.

I don't agree with the idea that they should be banned, removed from the regulations or any such thing.

The ring final is a useful circuit which a skilled electrician or designer can use in an installation in combination with other circuits to achieve the best outcome.

If you personally don't want to install ring circuits for whatever reason then that's fine, but please let the rest of us get on with installing the types of circuit we deem best suited to a particular installation.

 

[rewireIT]

If I was to say "Driving on the left is stupid and pointless, Europe proves that" would you consider it a sound argument?

No because that is a stupid argument.

Europe not having rings despite their rules being made up by dozens of countries of expert bodies proves we don't need rings. End of story.

 

[littlespark]

Anyone else notice the OP hasn’t been back since #4?

There are so many ring v radial discussions on the forum…. Maybe they can be amalgamated?

My own thoughts… which were stated on one of the other threads, is that we, as professionals, chose the best solution for the design… whether that be ring or radial. We just have an extra choice.

The Uk was an isolated island when electricity in homes became commonplace. We went for rings as it was a copper saving measure at the time, and the current ways have evolved from that.

The rest of Europe is so close together that commonalities between neighbouring countries naturally occurred… then one day a lot of them decided to standardise amongst themselves….. and either they didn’t include the UK in discussions, or we refused.

It’s not “wrong” or “right”…. It’s just different.

A final word….. can we keep the discussions civil?
Just make like a refrigerator and chill….

 

[timhoward]

Bear in mind that the use of rcbos save at least 4 ways in a split load board.

Sure, what I actually had in mind was if there was only a 4 way rewireable Wylex there in the first place the space for a replacement can be limited (if of course the replacement occupies the same spot)

Even in a kitchen how often are you gonna have a blender a toaster a kettle a water distiller or whatever all running simultaneously? And for how long?

In a small house where the kitchen is the utility room, you might have a dishwasher, washing machine and tumble drier all on together for over an hour. Ironing the previous load while the next one is washing and drying. A cuppa, kippers on toast. It's not a given that a 20A circuit won't get a little warm!
I don't disagree that other designs work, and multiple radials is certainly possible, but it is a convenient and resilient circuit for variable loads.

Aside from their ability to 'just get on with' periods of heavy use, they are probably the circuit that it is easiest to prove is in an excellent condition and discover modifications via the extensive tests that are possible.

To clarify, I don't think anyone is saying that we can't possibly do without them. It's about whether there are benefits to choosing to use them.

 

[rewireIT]

Sure, what I actually had in mind was if there was only a 4 way rewireable Wylex there in the first place the space for a replacement can be limited (if of course the replacement occupies the same spot)


In a small house where the kitchen is the utility room, you might have a dishwasher, washing machine and tumble drier all on together for over an hour. Ironing the previous load while the next one is washing and drying. A cuppa, kippers on toast. It's not a given that a 20A circuit won't get a little warm!
I don't disagree that other designs work, and multiple radials is certainly possible, but it is a convenient and resilient circuit for variable loads.

Aside from their ability to 'just get on with' periods of heavy use, they are probably the circuit that it is easiest to prove is in an excellent condition and discover modifications via the extensive tests that are possible.

To clarify, I don't think anyone is saying that we can't possibly do without them. It's about whether there are benefits to choosing to use them.

I much prefer how they do it in France, their electrics are much nicer. Their CU's are nicer too, good old double storey jobby.

 

[davesparks]

No because that is a stupid argument.

Europe not having rings despite their rules being made up by dozens of countries of expert bodies proves we don't need rings. End of story.

And our rules were also made by experts, experts who created what is widely regarded as the best designed and safest general use plug and socket system.

The ring circuit was developed due to a particular set of circumstances in this country and if they had occurred in other countries they would likely have adopted the ring circuit too.

 

[rewireIT]

And our rules were also made by experts, experts who created what is widely regarded as the best designed and safest general use plug and socket system.

By those in Britain.

 

[timhoward]

I much prefer how they do it in France, their electrics are much nicer. Their CU's are nicer too, good old double storey jobby.

I do like French CU's. Let's agree on that!

 

[rewireIT]

I do like French CU's. Let's agree on that!

They're mint. Nice little plastic stop screws that turn for a snug fit, wago'd earth bars, double pole breakers, main switch at origin of supply, and miles more circuits to put in meaning more money.

What's not to love.

 

[littlespark]

I do like French CU's. Let's agree on that!

I like their toast….. and their onion soup.

 

[nicebutdim]

Their version of electrocution is to die for.

 

[davesparks]

By those in Britain.

Not just in Britain, as far as I know they are regarded that way in many places.

Are you aware of a better general use system?

 

[mainline]

Sure, what I actually had in mind was if there was only a 4 way rewireable Wylex there in the first place the space for a replacement can be limited (if of course the replacement occupies the same spot)

I wouldn't be adding more circuits to a re wireable Cu.

In a small house where the kitchen is the utility room, you might have a dishwasher, washing machine and tumble drier all on together for over an hour. Ironing the previous load while the next one is washing and drying. A cuppa, kippers on toast. It's not a given that a 20A circuit won't get a little warm!

Having all those appliances on one circuit is wrong anyway, whether it be a ring or radial.

