- Thread starter Scolmore
- Start date
CLICK must be planning / looking at something that would make radials possible without having to use a 50 way D.B
My Son has just bought a 4 bedroom house in the U.S.A, it's got 3 D.B with a total of 58 circuits in them.
All sockets are on radials
My Son has just bought a 4 bedroom house in the U.S.A, it's got 3 D.B with a total of 58 circuits in them.
All sockets are on radials
Last edited:
D
davesparks
The Ring is dead, long live the Radial!
When wiring socket outlets do you:
1. Use ring final circuits
2. Use radial circuits
What a ridiculous, narrow minded question!
You clearly don't have a clue what you are talking about!
Any half decent electrician uses both types of circuit, choosing whichever one best suits the particular installation they are working on.
Just thought it would be interesting to see what is being used most!
[automerge]1598436738[/automerge]
No planning. Just looking at what you all think. There is no wrong answer!
[automerge]1598436851[/automerge]
This is a very valid answer! Just a post to see what the majority say. Interesting to see if people do pick one of the other or whether they'd agree with your statement of it not being an either or question.
Last edited:
So why not ask that question rather than stateJust thought it would be interesting to see what is being used most!
As has already been mentioned both types of circuit have there merits depending on the particular requirements of the customer and the premisesThe Ring is dead, long live the Radial!
Fair enough. Problem with your question is that both are used. It may be a preference or it may be designated.Just thought it would be interesting to see what is being used most!
I've no doubt, though, you'll succeed in getting a fair bit of attention with your 'question'.
......especially if the 'anti ring brigade' catch on.
Last edited:
Both is a perfectly valid answer tooFair enough. Problem with your question is that both are used. It may be a preference or it may be designated.
I've no doubt, though, you'll succeed in getting a fair bit of attention with your 'question'.
Nearly all would say both, then. Only dipsticks wouldn't....Both is a perfectly valid answer too
I think a more searching question would be:
'Apart from selecting ring or radial socket-outlet circuits on their merits for the requirements of a particular installation, do you have a personal preference or dislike for one or the other on the basis of conceptual limitations, suspicions or gut feelings?'
'Apart from selecting ring or radial socket-outlet circuits on their merits for the requirements of a particular installation, do you have a personal preference or dislike for one or the other on the basis of conceptual limitations, suspicions or gut feelings?'
Then most domestic's wouldn't understand what you're tawkin abaat...???? until they get to 'gut feelings'
JOKE LADS!!...........Just quoted for a replacement CU.
Where is option 3 - Lollypop?
It's not in my opinion, a standard circuit as far as BS7671 is concerned at least I don't think so.
Maybe I should have put an “ironic” emoji on my post. I know it’s not a standard circuit
Hindsight us a wonderful invention Mate don't fret over it.
Number of sockets to install is also a factor. 1 point on a ring is a bit pointless....
“Ironic” emoji
“Ironic” emojiWell if you are talking BIG sockets and have to double up conductors for current carrying capacity...
But exactly the point. For a couple of sockets radial is the best plan, for a whole floor's worth (or high-ish power density like a kitchen, or high protective conductor currents like computer room) then the ring rules them all.
What is the big deal? Click-bait? Oh yes, it worked...
What about option 4 - Hedgehog. RFC with loads of spurs?
G
GBDamo
A coronavirus, a 6mm ring with lots of 6mm radials with 2.5 rings on the end.What about option 4 - Hedgehog. RFC with loads of spurs?
Completely noncompliant, unnecessary and impractical but it would look lovely on a drawing.
That's just an RFC with multiple spurs, mothing odd about that methodWhat about option 4 - Hedgehog. RFC with loads of spurs?
If you mustI know Pete
R
radiohead
As has already been stated an 'either or' question is far too simplistic, both rings and radials have their uses.
I think it is worth summarising what I see as some disadvantages of both circuits.
