CU Move

[Evans Electric]

Oh OK then ... I don't want to enter the glanding civil discussion .

 

[Buildall]

I don't want to enter the glanding argument, but have you considered how weak the 4" wall will be after you have chased out for the SWA or 32mm steel conduit ( which I see as totally OTT) TBH . I would not even consider chasing a sub main into a 4" wall TBH .

I do not have a choice as this house is to be used for multiple ocupancy and the owner wants the cellar closed to residents but the cu accessable to all. If I move it to the party wall then the tails will go over 3 meter's and need the switched fuse which then is in the cellar with no access. Also there is the potental that the load could go over 80 amps at times so another reason for not using the switched fuse @ 80 amp. The only other idea I can come up with is to mount recessed cu in the party wall at a lower level and build a slim cuboard around it. That would then leave the tails short enough.

 

[ianmacd]

How are you complying with 522.6.1 if you do not use a gland to connect it to the CU (and don't say using cleats as they are unassociated with the CU)?

Also:

Single Point Bonding of CablesThe current ratings provided by the IEE Wiring Regulations are based on the armour being solidly bonded i.e. earthed at both ends (neither end is left floating). The scenario you describe suggests the cable has been installed with the armour bonded only at one end.

So they are basically saying its not been installed to their instructions if its not glanded.

 

[batty]

all insulated c/u i garage with armoured gland and shroud on supply to new pond circuit, (none rcd sub main i might add ; ) )

Am i being dumb here but how do you get lid off with an armoured cable connected to it?

 

[sparkytim]

How are you complying with 522.6.1 if you do not use a gland to connect it to the CU (and don't say using cleats as they are unassociated with the CU)?Also:

So they are basically saying its not been installed to their instructions if its not glanded.

On the basis of that then DNOs fail to terminate their supply cables correctly (No Glands used)

Also are we failing to comply with Manufacturer by segregating SWA feeds to Outbuildings by only Terminating Armour one end?

 

[AAAMUSEMENTS]

Couldn't you use one of those dooberries that clamp onto the armour?

http://www.tlc-direct.co.uk/Main_Index/Earthing_Index/Piranhna_Earth_Nuts/index.html

Found it...

 

[Badger]

Am i being dumb here but how do you get lid off with an armoured cable connected to it?

because batty bat my friend :^O its a wylex nh type board, nh type mcbs, and the back half and front half of cu are seperate, the armoured and gland arrangment is terminated i the rear half of the c/u

 

[batty]

because batty bat my friend :^O its a wylex nh type board, nh type mcbs, and the back half and front half of cu are seperate, the armoured and gland arrangment is terminated i the rear half of the c/u

Sorry its late was thinking the lid was a whole thing forgot they are in two parts.

:z

 

[Badger]

Sorry its late was thinking the lid was a whole thing forgot they are in two parts. :z

all is forgiven batty bat :^O :^O :^O

 

[Badger]

ive just realised what BSI means BULL SH ! TE INDUSTRY :^O :^O :^O

 

[Voltimax]

How are you complying with 522.6.1 if you do not use a gland to connect it to the CU (and don't say using cleats as they are unassociated with the CU)?

522.6.1

Wiring systems shall be selected and erected so as to minimize the damage arising from mechanical stress, e.g. by impact, penetration, tension or compression during installation, use or maintenance.

And what keeps a T&E in place when it is brought into a CU? Clips? Trunking? All of which are unassociated with the CU as is a cleat, but you agree they're acceptable? All that reg states is that a cable must be suitable for it's environment not that it has to be glanded.

As for your quote, well I can't argue that and so therefore I won't As I said, if you can put forward evidence I'll accept it.

 

[ianmacd]

On the basis of that then DNOs fail to terminate their supply cables correctly (No Glands used)Also are we failing to comply with Manufacturer by segregating SWA feeds to Outbuildings by only Terminating Armour one end?

Thats up to the DNO but 7671 requires us to follow manufacturers instructions.

Again, no as it says free not electrically separated. Using a nylon gland would allow the cable to be securely fixed but still electrically separate.

 

[ianmacd]

Couldn't you use one of those dooberries that clamp onto the armour?http://www.tlc-direct.co.uk/Main_Index/Earthing_Index/Piranhna_Earth_Nuts/index.html

Found it...

They are very good. I can highly recommend them.

 

[ianmacd]

522.6.1Wiring systems shall be selected and erected so as to minimize the damage arising from mechanical stress, e.g. by impact, penetration, tension or compression during installation, use or maintenance.

And what keeps a T&E in place when it is brought into a CU? Clips? Trunking? All of which are unassociated with the CU as is a cleat, but you agree they're acceptable? All that reg states is that a cable must be suitable for it's environment not that it has to be glanded.

As for your quote, well I can't argue that and so therefore I won't As I said, if you can put forward evidence I'll accept it.

T&E is not as heavy or likely to be subject to so much force. By not using a gland you are not minimising the damage arising from mechanical stress so are not following 522.6.1.

 

[Voltimax]

But an SWA that is cleated before it enters the enclosure won't be subject to any stress related to it's weight, especially in the situation we are discussing, so I would disagree that you are not complying with that reg. A 16mm T&E can be a heavy cable, would you gland that as it enters a domestic grade CU? That said even if it was a 1.5 entering from the bottom you're effectively saying it wouldn't need clipping or a gland because it isn't heavy enough.

 

[ianmacd]

I think you are just talking crap now and you should stop being a cowboy and terminate swa into glands.

 

[sparkytim]

We all see things a bit differently and this shows that there will always be a difference of opinion on the application of the regs.

Thats why the regs on the whole supply PRINCIPELS and not RULES.

See the bigger picture and you won't be so restricted as to application.

Lets have a bit of respect for that and agree to disagree, life is to short.

 

[Badger]

I think you are just talking crap now and you should stop being a cowboy and terminate swa into glands.

:Applaud :Applaud:Applaud

 

[Voltimax]

I think you are just talking crap now and you should stop being a cowboy and terminate swa into glands.

Well that's one way to end a discussion isn't it?

Nice to see you have a professional manner.

Contradicting quotes here.

I would not class that as good workmanship. Should be properly glanded both ends with the CU one potentially being a nylon gland and Earthed at the cut out end.

But later on you quote this:

Also:

Originally Posted by Cable manufacturer

Single Point Bonding of Cables

The current ratings provided by the IEE Wiring Regulations are based on the armour being solidly bonded i.e. earthed at both ends (neither end is left floating). The scenario you describe suggests the cable has been installed with the armour bonded only at one end.

So they are basically saying its not been installed to their instructions if its not glanded.

For your information I do gland SWA's at both ends, but that's my preference. Someone else suggested glanding at one end and although I would gland it at both ends, I didn't see any reason why his method was not valid.

I'm not in the habit of talking crap and I'd like to think I'd shown you more respect than you just did me.

 

[ianmacd]

How is that contradictory. The instructions say neither end is left floating so that allows for using isolating glands.

I do however think my crap talking cowboy comment may have been a bit harsh in reflection and apologize for that.