I don't disagree that other designs work, and multiple radials is certainly possible

Possible ? Radials are the most common circuit in use and installed.

it is a convenient and resilient circuit for variable loads.

So is a radial

Aside from their ability to 'just get on with' periods of heavy use, they are probably the circuit that it is easiest to prove is in an excellent condition and discover modifications via the extensive tests that are possible.

Prove is a bit of a strong word ?
You can't prove any circuit is in excellent condition just using an MFT.

To clarify, I don't think anyone is saying that we can't possibly do without them. It's about whether there are benefits to choosing to use them.

There are benefits to using a Ring final, there are also benefits using a horse and cart compared to a van.

 

[davesparks]

I much prefer how they do it in France, their electrics are much nicer. Their CU's are nicer too, good old double storey jobby.

In what way are the electrics nicer?

And what makes their CUs so much better?

 

[nicebutdim]

In what way are the electrics nicer?

And what makes their CUs so much better?

Plastic quarter turn screws that become brittle and break, use of screwdriver reduced by 1/3, DP breakers that take up twice as much space and not much else, other than more money to be made if longer jobs are deemed better than getting finished and moving on to the next.

Apparently.

 

[davesparks]

Plastic quarter turn screws that become brittle and break,

Like we used to have in plastic CUs, the ones that end up all chewed up and one side never catches properly?

 

[nicebutdim]

Like we used to have in plastic CUs, the ones that end up all chewed up and one side never catches properly?

The very same.

Came across a surprisingly reasonable condition Hager example yesterday.

 

[7029 dave]

I like their toast….. and their onion soup.

They bake their bread in such a naughty shape

 

[rewireIT]

In what way are the electrics nicer?

And what makes their CUs so much better?

More room in the CU to work, wago'd earth bar, double pole breakers, no dreadful flat profile cable, more appliances on separate circuits giving better selectivity, main switch provided on incoming head as standard, pre-sleeved earth wires, pre-wired conduit, better selection of fittings (especially for lights), better light switch rocker size, no ring final's, better looking plugs, variable supply (bringing it down brings standing charge down), colour coded cable so you can see on sight what size it is....

Just obviously better than the horror show here in the UK.

Wait until you see how they slate roofs. Although i'm sure someone will try to say pinning with nails like we do is best.

 

[mainline]

More room in the CU to work, wago'd earth bar, double pole breakers, no dreadful flat profile cable, more appliances on separate circuits giving better selectivity, main switch provided on incoming head as standard, pre-sleeved earth wires, pre-wired conduit, better selection of fittings (especially for lights), better light switch rocker size, no ring final's, better looking plugs, variable supply (bringing it down brings standing charge down), colour coded cable so you can see on sight what size it is....

Just obviously better than the horror show here in the UK.

Wait until you see how they slate roofs. Although i'm sure someone will try to say pinning with nails like we do is best.

Yeah but what makes them nicer lol.

 

[littlespark]

no dreadful flat profile cable

So good old 6242Y doesn't float your boat, either, huh?

 

[rewireIT]

So good old 6242Y doesn't float your boat, either, huh?

No it's awful.

 

[Pretty Mouth]

Wait until you see how they slate roofs. Although i'm sure someone will try to say pinning with nails like we do is best.

I'm curious now. Slate slate or tiles slate?

 

[davesparks]

More room in the CU to work,

As long as you choose the right CU then there's not much issue with ours.

wago'd earth bar,

Interesting, that sounds like a good idea, do you have an example of this?

double pole breakers,

Yes because they require them for safety on their single phase circuits, our single phase supplies/circuits are safe with DP MCB's. DP MCB's and DBs are available in the UK when they are required.

no dreadful flat profile cable,

Whats wrong with flat profile cable?

more appliances on separate circuits giving better selectivity,

I'm not sure how this affects selectivity?

main switch provided on incoming head as standard,

Interesting, I'm aware of the need for an RCD/RCBO at the supply head due to their common earthing systems and restricted current supplies.
Supply isolators are becoming common here for small supplies and I agree that it's is a good thing that we should have been doing years ago.

pre-sleeved earth wires,

Why does that matter?

pre-wired conduit

Whats that look like? Doesn't that defeat the object of having conduit in the first place?
Surely a pre-wired conduit is just a cable?

, better selection of fittings (especially for lights),

OK, but that's personal choice and I can't say I've ever had an issue with the available selection of light fittings in this country.
Is there a particular type of light fitting you feel is missing from this country?

better light switch rocker size

If you want bigger switch rockers you can get them in this country.

This is really starting to sound like you are clutching at straws.

, no ring final's,

Why is that better? It's just a different way of doing things.

better looking plugs,

Really? That's such a subjective thing and really not important is it?
Why does the look of the plug matter?

variable supply (bringing it down brings standing charge down),

Does it, or rather, would it?
I doubt standing charges would go down if you introduced that as the cost of altering so many supllies would be phenomenal.

colour coded cable so you can see on sight what size it is....

I hadn't realised that idea had spread to mainland Europe, I thought it was only in the USA that domestic electricians needed colour coded cables to be able to identify their size!

Do you have any examples? Ive not studied electrical installations in mainland Europe but from what I have seen I thought most of their cable was plain white.

Just obviously better than the horror show here in the UK.

I really don't see how you can describe UK electrical installations as a horror show.