Its this one now top of the list http://www.icage.co.uk/
So one says use separate junction box and then heat resist flex and the other says ok to use existing twin and earth standard flat loop in and out
Downlights with flex help
- Thread starter aveatry
- Start date
So one says use separate junction box and then heat resist flex and the other says ok to use existing twin and earth standard flat loop in and out
Sponsored Links
I have spent the last few weeks on a job where those ansell icage lights are being used throughout.
You can get two twin and earth in the terminals quite comfortably, you just need to strip a few mm more sheath off than you'd expect and give the live and neutral a good bend (give them a dog leg/I don't mean twist them), putting the earth in first.
Imperative you screw the connector to the fitting as that's how the landholder is earthed
You can get two twin and earth in the terminals quite comfortably, you just need to strip a few mm more sheath off than you'd expect and give the live and neutral a good bend (give them a dog leg/I don't mean twist them), putting the earth in first.
Imperative you screw the connector to the fitting as that's how the landholder is earthed
Thanks for that, I am looking at those because if I want to I think I can get some extra long higher power leds in there as I think the can section is quite long, what did you think of them
Also the ca body measurements state 68mm and I suppose you need to add a few mm for the springs but it says a cut out of 85mm on the ip65 ones is needed - seems a bit big
They're not too bad. I'll have a look later and see what size holesaws we've been using if I remember. I think we've been using 74mm for the standard ones not 80mm like the manual says
Sponsored Links
That would be great, my issue is that I have been down this road before with some click flameguard like these http://www.fastlec.co.uk/click-flameguard-recessed-low-glare-downlighter-240v-mains-g[/url]
As at the time LEDs were not good enough and I wanted something that would take an 11w megaman and sit flush.
So Im now left with 90mm holes, now in my new ceiling I want to keep the hole as small as I can to allow future replacements and those icage holes seem a bit on the big side compared to others.
I see that you are also looping in and out with standard flat T+E for regs also then
As at the time LEDs were not good enough and I wanted something that would take an 11w megaman and sit flush.
So Im now left with 90mm holes, now in my new ceiling I want to keep the hole as small as I can to allow future replacements and those icage holes seem a bit on the big side compared to others.
I see that you are also looping in and out with standard flat T+E for regs also then
What do the MIs state ?
Looking at the phot, then it's probably OK - the terminal box is "remote" from the heat source to the extend that it isn't likely to be an issue. There's a "pigtail" of what will almost certainly be high temperature flex between the lampholder and the terminal box, so that takes care of the most important bit (the hot end of the bulb heating the lampholder).
- Joined
- 11 Jan 2004
- Messages
- 42,758
- Reaction score
- 2,637
- Country
If the cpc's are twisted together underneath the JB, that does not sound like an installation from 1998.
That practice predates the 90's by a long shot.
Unless the guy that did it was long in the tooth.
That practice predates the 90's by a long shot.
Unless the guy that did it was long in the tooth.
A guy nearing retirement in 1998 would have served his apprenticeship with an electrician who himself qualified before WW II.
Old habits sometimes die hard.
Old habits sometimes die hard.
Indeed - that's what I said above. When I moved into this house in 1987, it was full of JBs wired like that, but they had probably been installed in the 70's, or maybe even 60s. Some did at least have the twisted CPCs in some sort of connector block. Electrically speaking, I suppose there was not a lot wrong with the practice - the main problem was that it usually either left bits of bare CPC within the JB (there was never any sleeving) or else the outer sheath of the cable did not fully enter the JB.
Kind Regards, John
Yea we're using the same holesaw size for the IP as they recommend. Sorry.
Also, if you look at page 6 of their catalogue, it better illustrates what I was trying to describe about the bending of the conductors.
http://www.icage.co.uk/files/iCage Catalogue.pdf
Did a couple more today and remembered another tip, bend the connector strip up to 45degrees, makes life MUCH easier
Also, if you look at page 6 of their catalogue, it better illustrates what I was trying to describe about the bending of the conductors.
http://www.icage.co.uk/files/iCage Catalogue.pdf
Did a couple more today and remembered another tip, bend the connector strip up to 45degrees, makes life MUCH easier
Yeh thats what i am seeing, at least at this JB anyway which was why I mistook it for no earth because from the top I can just see each red and black, but the earth is pulled around the back so tight and neat that from above I could not see any, its only when i picked the JB up and turned it over that I could see all the earths.
I dont even think the rest of the JBs up there are all like it-- and for what its worth due to various extensions the whole house has been tested (ring and downstairs lights) and I have certificates for ---all except the upstairs lighting everything else was ok when tested and I have no reason to doubt the upstairs lighting, caveats and warnings not withstanding
Yes I saw that too and thought of you
What I dont get is that both ip and non ip ones have the same body diameter {68mm) yet the ip rated one needs a 85mm cutout and the non needs a 76mm
Not too sure tbh but the overall diameter is 105mm or whatever so no worries cutting the hole. You could always do a test hole on an old bit of wood and see how it looks/fits etc.
In the first post you said these were for a bedroom? So just don't fit the IP rated ones and use the standard ones?
In the first post you said these were for a bedroom? So just don't fit the IP rated ones and use the standard ones?
Yeh the holes are bigger than usual though arnt they even at 76mm ive always got in the back of my mind future replacements and at 76mm limits my choice.
Sounds like you are fitting ip ones as they are 108 at the bezel with an 85mm cutout
I think I am going to take a piece of board to the suppliers with a few different smaller holes to see what I can get away with.
So you are looping in and out with normal non heat resist 1.5mm T+E then on these
Sounds like you are fitting ip ones as they are 108 at the bezel with an 85mm cutout
I think I am going to take a piece of board to the suppliers with a few different smaller holes to see what I can get away with.
So you are looping in and out with normal non heat resist 1.5mm T+E then on these
DIYnot Local
Staff member
If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.
Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.
Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local
Sponsored Links
