Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
UK diy (uk.d-i-y) For the discussion of all topics related to diy (do-it-yourself) in the UK. All levels of experience and proficency are welcome to join in to ask questions or offer solutions. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
light wiring
Apologies to anyone who's read this under another thread.
-- The downstairs light ring is in 'theory' overloaded, so the outside light will have to powered by the upstairs light circuit ring but with the switch downstairs! Is this a problem? Also I noticed a lot of 30amp juction boxes on my 5 amp light circuit - is this also a problem? (they were done before we moved as part of a garage conversion and have been working fine for 10 years or so). Thank you |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 11:08:58 -0000, "MP"
strung together this: Apologies to anyone who's read this under another thread. You'd be better off apologising for sticking a sig seperator in the middle of your post. The downstairs light ring is in 'theory' overloaded, so the outside light will have to powered by the upstairs light circuit ring but with the switch downstairs! Is this a problem? The lighting circuit will be a radial, not a ring so there aren't tecnically any spurs on the circuit, as such, IYSWIM. There's also the thing of diversity, which says you won't have all the lights on at once so you can effectively go 33% over what you think your maximum circuit current is limted to. Also I noticed a lot of 30amp juction boxes on my 5 amp light circuit - is this also a problem? No, unless they're all badly terminated. -- SJW Please reply to group or use 'usenet' in email subject |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"Lurch" wrote
| There's also the thing of diversity, which says you won't have all the | lights on at once so you can effectively go 33% over what you think | your maximum circuit current is limted to. Surely there is *no* diversity allowed on a lighting circuit - precisely because it is quite likely that all lights will be on at once - especially in the bog-standard one-light-in-the-middle-of-the-ceiling per room types of installation? Owain |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 23:38:38 -0000, "Owain"
strung together this: "Lurch" wrote | There's also the thing of diversity, which says you won't have all the | lights on at once so you can effectively go 33% over what you think | your maximum circuit current is limted to. Surely there is *no* diversity allowed on a lighting circuit There is, it was 66%, I don't think it's changed. - precisely because it is quite likely that all lights will be on at once - especially in the bog-standard one-light-in-the-middle-of-the-ceiling per room types of installation? Well, can't say as I've ever overloaded a lighting circuit personally, even with going over 6A on a few occasions. In an ideal situation you would leave the diversity out of it rather than loading all the circuits up to the max. -- SJW Please reply to group or use 'usenet' in email subject |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Lurch wrote:
Surely there is *no* diversity allowed on a lighting circuit There is, it was 66%, I don't think it's changed. AFAICU from a quick read of the OSG, there's no 'diversity' allowed in the design of the lighting circuit itself: its Table 1A shows 'current demand to be assumed' as 'current equivalent to the connected load, with a minimum of 100W per lampholder' (the latter methinks will get updated Real Soon Now to take account of non-BC low-energy fittings - 2D, 4-pin, and the like, where it's pretty reasonable to claim that there's little likelihood of the 10-25W loomin' air being replaced with a 100W-tungsten-capable BC lampholder). So 14 lampholders is your lot, roughly speaking... However, you *are* then OK to assume diversity in calculating the load each lighting circuit contributes to the whole installation - and that's where you remember the 66% figure from (that's for an individual household install, with higher proportions for commercial (90%) and small-hotels-boarding-houses-and-similar (75%)). As with all applications of diversity, it's not always a get-out-of-jail-free card - if there are particular circumstances on a given circuit, e.g. 500W of kitchen downlighters switched as one, that's already half of the 960W with 66% of the 6A nominal represents... |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"Stefek Zaba" wrote in message ... Lurch wrote: Surely there is *no* diversity allowed on a lighting circuit There is, it was 66%, I don't think it's changed. AFAICU from a quick read of the OSG, there's no 'diversity' allowed in the design of the lighting circuit itself: its Table 1A shows 'current demand to be assumed' as 'current equivalent to the connected load, with a minimum of 100W per lampholder' (the latter methinks will get updated Real Soon Now to take account of non-BC