I am about to put in a new ring main run in conduit with single cables,
obviously the live and neutral will be 2.5mm but I am unsure what size the
earth conductor should be, you would think that it should also be 2.5mm but
in 2.5 twin & earth cable it is much smaller, so do I use a smaller earth?.

Trevor Smith

On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 18:34:14 +0100, "Trevor Smith"
strung together this:

do I use a smaller earth?.

Use a minimum of 1.5mm cable for the earth.
--

SJW
A.C.S. Ltd

In article ,
Lurch writes:
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 18:34:14 +0100, "Trevor Smith"
strung together this:

do I use a smaller earth?.

Use a minimum of 1.5mm cable for the earth.

Personally I always use same size earth as other conductors
when using singles. But 1.5mm would be allowable for a
normal sized ring circuit.

--
Andrew Gabriel

On 30 Jun 2004 23:59:38 GMT, (Andrew
Gabriel) strung together this:

Personally I always use same size earth as other conductors
when using singles.

I don't because I'm a tightarseand a bit lazy! 1.5mm doesn't require
as much effort to strip as 2.5mm!
--

SJW
A.C.S. Ltd

Lurch wrote:


I don't because I'm a tightarseand a bit lazy! 1.5mm doesn't require
as much effort to strip as 2.5mm!

Now that *is* lazy ;-)

(I take it you are using wire strippers and not your teeth?)


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

In article ,
Lurch wrote:
I don't because I'm a tightarseand a bit lazy! 1.5mm doesn't require
as much effort to strip as 2.5mm!

Ever heard of decent wire strippers? ;-)

--
*If Barbie is so popular, why do you have to buy her friends? *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Lurch wrote:
On 30 Jun 2004 23:59:38 GMT, (Andrew
Gabriel) strung together this:

Personally I always use same size earth as other conductors
when using singles.

I don't because I'm a tightarseand a bit lazy! 1.5mm doesn't require
as much effort to strip as 2.5mm!

With a good pair of 'automatic' strippers the difference is
insignificant surely. You don't use cutters or pliers to strip your
wire do you?

--
Chris Green

On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 02:50:59 +0100, John Rumm
strung together this:

(I take it you are using wire strippers and not your teeth?)

Close, a pair of CK sensoplus sidecutters.
--

SJW
A.C.S. Ltd

Close, a pair of CK sensoplus sidecutters.

You are joking right?

Christian.

On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 10:52:54 +0100, "Christian McArdle"
strung together this:

You are joking right?

All the pros nick the copper, it wouldn't be right otherwise! I
usually oversize the cable to start with so that the chunk you take
out of the cable upon installation is allowed for in the design stage,
isn't that how you're meant to do it? ;-)
--

SJW
A.C.S. Ltd

On 1 Jul 2004 09:12:03 GMT, strung together this:

With a good pair of 'automatic' strippers the difference is
insignificant surely. You don't use cutters or pliers to strip your
wire do you?

I used to have an automatic wire stripper, but he was useless, so I
sacked him! My current strippers aren't automatic and still require me
to do a certain amount of the work.
--

SJW
A.C.S. Ltd

My current strippers aren't automatic and still require me
to do a certain amount of the work.

I've used all sorts of stripper, manual and automatic. However, one type I
always come back to is the type illustrated below.

http://www.screwfix.com/app/sfd/cat/...18057&ts=87061

They are simply fantastic. Simply insert wire and squeeze handles. No fuss
whatsoever. Very clean cut, no adjustment required. They simply work. The
idea of using pliers makes me cringe!

Christian.

On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 14:07:06 +0100, "Christian McArdle"
strung together this:

I've used all sorts of stripper, manual and automatic. However, one type I
always come back to is the type illustrated below.

http://www.screwfix.com/app/sfd/cat/...18057&ts=87061

I use something similar to that,

http://www.idealindustries.com/IDEAL...r?OpenDocument

Mainly for flexible cables though, for general day to day using a pair
of cutters is standard practice, but I have seen plenty of people
balls it up on numerous occasions. Just depends what you're used to I
suppose.
--

SJW
A.C.S. Ltd

Mainly for flexible cables though, for general day to day using a pair
of cutters is standard practice, but I have seen plenty of people
balls it up on numerous occasions.

It's more speed and ease, though. I'd cut, say, 6 wires for a 13A socket and
be able to strip the lot in under 10 seconds without even thinking about it.
Maybe my cutter technique is faulty, but it would take me about 10 seconds
per wire to do it that way.

Christian.

On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 14:34:26 +0100, "Christian McArdle"
strung together this:

It's more speed and ease, though.

