Discuss 'Leapfrog' wiring of a ring in a long workshop. What do you think? in the Electrical Forum 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

Mark42

-
Esteemed
Patron
Reaction score
287
I'm insulating, and replacing the wiring, in one of my own (metal, agricultural-type) workshops - fitting 13A/16A sockets on each of the horizontal 'top hat' wall rails, 20m long, with each 4m bay having 4-5 sockets.

This will be done in stages over the next year: the insulation and plasterboard takes a long time, and I'll completely finish/paint each bay before moving on to the next, so as to have an always-working installation.

The sockets on each wall will be wired as RFCs in 2.5mm T&E inside the top hat rail, closed with Celotex and plasterboard. It provides an excellent ready-made concealed trunking system.

I'd normally wire a ring socket-to-next-socket and so on, then have one often longer run back to the board from the end.

But this time, to make it easy to stop and start work yet still have a functioning ring (by adding a single short link at the end), I'll 'leapfrog' the ring wiring to every second socket.

I have no idea if this is normal practice! Thinking about it, it does feel better-designed anyway, as nearly every socket-to-socket cable run will be exactly the same length.

Have I missed anything?
[automerge]1591826810[/automerge]
Too many words! This is what I mean:'Leapfrog' wiring of a ring in a long workshop. What do you think? IMG_2639.JPG - EletriciansForums.net
Obviously this question only applies to an 'industrial' application where there are loads of sockets in one long, obvious, visible length.
 
Last edited:
leapfrogging as in pic 3 is the best way. alternatively, if you have enough ways in the DBseparate radials in 4mm for each bay, or 1 radial to serve 2 bays.
 
I was going to ask in a situation like this does a Ring actually have any benefits over a Radial ?
Compared to a 32A 4mm radial, if both legs following the same route benefits of a ring might be:

slightly longer circuit length in terms of voltage drop,
easier to terminate 2.5mm conductors
benefit of high integrity earthing if needed

So not much really. IMO a circuit like this is crying out to be installed as a radial
 
I'm insulating, and replacing the wiring, in one of my own (metal, agricultural-type) workshops - fitting 13A/16A sockets on each of the horizontal 'top hat' wall rails, 20m long, with each 4m bay having 4-5 sockets.

This will be done in stages over the next year: the insulation and plasterboard takes a long time, and I'll completely finish/paint each bay before moving on to the next, so as to have an always-working installation.

The sockets on each wall will be wired as RFCs in 2.5mm T&E inside the top hat rail, closed with Celotex and plasterboard. It provides an excellent ready-made concealed trunking system.

I'd normally wire a ring socket-to-next-socket and so on, then have one often longer run back to the board from the end.

But this time, to make it easy to stop and start work yet still have a functioning ring (by adding a single short link at the end), I'll 'leapfrog' the ring wiring to every second socket.

I have no idea if this is normal practice! Thinking about it, it does feel better-designed anyway, as nearly every socket-to-socket cable run will be exactly the same length.

Have I missed anything?
[automerge]1591826810[/automerge]
Too many words! This is what I mean:View attachment 58761
Obviously this question only applies to an 'industrial' application where there are loads of sockets in one long, obvious, visible length.

The drawing you have labelled as a 'standard ring' is incorrect an any situation, the sockets, and therefore the loads, should be evenly distributed around the circuit.

The third picture, labelled as 'leapfrog' is correct and provides the most even distribution of the sockets around the ring.
 
It might be worth documenting somewhere how you are going to run the cables... even numbering the back of the boxes. Future fault finding could be confusing if you do option 3, and future spark expects option 1.

Also, can you answer the question in #3.... the 16A sockets?
 
Maybe it's just me, but the 3rd diagram is not leap-frog at all...its just wiggly wiring of many more sockets in a ring, adding more sockets to what was previously a single long run , without sockets, back to the db
 
I'm insulating, and replacing the wiring, in one of my own (metal, agricultural-type) workshops - fitting 13A/16A sockets on each of the horizontal 'top hat' wall rails, 20m long, with each 4m bay having 4-5 sockets.

