Unconventional termination of SWA

Talk Electrician Forum

Help Support Talk Electrician Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
To increase the surface area of the gland ,  is what we were told .         Its strange  you say that ,  I , and anyone I know in the trade  since the 1960's  have never seen them on the inside ....perhaps it changes by  location .   :C

There are a few  anomalies that you come across perhaps once only .

One I always quote  was a hospital  wards refurb we did ...the spec demanded  the use of , when coupling to a surface box...a flanged coupler   ( steel conduit)   complete  with long reach 20mm bush with a serrated washer on it  .on the inside   ....and a lead washer  between the flange & the box .     All very well  but never , ever did it again .

This was B/E conduit  but theres a Google picture  so someone must still use them ...shows the lead washer but not the serrated washer. 

View attachment 9662,,


We had to use these 100% of the time on   BT jobs, that was about 15 years ago. I wonder what H&S would   say today.

Back to the op, what about street lighting cutouts, no glands & a jubilee clip round the swa.  I was taught a similar method,  on my apprenticeship, slipping a pipe under the swa and a jubilee clip in certain   tight areas, 

 
OH  BT were using them too then !  

Yes street lighting was a problem we had too .  Wiring in SWA  , a metal spur was spec'd  to be fitted inside the lampost service point  but you couldn't get two pair of grips in there to fit a gland  .  The only way was to have a big loop sticking out , gland up onto the box and shove all the slack  into the lampost .   Having a loop in & out was even worse .  

These were the more decorative lamposts  , not much room,     used for university campus   pedestrianised areas and walkways  , hundreds of 'em .       That was the job we asked about using split concentric   and were informed we were not allowed to install it .   

I'd bet if the city council  or the local electric  board  were doing the job ...they'd have used it !!!    

 
Talking about unconventional  termination of SWA's    ...I just remembered  doing some work for British Gas  on their remote stations  .   

Their method of making off SWA   was the usual way ,  row of armoureds in the top of a panel  ....then about  6 - 8 inches  above the gland  they cut a band of PVC out of the sheaths  about 20mm wide  and strap all the SWA 's together with copper strip  clamped onto the armouring .   :C

I didn't emulate the method as I thought it was stupid TBH   .

They did however have a great method with their  really high   lighting columns .   Attach  this hydraulic device at the bottom ,  shove a lever in to lift the top half of the column off the base , then lower it against the hydraulics  .     Do your work on the floods at the top then pump it back up .   

 
Back to the op, what about street lighting cutouts, no glands & a jubilee clip round the swa.  I was taught a similar method,  on my apprenticeship, slipping a pipe under the swa and a jubilee clip in certain   tight areas, 


It’s a very common way of terminating SWA’s, the “top hat gland” supports the cables armouring. I had many an argument with E54 about them.

A few years back I had to look in to having 11kV PILC-SWA cables terminated, top hat glands and heat shrink tubing to the rescue.

Their method of making off SWA   was the usual way ,  row of armoureds in the top of a panel  ....then about  6 - 8 inches  above the gland  they cut a band of PVC out of the sheaths  about 20mm wide  and strap all the SWA 's together with copper strip  clamped onto the armouring .   :C


Very common back in the 60's.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Very common back in the 60's.
Who  was that then   Tony  ?  This was British Gas  .   Can't say I ever saw it done until  the 1990's . 

My thoughts on it were :- 

1.  What does it achieve ?  Nothing . 

2. The glands  &  banjo's bolted to the top plate were more than adequate  and conformed with common practice .

3.  Exposing the armour wires to the elements  is not to be recommended  in any way . 

4.  Squashing  the cores with a clamp is not common practice .

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I can think of a couple of companies I’ve worked for that used copper tape between SWA’s. It doesn’t mean I agree with the method. When I first saw it used I couldn’t see the point of it and I still can’t.

 
I can think of a couple of companies I’ve worked for that used copper tape between SWA’s. It doesn’t mean I agree with the method. When I first saw it used I couldn’t see the point of it and I still can’t.
Its as pointless  as those  PVC conduit adaptors  with a moulded boss on the side .     Apparently its for a self tapper to fix an  earth lug  to :C  

 
Its as pointless  as those  PVC conduit adaptors  with a moulded boss on the side .     Apparently its for a self tapper to fix an  earth lug  to :C  
Well I actually thought it was for sticking a self tapper in to "lock" the conduit in the "style of the 'American system " where they do not thread the conduit 😂

 
It could be  that ....  I just  remember asking  and thats what I was told .    I'm surprised they still do that moulding TBH  .      Hey!  Thinking about it ...  isn't there a boss in the PVC  conduit boxes  for "earthing"   ?   

 
It could be  that ....  I just  remember asking  and thats what I was told .    I'm surprised they still do that moulding TBH  .      Hey!  Thinking about it ...  isn't there a boss in the PVC  conduit boxes  for "earthing"   ?   
 I think you can buy a terminal to push fit into it for joining the earth wires together

 
I suppose it's academic now as if installing a new circuit in SWA to a CU, it seems the current regs would require a change of said CU to metal clad anyway. Is that correct?

I am a bit rusty lol!!
No CU change required, gland the SWA into the enclosure as normal, use a Piranha lock nut and earth the Armour via a suitable size lead from the nut to the earth bar, as you normally would 

 
Top