Depends what you're used to, I can work with a pair of cutters as
strippers with relative ease, but that's because that's how I've
always done it. If I were only doing it on the odd occasion I probably
would be quicker with the strippers.
--

SJW
A.C.S. Ltd

Depends what you're used to, I can work with a pair of cutters as
strippers with relative ease, but that's because that's how I've
always done it. If I were only doing it on the odd occasion I probably
would be quicker with the strippers.

I still use an old pair of manual wire strippers made by bib, remember
them ?,. Cant get on with the auto strippers we have at work. But might
get a pair of those screwfix ones.

Dave

--

Some people use windows, others have a life.

In article ,
Christian McArdle wrote:
I've used all sorts of stripper, manual and automatic. However, one type
I always come back to is the type illustrated below.

I've also got many - probably an example of just about every type, but my
favourite by far doesn't appear to be made anymore - or at least I can't
find it at RS etc. It's a sideways on device with four holes for different
size ranges, and will do the smallest I ever use in electronics up to
2.5mm.
I've not found any 'auto' type that doesn't need adjustment over a range
of cables, so rather defeats the object.

--
*Puritanism: The haunting fear that someone, somewhere may be happy.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Stanton wrote:


I still use an old pair of manual wire strippers made by bib, remember
them ?,. Cant get on with the auto strippers we have at work. But might
get a pair of those screwfix ones.

Takes alot to beat:

http://custom1.farnell.com/cpc/produ...ct%5Fid=268280

for simplicity it has to be said - very good at splitting cable
lengthways as well when required.


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

Takes alot to beat:

snipped long line

for simplicity it has to be said - very good at splitting cable
lengthways as well when required.

Those are the ones !

Dave

--

Some people use windows, others have a life.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message ...
In article ,
Christian McArdle wrote:
I've used all sorts of stripper, manual and automatic. However, one type
I always come back to is the type illustrated below.

I've also got many - probably an example of just about every type, but my
favourite by far doesn't appear to be made anymore - or at least I can't
find it at RS etc. It's a sideways on device with four holes for different
size ranges, and will do the smallest I ever use in electronics up to
2.5mm.

That would be like item 19779 at www.drapertools.com, right? I use
one of those but find it can be a bit awkward (eg the notches sizes
don't seem to correspond to reality, and it can be fiddly checking
you're in the right notch, eg when grovelling around in a gloomy
roofspace) and so have been considering upgrading to an auto jobbie

David

In article ,
Lobster wrote:
I've also got many - probably an example of just about every type, but
my favourite by far doesn't appear to be made anymore - or at least I
can't find it at RS etc. It's a sideways on device with four holes for
different size ranges, and will do the smallest I ever use in
electronics up to 2.5mm.

That would be like item 19779 at www.drapertools.com, right? I use one
of those but find it can be a bit awkward (eg the notches sizes don't
seem to correspond to reality, and it can be fiddly checking you're in
the right notch, eg when grovelling around in a gloomy roofspace) and so
have been considering upgrading to an auto jobbie

No - that's not the one. The one I've got has two jaws which separate
under spring pressure. One holds the cable outer (under different spring
pressure) on the working stroke, but releases it on the return stroke. The
other jaw contains the split dies with the holes, which have a sharp
leading edge and bite into the insulation, again under spring pressure.
They don't need to go through it to the conductor - simply grip it firmly,
hence the choice of four sizes, which cover everything I use. It wouldn't
be suitable for very large stuff, though - I'd not try it on larger than
2.5mm.

The big difference is that it bites into the insulation over 360 degrees -
or near enough - where most rely on just attacking it from two sides.

No brand name, unfortunately, although it's built to last with the wearing
parts fixed by screws for easy replacement. If I knew who made it. ;-)

I think it came from Maplin, and was expensive.

--
*Eat well, stay fit, die anyway

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 10:13:56 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
strung together this:

The one I've got has two jaws which separate
under spring pressure. One holds the cable outer (under different spring
pressure) on the working stroke, but releases it on the return stroke. The
other jaw contains the split dies with the holes, which have a sharp
leading edge and bite into the insulation, again under spring pressure.
They don't need to go through it to the conductor - simply grip it firmly,
hence the choice of four sizes, which cover everything I use. It wouldn't
be suitable for very large stuff, though - I'd not try it on larger than
2.5mm.

Did you see the URL I posted, it sounds just like them.
http://www.idealindustries.com/IDEAL...r?OpenDocument
--

SJW
A.C.S. Ltd

In article ,
Lurch wrote:
Did you see the URL I posted, it sounds just like them.
http://www.idealindustries.com/IDEAL...r?OpenDocument

Ah. Yes, that's the one. Glad they're still made - although mine shows no
signs of wear.

