So the art of tidy installation isn't quite dead then

Some of the wires look a bit short to me, making it hard for future adaptations.
And that, of course, is another of the prices paid for beautiful neatness. I must confess that I personally usually sacrifice some neatness in order to facilitate later re-termination and/or modification.
But then flyingsparks shows how it's possible to leave a little spare without sacrificing neatness.

FWIW, I have the same "discussion" over data cabling. When terminating data cables into a patch panel, I prefer a system where the socket is crimped to the cable and then slotted into the panel. I also leave a small loop which means hte socket can be changed (individually) if needed.
Most use "punchdown" panels, and loom everything up with no spare whatsoever. If one of those fails, it's a f***ing nightmare.

I'll post some pictures to illustrate when I get a few minutes.
 
Sponsored Links
OK, here's a couple of photos of a fairly typical installation with a "punchdown" panel. This was at a customer site and I had to investigate a faulty connection - without unplugging any other customers served by this panel !
Notice how there's a) next to no slack available, and b) very very restricted access to the terminations without unbundling everything and teasing the cables apart (at the risk of creating other faults). On this design of panel there is no facility for strain relief if you wanted to bring the cables away towards the rear instead of along to one end.

Some do have a strain relief bar to allow rearwards cable exit - but they are uncommon, and a pain to use as the bar usually restricts access for the punchdown tool.

By contrast, this the termination method I prefer. These are front and rear shots of the completed panels.
Each connector is a separate item which slots into the panel after termination - and can be removed individually without disturbing the rest if needed. The mounting frame has tie down points for each cable.

As it happens, this is (I think) the third version of this panel system. I preferred the previous version which was a one piece panel. On that, the connected was fitted from behind and slotted vertically over two pins. It was much better as you could add/remove connectors without disturbing anything already plugged into other sockets. On this design, you have to separate from and rear sections, which seems to need 4 hands to put back together (one to hold the frame, one to hold the front, and two to fit the mounting screws) - but the main issue is that you either have to unplug anything else, or fiddle later to get the front back on (the release tabs of the plugs snag behind the front panel).
The reason for the change is they've introduced a 48 port version - a second sub-frame mounts onto the one you can see here, adding an upper row with another 24 ports. That would preclude the vertical insertion method used on the previous design.

Some shots during termination
What I tend to do is mount the front panel on the rack and poke the cable ends through while I'm dressing them up. Then I'll take one cable at a time from it's hole, terminate it, and slot the connector into the frame - until I've done all 24 at which point I'll fit front to frame and screw it in the final position before moving to the next panel.

On this particular job, the electricians pulled all the data cables in. I'm not a great fan of working like this as "ability varies" and this time I got "bunch of cowboys who don't give a s**t" - this is how the cables were left for me :eek:
It took a full day just to unravel them all. In addition, in spite of telling them how to treat the cables, the lad was really abusing them (eg cable snags, normal reaction is to unsnag it, this lad just pulled harder till it gave in :rolleyes:). I also had them replace (IIRC) about 8 which were too short - but I missed a couple which is why the panels are mounted lower down in the rack than I normally put them (if you look carefully as the cables, you'll see a couple without much slack which were terminated without shortening them at all).

And a couple more. This shows how the cables ended up

and after the front section of floor is fitted

I have to say, the main contractor and joiners were very helpful on this job. The floor was double joisted for load spreading, and this provided an opportunity to build in a cable run across the front of the raised section (the front board just lifts off for access).


I don't get to do many jobs like this. Usually they get subbed out to a local cabling company - I don't work fast enough. In this case, the customer specifically wanted me to do it :)
 
And that, of course, is another of the prices paid for beautiful neatness. I must confess that I personally usually sacrifice some neatness in order to facilitate later re-termination and/or modification.
But then flyingsparks shows how it's possible to leave a little spare without sacrificing neatness.
Well, flyingsparks' one is certainly very neat but arguably a little neatness has been sacrificed (for very good reason) in comparison with the pristine 'no spare' arrangement. I would also agree with others who have said that it's far more difficult to get the degree of aesthetic beuty seen in pics posted in this thread when one is dealing with a standard domestic CU - particularly if RCBOs are involved.

FWIW, I have the same "discussion" over data cabling. When terminating data cables into a patch panel, I prefer a system where the socket is crimped to the cable and then slotted into the panel. I also leave a small loop which means hte socket can be changed (individually) if needed. Most use "punchdown" panels, and loom everything up with no spare whatsoever. If one of those fails, it's a f***ing nightmare.
Indeed. As you will have seen, I made the point myself that the same applies at least as much to data and signal cabling. Indeed it's probably more important, since having to extend the conductors in a multiway cable for subsequent maintenance/modification is, as you say, a serious nightmare. Wherever possibly, I try to arrange for there to be some spare cable somewhere near which could be 'pulled in' if ever needed - sometimes to the extent of having a deliberate loop or 'zig-zag' in, say, clipped cables.