Existing rings...(on EICR's for example) are an absolute pain to verify. Unknown layouts and non-textbook readings mean verifying the possible presence of spurs from spurs, interconnections etc is time consuming and involves much dismantling. Most of us use plug in testing adaptors which often produce odd readings due to contact or switch resistance on ancient outlets, the only certain way is to drop the points and use probes straight onto terminations, disruptive, time consuming and damaging to surface finish. Real time constraints when carrying out EICR's at acceptable cost mean ring circuits are often not properly verified and the inspector has to make judgement calls on whether the circuit is correctly wired. That said I love testing my own rings and calculating whether measured readings are spot on!
As far as radials go there was a long thread on here a while back where an OP stated rings should be outlawed because they are often abused by Kev the kitchen fitter and DIY Dave, his point was radials are much safer.
But unskilled persons being unable to correctly alter a ring is not a reason for banning it, ban Kev and Dave...not the ring!!
That point of view also ignores the potential danger of a radial. One bad or broken connection of the cpc may result in every downstream point working and apparently ok but not having an earth.
I think the safest circuit of all is a radial serving one point from a 16 or 20a OCPD, but the practicalities of that with the number of points modern properties require make it a non starter, not only for the capacity of DB required, but for the sheer quantity of wiring involved.
It is though an interesting phenomenon that many people are completely incapable of altering a ring, and finishing up still with a ring, and not just Kev and Dave. A ring is one of the simplest of all circuits, just a loop of cable which starts and finishes at the same point, and yet it continually seems to generate utter incompetence.
I think it is worth summarising what I see as some disadvantages of both circuits.
Existing rings...(on EICR's for example) are an absolute pain to verify. Unknown layouts and non-textbook readings mean verifying the possible presence of spurs from spurs, interconnections etc is time consuming and involves much dismantling. Most of us use plug in testing adaptors which often produce odd readings due to contact or switch resistance on ancient outlets, the only certain way is to drop the points and use probes straight onto terminations, disruptive, time consuming and damaging to surface finish. Real time constraints when carrying out EICR's at acceptable cost mean ring circuits are often not properly verified and the inspector has to make judgement calls on whether the circuit is correctly wired. That said I love testing my own rings and calculating whether measured readings are spot on!
As far as radials go there was a long thread on here a while back where an OP stated rings should be outlawed because they are often abused by Kev the kitchen fitter and DIY Dave, his point was radials are much safer.
But unskilled persons being unable to correctly alter a ring is not a reason for banning it, ban Kev and Dave...not the ring!!
That point of view also ignores the potential danger of a radial. One bad or broken connection of the cpc may result in every downstream point working and apparently ok but not having an earth.
I think the safest circuit of all is a radial serving one point from a 16 or 20a OCPD, but the practicalities of that with the number of points modern properties require make it a non starter, not only for the capacity of DB required, but for the sheer quantity of wiring involved.
It is though an interesting phenomenon that many people are completely incapable of altering a ring, and finishing up still with a ring, and not just Kev and Dave. A ring is one of the simplest of all circuits, just a loop of cable which starts and finishes at the same point, and yet it continually seems to generate utter incompetence.
D
Dustydazzler
People think rings are bad , I recently watched a video of a guy wiring his house in America and he put lights and sockets on the same circuit using the same sized cable and kept calling it ‘roughing’ in his wiring...
it was blooming rough and at every point he stripped the cores back & twisted the bare copper earths together and shoved them in the back of each box so he had just the L & N to connect later
it was blooming rough and at every point he stripped the cores back & twisted the bare copper earths together and shoved them in the back of each box so he had just the L & N to connect later
and no doubt a proliferation of fire nuts. on another forum, predominantly American, several members praise their silly wire nuts and condemn wagos.
Yeah, I was watching the ideal international sparky championship. Aussie, Canadian, American and a Chinese fella in the final. Someone in the comments section asked where the British entry was. The comments were “Anyone who uses Rings, are not invited” and the like. These foreign morons have no idea of the concept. They probably would have trouble wiring one.
OFFICIAL SPONSORS
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
Advert
Thread starter
- Joined
- What type of forum member are you?
- Manufacturer / Distributor / Supplier / Inventor - etc
Thread Information
Thread Tags
Advert
Thread statistics
Advert
TrueNAS JBOD Storage Server
-
-
Understanding TrueNAS JBOD Servers: A Comprehensive Guide- Started by Dan
- Replies: 8
-