--
*Women who seek to be equal to men lack ambition.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 23:07:04 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
strung together this:

Ah. Yes, that's the one. Glad they're still made - although mine shows no
signs of wear.

Nope, mine neither. As a coincedence the Ideal catalogue landed on my
doorstep today, they've got six A4 size pages dedicated to the
different variations of these strippers! I'm also rather impressed
with some of the other gadgets in there, only downside is there's not
one mention of a metric measurement so far!
--

SJW
A.C.S. Ltd

In message ,
John Rumm wrote:

Dave Stanton wrote:


I still use an old pair of manual wire strippers made by bib, remember
them ?,. Cant get on with the auto strippers we have at work. But might
get a pair of those screwfix ones.

Takes alot to beat:

http://custom1.farnell.com/cpc/produ...ct%5Fid=268280

for simplicity it has to be said - very good at splitting cable
lengthways as well when required.



Why has no-one mentioned the simple pen-knife yet?

T&E - slide it down the CPC and it slits the outer, then pinch the end
of L or N between your thumb, the knife and your index finger and roll
it a bit. Off pops the end.

Ok, it only works on solid cores properly (with thin stranded you run
the risk of losing a few strands, but it's fine for all the T&E I've
tried) and works best when the inner insulation (the red/black bit)
isn't glued to the cable and is free to rotate, but variations on this
have made me "lay aside" practically every wire stripper I've ever
tried... and it is much better at getting into tight places too :-)

The only caveat I have is that it really needs a decent pen-knife to
work. I mislaid the tool for a couple of days and had to use a Stanley
- not anywhere near as good, probably down to the shape and material of
the blade.

Hwyl!

M.

--
Martin Angove: http://www.tridwr.demon.co.uk/
Two free issues: http://www.livtech.co.uk/ Living With Technology
.... My reality check just bounced.

On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 00:16:23 +0100, Martin Angove
wrote:

In message ,
John Rumm wrote:

Dave Stanton wrote:


I still use an old pair of manual wire strippers made by bib, remember
them ?,. Cant get on with the auto strippers we have at work. But might
get a pair of those screwfix ones.

Takes alot to beat:

http://custom1.farnell.com/cpc/produ...ct%5Fid=268280

for simplicity it has to be said - very good at splitting cable
lengthways as well when required.



Why has no-one mentioned the simple pen-knife yet?

T&E - slide it down the CPC and it slits the outer, then pinch the end
of L or N between your thumb, the knife and your index finger and roll
it a bit. Off pops the end.

of your index finger ? :-)



..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

On Sat, 03 Jul 2004 00:03:17 +0100, Lurch
wrote:

On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 23:07:04 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
strung together this:

Ah. Yes, that's the one. Glad they're still made - although mine shows no
signs of wear.

I still have and use the ones BT forgot to take back when I left over
twenty years ago. ;-)

They are like a pair of pliers but with the ends at 90 deg to the main
tool (and overlapping) and a 'V' notch in each jaw. The depth is set
by a threaded stop on the side and are very easy / reliable /
repeatable to use.

I was stripping some Cat5e with that slippery type insulation and they
were doing a fine job ..

All the best ..

T i m

In article ,
T i m wrote:
They are like a pair of pliers but with the ends at 90 deg to the main
tool (and overlapping) and a 'V' notch in each jaw. The depth is set
by a threaded stop on the side and are very easy / reliable /
repeatable to use.

Sounds like the standard electrician's type.

I was stripping some Cat5e with that slippery type insulation and they
were doing a fine job ..

They're ok, but need to be set for different cable sizes which is fiddly
on small ones - although on solid core mains stuff you can ignore the
stop, with practice.

--
*Welcome to **** Creek - sorry, we're out of paddles*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Martin Angove writes:

Why has no-one mentioned the simple pen-knife yet?

Well, that's what I use -- normally a stanley knife.

When wiring, I usually try to avoid cutting the conductors
if they are to be connected back together in the terminal.
I remove a length of insulation and fold the conductor in
half or lay it through a slotted terminal.

When doing a whole ring circuit, I usually try to see if I
can install it as one single uncut length of cable from
the CU back to the CU. This way you never get any cumlative
contact resistances in the ring itself.

--
Andrew Gabriel

In article ,
Andrew Gabriel wrote:
When doing a whole ring circuit, I usually try to see if I
can install it as one single uncut length of cable from
the CU back to the CU. This way you never get any cumlative
contact resistances in the ring itself.

I'd be amazed if you could measure any difference over properly made
terminations in the fittings. Ie, done up till they groan.