Kind Regards, John.
 
Indeed. As you will have seen, I made the point myself that the same applies at least as much to data and signal cabling. Indeed it's probably more important, since having to extend the conductors in a multiway cable for subsequent maintenance/modification is, as you say, a serious nightmare. Wherever possibly, I try to arrange for there to be some spare cable somewhere near which could be 'pulled in' if ever needed - sometimes to the extent of having a deliberate loop or 'zig-zag' in, say, clipped cables.
Yes indeed. It's not just the practicalities of extending multiple cores - with modern data cabling there is a serious performance issue to consider as each connection adds "imperfections" to the cable. High speed networks are effectively shoving several hundred megahertz signals down the wires, so cable quality is very important.

Sometimes you are left with no choice. On another job (and again, why I'm not keen on these "terminate someone else's cables" jobs), part of the cabling was installed by the people who built the extension to a school - I had to extend about 50% of the cables, while some had enough slack to go half way round the building :rolleyes:
I don't know how the hell they expected this cable to reach anywhere useful, but I get another "don't give a s**t, someone else's problem" bunch of cowboys.
 
Sponsored Links
30972181ne4.jpg



http://www.geekabout.com/2008-02-19-479/40-most-disastrous-cable-messes.html


(Some Imageshack images missing, but if you Google the filename you might find them squirreled away elsewhere.)
 
http://www.geekabout.com/2008-02-19-479/40-most-disastrous-cable-messes.html
Think I've seen that before - I've certainly seen some of those pictures.

This is what I used to manage at a previous job
Notice that there are no more than two rows of sockets between cable management bars, so there is never a need for a patch cable to obstruct access to sockets it passes.

And for some reason, people I work with think I have some sort of OCD disorder when it comes to cabling :confused:
 
Do you do a lot of board changes? :confused:
Definitely not (at least, not in recent years), but I'm not talking only of CUs - rather of any situations when cables are terminated within some sort of enclosure, including situations of ELV/signal/data cables.

Kind Regards, John.

Fair enough. In answer to your queries.
Grouping cables in a 3 phase board is common practice and the CF isn't applied. The cables have enough capacity to cope with being grouoped over a few inches and there is a lot of free space to dissipate heat. Leaving the cables loose, will look untidy.

There is a balance between cutting too short and leaving too long.
I always hate it when the cables have been cut to the millimetre.
 
Fair enough. In answer to your queries. Grouping cables in a 3 phase board is common practice and the CF isn't applied.
Yes, that's what I suspected - hence, I suppose, my question.

The cables have enough capacity to cope with being grouoped over a few inches and there is a lot of free space to dissipate heat.
Very good engineering common sense, but I imagine there is scope for the pedantic around to ask where they can find in the regs a dispensation to omit allowance for grouping when that grouping occurs only over a few inches and is in a fairly well-venilated environment!
There is a balance between cutting too short and leaving too long. I always hate it when the cables have been cut to the millimetre.
Exactly, and I personally have absolutely no problem with the common sense approach - but what about 'the regs'?

Kind Regards, John.
 
While we're having an "I'll show you mine" session :LOL:
What do I score out of 10 for this one ? Personally I wasn't that happy with it - but as others have pointed out, there's not that much room, and it's hampered by being a replacement which restricts both cable entry locations and lengths.
 
Nice Neat work - isn't it great when you have that much space to work in, especially with RCBO's compared to the fiddly, cramped Consumer units currently on the market.

Yep you don't see many pictures of fully populated CU with RCBOS.
 
While we're having an "I'll show you mine" session :LOL: What do I score out of 10 for this one ? Personally I wasn't that happy with it - but as others have pointed out, there's not that much room, and it's hampered by being a replacement which restricts both cable entry locations and lengths.
For what little my opinion is worth in this regard, I'd say that the neatness of that wiring is approaching the best that one can reasonably expect to achieve in a standard domestic CU, particularly when it's full of RCBOs. I would not be all all unhappy if that had been my work.

I might ask if the conductors are labelled (I can't see any labelling in photo).

Kind Regards, John.
 
Exactly, and I personally have absolutely no problem with the common sense approach - but what about 'the regs'?
What about the regs?
Where do the regs say that if an electrician (exercising common sense) deems that grouping occurs only a small length, in a reasonably ventilated area, then (s)he does not need to include a grouping factor in their cable calculations?

Kind Regards, John.
 

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
Back
Top