On 2019-10-19, John Rumm wrote:

On 18/10/2019 12:24, Adam Funk wrote:
On 2019-10-18, John Rumm wrote:

On 18/10/2019 09:11, Chris Green wrote:
Brian Gaff wrote:
Why don't sockets have a system where a plate is tightened down on the wire
or wires like we used to see in terminal blocks of old. I'd have though that
was a more positive method, since you would have to have the space for all
three in such a socket. No not seen any either.

It then needs to be wide enough for all the cables though doesn't it?
I agree, I prefer the type you describe as well but often have the
problem that the wires get the wrong side of the plate.

You can do it using an rectangular terminal recess, where the width
matches the scree diameter - so its not easy for wires to be "missed" by
the screw, but the length still allows for plenty of wires.

These GET Ultimate ones I find are easy to get 4 wires into:

http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php/...rminations.jpg

I think MK accessories have that kind of recess now too.

One thing I was wondering about recently --- would it not be better if
there were a captive but non-rotating piece of flat brass between the
screw & the wires, so that the screw isn't twisting against the wires
when you tighten it?

There is something to be said for a (lightly) pointed screw end contact
directly with a wire, since its easier to get a connection that is gas
tight, and so minimises the chance that the contact resistance will
creep up due to oxidisation.

That's an interesting point. I can see that for a single wire in one
of the traditional brass cylinders, but I'm sure some of the sockets &
switches I've used recently have flat plates opposite the screws, &
wouldn't the pointed screw push two wires apart?