This will be done in stages over the next year: the insulation and plasterboard takes a long time, and I'll completely finish/paint each bay before moving on to the next, so as to have an always-working installation.

The sockets on each wall will be wired as RFCs in 2.5mm T&E inside the top hat rail, closed with Celotex and plasterboard. It provides an excellent ready-made concealed trunking system.

I'd normally wire a ring socket-to-next-socket and so on, then have one often longer run back to the board from the end.

But this time, to make it easy to stop and start work yet still have a functioning ring (by adding a single short link at the end), I'll 'leapfrog' the ring wiring to every second socket.

I have no idea if this is normal practice! Thinking about it, it does feel better-designed anyway, as nearly every socket-to-socket cable run will be exactly the same length.

Have I missed anything?
[automerge]1591826810[/automerge]
Too many words! This is what I mean:View attachment 58761
Obviously this question only applies to an 'industrial' application where there are loads of sockets in one long, obvious, visible length.
If the containment is conduit or dedicated trunking then no 3 is the bet way, in conduit it can be done with a single run, DB to final socket location, simple really, did it this way on many occasions, also when installed using 4 core MICC as an example, sadly not taught on quick fit electrician courses, so you can understand the confusion.
 
In a workshop situation I would be concerned about the loading possible with five individual bays with up to five sockets in each being used at the same time, what is going to be powered in each bay?
 
In a workshop situation I would be concerned about the loading possible with five individual bays with up to five sockets in each being used at the same time, what is going to be powered in each bay?
that's why i suggested 3 -5 separate radials in 4mm.
 
Maybe it's just me, but the 3rd diagram is not leap-frog at all...its just wiggly wiring of many more sockets in a ring, adding more sockets to what was previously a single long run , without sockets, back to the db
An easy way to imagine it is this, where you have a long wall with sockets all in one row along that wall and the db is at one end of the wall then there will be a short leg from the db to the closest socket then a long leg to the furthest socket (not ideal). To avoid this each leg serves every other socket until they finally meet at the end socket which then becomes the middle of the ring and thus evens out the loads across the circuit.
Does that make sense?
As mentioned on this thread though, radials might be a more desirable design. To avoid confusion for anyone following up to fault find in the future.
 
There should be no confusion - fig. 3 is a standard circuit installed in the recommended manner. Any electrician who finds that confusing is in the wrong job. As mentioned in multple posts above, installing all sockets in one leg with a long return leg is bad practice as the centre of an evenly-distributed load is only 1/4 of the way along the total length of cable, not 1/2 way.

We do not know the expected load so cannot comment on how many radials etc might be preferable. If it's to power assorted bench lamps, phone chargers and the occasional power tool, multiple 4mm² radials would be rather a waste of effort. If there are a few heavy loads then a ring may not be the best, but the fact that there are 13A and 16A sockets makes me think the OP has already thought about the distinction between general and tool / equipment loads and designed accordingly.
 
certainly, option 3 provides even spacing around the ring, but it is not leapfrogging...it's just option 2, bunched up
A radial would be prettier...
 
certainly, option 3 provides even spacing around the ring, but it is not leapfrogging...it's just option 2, bunched up
A radial would be prettier...

Look at the difference in length of the outward and return legs of those options. I think the drawing might be deceiving you.

If option 2 sockets were numbered in a clockwise direction, the outward leg of option 3 connects 1,3,5,7 etc, with return leg picking up each socket in between.
 
Compared to a 32A 4mm radial, if both legs following the same route benefits of a ring might be:

slightly longer circuit length in terms of voltage drop,
easier to terminate 2.5mm conductors
benefit of high integrity earthing if needed

So not much really. IMO a circuit like this is crying out to be installed as a radial

Have just thought of another benefit a ring installed in this manner might have over a 32A 4mm radial: a ring would have more flexibility regarding its method of installation.
 

Reply to 'Leapfrog' wiring of a ring in a long workshop. What do you think? in the Electrical Forum 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

Electrical Forum

Welcome to the Electrical Forum at ElectriciansForums.net. The friendliest electrical forum online. General electrical questions and answers can be found in the electrical forum.
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