low-energy fittings - 2D, 4-pin, and the like, where it's pretty reasonable to claim that there's little likelihood of the 10-25W loomin' air being replaced with a 100W-tungsten-capable BC lampholder). So 14 lampholders is your lot, roughly speaking... However, you *are* then OK to assume diversity in calculating the load each lighting circuit contributes to the whole installation - and that's where you remember the 66% figure from (that's for an individual household install, with higher proportions for commercial (90%) and small-hotels-boarding-houses-and-similar (75%)). As with all applications of diversity, it's not always a get-out-of-jail-free card - if there are particular circumstances on a given circuit, e.g. 500W of kitchen downlighters switched as one, that's already half of the 960W with 66% of the 6A nominal represents... I just got lost here :-( Surely diversity allows an increase in the total loading as it assumes not all will be turned on ? So a 6A nominal current gives about 1500W which is then multiplied by 1/0.66 to give 2250 as the maximum lighting on the circuit. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Mike wrote:
I just got lost here :-( Surely diversity allows an increase in the total loading as it assumes not all will be turned on ? So a 6A nominal current gives about 1500W which is then multiplied by 1/0.66 to give 2250 as the maximum lighting on the circuit. No. The circuit itself should be designed for running under full load, and the protective device must be chosen so its nominal rating is greater than that full load will draw, while being less than the rating for the cable selected (derated by all relevant factors). You do *not* design in an 'overload' on the individual lighting (or other) circuit. You *do*, though, get to recognise that full load on the lighting circuit will be 'rare' - so although the circuit itself must be safe under its full load, the contribution to the total *installation* load which this circuit makes is taken, in normal circumstances, to be a mere 66% of its total current demand. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Stefek Zaba wrote:
No. The circuit itself should be designed for running under full load, and the protective device must be chosen so its nominal rating is greater than that full load will draw, while being less than the rating for the cable selected (derated by all relevant factors). You do *not* design in an 'overload' on the individual lighting (or other) circuit. .. ^^^^^^^^ Delete "or other". Diversity /is/ allowed within many other types of circuit - e.g. the standard (OSG Appendix 8) circuits are based on a maximum floor area served, not on a full 13 A at each socket! The 'rules' for diversity within individual circuits are set out in Table 1A of the OSG, together with its footnotes. Another example is that that a domestic cooker circuit does not have to be designed for the full load current (FLC) of the appliance(s) connected - a design current of 10 A plus 30% of the remaining FLC[*] is allowed. [*] FAOD this means Ib = 10 + 0.3 * (FLC - 10) amps, where Ib is the design current. You *do*, though, get to recognise that full load on the lighting circuit will be 'rare' - so although the circuit itself must be safe under its full load, the contribution to the total *installation* load which this circuit makes is taken, in normal circumstances, to be a mere 66% of its total current demand. The point is not so much that full load on the lighting circuit will be rare, but that it will rarely coincide with simultaneous full load on several other circuits. The 66%, BTW only applies for domestic installations, higher figures are stipulated for non-domestic situations. Diversity /between/ circuits at a consumer unit or dis-board is dealt with by Table 1B in the OSG. It's a common mistake to confuse the two diversity tables, and the cause of similar thread topics here in the past. -- Andy |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Andy Wade wrote:
.................................................. ......... You do *not* design in an 'overload' on the individual lighting (or other) circuit. . ^^^^^^^^ Delete "or other". Diversity /is/ allowed within many other types of circuit - e.g. the standard (OSG Appendix 8) circuits are based on a maximum floor area served, not on a full 13 A at each socket! Thanks for the correction, Andy! It's a common mistake to confuse the two diversity tables, and the cause of similar thread topics here in the past. Aye - off to wrap head in cold wet towel (and turn on the Golf's sidelights just to watch *both* numberplate lights being on - today's d-i-y 'triumph'!)... |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Installing light fixture - wiring question | Home Repair | |||
Inground spa light replac | Home Repair | |||
Changing a light bulb on R.C.M | Metalworking | |||
Ceiling light wiring question | Home Repair | |||
Wiring a 3 way light switch. | UK diy |