--
*No radio - Already stolen.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 00:16:23 +0100, Martin Angove
strung together this:

Why has no-one mentioned the simple pen-knife yet?

T&E - slide it down the CPC and it slits the outer, then pinch the end
of L or N between your thumb, the knife and your index finger and roll
it a bit. Off pops the end.

I used to do it like that, and even used pliers to double everything
over but it was 'old fashioned' and too slow.
--

SJW
A.C.S. Ltd

(Andrew Gabriel) writes:

When doing a whole ring circuit, I usually try to see if I can
install it as one single uncut length of cable from the CU back to
the CU. This way you never get any cumlative contact resistances in
the ring itself.

Is this with singles or T&E? If the latter; how do you fit earth
sleeving over the unbroken protective conductor: single sleeve over
doubled conductor?

--
Mark

In article ,
Mark Williams ] writes:
(Andrew Gabriel) writes:

When doing a whole ring circuit, I usually try to see if I can
install it as one single uncut length of cable from the CU back to
the CU. This way you never get any cumlative contact resistances in
the ring itself.

Is this with singles or T&E?

I've done it with both.

This isn't something I religiously stick to. Simply, where possible
I avoid cutting conductors which are to be reconnected. If you see a
ring circuit I'm installing at first fix, you'll see the cable loops
in and out of each back box. If I get a whole ring installed in one
uncut piece, I give myself a pat on the back.

If the latter; how do you fit earth
sleeving over the unbroken protective conductor: single sleeve over
doubled conductor?

You feed both the wires through the same hole, and sleeve the folded
CPC with one piece wide enough to take two conductors.

--
Andrew Gabriel

"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 03 Jul 2004 00:03:17 +0100, Lurch
wrote:

On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 23:07:04 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
strung together this:

Ah. Yes, that's the one. Glad they're still made - although mine shows
no
signs of wear.

I still have and use the ones BT forgot to take back when I left over
twenty years ago. ;-)

They are like a pair of pliers but with the ends at 90 deg to the main
tool (and overlapping) and a 'V' notch in each jaw. The depth is set
by a threaded stop on the side and are very easy / reliable /
repeatable to use.

I was stripping some Cat5e with that slippery type insulation and they
were doing a fine job ..


I'll bet you still have your 81s and No.2 somewhere

On 4 Jul 2004 20:14:11 GMT, (Andrew
Gabriel) strung together this:

You feed both the wires through the same hole, and sleeve the folded
CPC with one piece wide enough to take two conductors.

Er, that's against the regs.
--

SJW
A.C.S. Ltd

In article ,
Lurch writes:
On 4 Jul 2004 20:14:11 GMT, (Andrew
Gabriel) strung together this:

You feed both the wires through the same hole, and sleeve the folded
CPC with one piece wide enough to take two conductors.

Er, that's against the regs.

Please cite...

--
Andrew Gabriel

On 4 Jul 2004 21:54:03 GMT, (Andrew
Gabriel) strung together this:

Please cite...

I knew you were going to say that. I haven't found the particular line
yet, having said that I've only ever been told by the bloke from the
NICEIC that it's a no-no.
It's bad practice anyway, which is against the regs.
--

SJW
A.C.S. Ltd

In article ,
Lurch writes:
On 4 Jul 2004 21:54:03 GMT, (Andrew
Gabriel) strung together this:

Please cite...

I knew you were going to say that. I haven't found the particular line
yet,

I'll save you the trouble -- there isn't one. ;-)

having said that I've only ever been told by the bloke from the
NICEIC that it's a no-no.

You might ask why out of curiosity, but NICEIC's made up rules
aren't part of BS7671.

It's bad practice anyway, which is against the regs.

Why?
On the contrary, I often hear it stated as mandatory for
supplementary service bonding not to cut/join the conductor
(which isn't true, but is a good idea nevertheless).

--
Andrew Gabriel

On 4 Jul 2004 23:43:38 GMT, (Andrew
Gabriel) strung together this:

I'll save you the trouble -- there isn't one. ;-)

I had a feeling there wouldn't be.

You might ask why out of curiosity, but NICEIC's made up rules
aren't part of BS7671.

No, that's why I didn't mention that to start with. I generally take
all advice from the NICEIC loonies with a pinch of salt.

It's bad practice anyway, which is against the regs.

Why?
On the contrary, I often hear it stated as mandatory for
supplementary service bonding not to cut/join the conductor
(which isn't true, but is a good idea nevertheless).

Yes, on supplementary and equipotential bonding, not with the CPCs
though.
Having said all that, I do it myself most of the time as it's a lot
quicker that way, and I like to fly through a big job!
--

SJW
A.C.S. Ltd