Using jb's for multi point lighting radial

[haptism]

Since doing a bit of digging am i right in thinking that using jb's to branch off from a radial circuit for a single switch and associated lights is considered "old hat" nowdays. ?? Ive read the 17th ed recommends jb's be of the maintenance free type is they are non accessible, which is all well and good; however ive read somewhere else that in new installations jb's anywhere should be avoided.

I realise that "spider" like radial lighting can cause issues for future testing and fault finding but surely its still a worthy method of installation. (In a domestic, T&E sense).

Ive been away from the trade for a while and thinking of getting back into it, just brushing up on some knowledge before anyone asks. Thanks

 

[7029 dave]

There is no regulation to say you can't use jb on lighting circuits, nearly all council works in domestic will insist on no joints, only 3 plate or feed to switch to switch. IMO the j701 j601 are still being stocked so why not.

 

[haptism]

There is no regulation to say you can't use jb on lighting circuits, nearly all council works in domestic will insist on no joints, only 3 plate or feed to switch to switch. IMO the j701 j601 are still being stocked so why not.

Okay, thanks

 

[amlu]

wagos and wagobox will do the job if you have to. avoid old old style boxes with screwed terminal, they may get loose over time...

 

[malcolmsanford]

I was taught especially in bungalows to wire the lights into a "spider" configuration and apart from perhaps an issue with using more cable why not.

For me I'd rather connect 6-8 T&E's into a nice 6 x 6 adapatble box than the possibilty of 4 T&E's in a small ceiling rose. Also I can't see in these days of cheap labelling machines how it is more difficult to test.

It also is certainly easy for fault finding

 

[haptism]

I was taught especially in bungalows to wire the lights into a "spider" configuration and apart from perhaps an issue with using more cable why not.

For me I'd rather connect 6-8 T&E's into a nice 6 x 6 adapatble box than the possibilty of 4 T&E's in a small ceiling rose. Also I can't see in these days of cheap labelling machines how it is more difficult to test.

It also is certainly easy for fault finding

Dont you mean issues using less cable !

 

[malcolmsanford]

To be honest I would have thought you use more cable. Instead of looping from rose to rose you have to go back to the "spider" each time.

Anyways whatever if you use less cable then another plus

 

[uksparks]

Is the spider method basically having one cable to the light and one to the switch, and then its switched in a JB above the ceiling somewhere?

For me, I would rather take it to the light or the switch, I think its just adding loads of additional joints that not are necessary.

 

[malcolmsanford]

Is the spider method basically having one cable to the light and one to the switch, and then its switched in a JB above the ceiling somewhere?

For me, I would rather take it to the light or the switch, I think its just adding loads of additional joints that not are necessary.

\

The way I was taught was your L-N+E would come out of the MCB into your adaptable box and if you had 6 lights say in the bungalow you fit, well in them days 14 klippons, 6-L 6-N and 2-E on a din rail.

You then looped the supply side of the klippons making 6-L terminals and then 6-N terminals. Then you run your L-N+E to the fitting/rose and then drop your S/L-L from the fitting/rose.

Back in the day before EICRs you would bunch the E's into just 2 klippons, but you could also fit 6 klippons.

It's old fashioned in a way but as I said at my age with my eyes fitting upto 4 T+E into a rose is not fun lol

 

[gnselectricals]

Just wired my father in laws kitchen lights Spider-Man style. Much easier as he wasn't dropping the ceilings. 6g sw so dropped in 3 3 cores to that and then sw lines looped to spots all back to a nice big ip box in attic with din rail wago's. and all labelled nice and tidy

 

[7029 dave]

Is the spider method basically having one cable to the light and one to the switch, and then its switched in a JB above the ceiling somewhere?

For me, I would rather take it to the light or the switch, I think its just adding loads of additional joints that not are necessary.

Well you have not done much occupied rewires then, with minimal disruption to decoration, this method is perfect less floor boards to lift, less cable, less mess.

 

[davesparks]

\

The way I was taught was your L-N+E would come out of the MCB into your adaptable box and if you had 6 lights say in the bungalow you fit, well in them days 14 klippons, 6-L 6-N and 2-E on a din rail.

You then looped the supply side of the klippons making 6-L terminals and then 6-N terminals. Then you run your L-N+E to the fitting/rose and then drop your S/L-L from the fitting/rose.

Back in the day before EICRs you would bunch the E's into just 2 klippons, but you could also fit 6 klippons.

It's old fashioned in a way but as I said at my age with my eyes fitting upto 4 T+E into a rose is not fun lol

You got the posh version! We only had an RB4/J701 and a strip of 15A connector blocks

 

[Dave OCD]

I use this method often , particularly when it's not practical to loop feeds through switch positions, and with many of todays light fittings just the one cable is enough to connect in.

 

[davesparks]

Well you have not done much occupied rewires then, with minimal disruption to decoration, this method is perfect less floor boards to lift, less cable, less mess.

Exactly! And when you've got that really small conduit in the wall and fancy light fitting with no room for one cable it's the way forward

 

[tomspark93]

I've never considered doing it that way. However It would make sense in an occupied rewire. At least all joints would be readily accessible in the loft space. I usually just choose the most suited style for the job not fussed whether it's loop in at the switch or the rose, unless the customer buys a fancy light fitting of course.