Twin brown brown and earth

[Risteard]

You do if you want to minimise radiation of 50Hz.

You still don't.

You could use a twin brown and a single brown.

 

[JohnW2]

You still don't. You could use a twin brown and a single brown.

Taped together, perhaps? - that hardly sounds like a good professional practice, given that all three conductors could be put in the same cable.

 

[Risteard]

Taped together, perhaps? - that hardly sounds like a good professional practice, given that all three conductors could be put in the same cable.

So you are willing to ignore the Regulation which states that they should be correctly identified by colour "preferably throughout their length". It is infinitely better practice than using incorrect colours.

 

[JohnW2]

So you are willing to ignore the Regulation which states that they should be correctly identified by colour "preferably throughout their length".

I don't see much compulsion indicated by the word "preferably". I would personally prefer to concentrate on what made electrical sense, rather than to worry about a 'preferably' in a regulation with which I was complying.

I would be surprised if anyone could cite an actual example of a case in which an actual safety problem had arisen because conductors which were satisfactorily identified per the requirements of BS7671 were not identified 'throughout their length'!

 

[SUNRAY]

You do if you want to minimise radiation of 50Hz.

But they apparently don't worry about interference in Ireland.

 

[winston1]

But they apparently don't worry about interference in Ireland.

He is in the UK.

 

[winston1]

Twin brown is a brilliant idea and brown and blue should be illegal for misuse as a switch drop without a neutral. You don't need three core for strappers.

Twin brown is a stupid idea. But so is the idea or using blue (formally black) as a switched wire. Switched wires should be identified by a different colour. In France they are mauve with a second one (as in strappers) orange. Australia used white in the red black days, not sure what they use now.

 

[AndyPRK]

Triple brown would be too confusing.

 

[JohnW2]

Triple brown would be too confusing.

It would - even worse than double brown!

Those who produced these regs seemed to be concerned only with identifying which conductors might (always or sometimes) be at line potential, rather than the practicalities of knowing 'which are which' - maybe they have had limited (if any) experience 'at the coal face'.

I would have thought that a good solution would have been for them to allow that, in single-phase circuits, brown black or grey (not just brown) could be use for 'line' (or 'potentially line') conductors - thereby both identifying them all as potentially being at line potential and also making it clear 'which was which'. One could then have had brown/black or brown/grey T+E and brown/black/grey 3-core+E.

Kind Regards, John

 

[flameport]

It would - even worse than double brown!

Far easier for identification of individual cores, as the position of the CPC could be used, 2 cores on one side and 1 on the other.

3C+E should be used for all switch drops now, so that a neutral can be provided at the switch if looped at the ceiling.
If looped at the switch, 3C+E should still be used so that both L and SL are available at the light fitting.

 

[JohnW2]

Far easier for identification of individual cores, as the position of the CPC could be used, 2 cores on one side and 1 on the other.

True - it would at least get one one-third of the way to knowing exactly 'which was which' (and that might often be enough).

3C+E should be used for all switch drops now, so that a neutral can be provided at the switch if looped at the ceiling. If looped at the switch, 3C+E should still be used so that both L and SL are available at the light fitting.

I can't argue with that and, in fact, it has become my usual practice. In the latter case, I must say that (per my previous post), I don't usually bother to over-sleeve the black and grey - but it would be nice if the regs acknowledged that to be acceptable in a single-phase circuit. Let's face it, no-one (other, I suppose, than a complete idiot!) is going to think that a switch drop carries 3-phase electricity - and, as I said, from the 'safety' point-of-view, all three colours designate a line conductor.

Kind Regards, John

 

[SUNRAY]

So you are willing to ignore the Regulation which states that they should be correctly identified by colour

Who's trying to ignore regulations?

What I read says:

"preferably throughout their length".

The Irish language is is obviousely different to English because in English that doesn't mean marking the ends with an identifier sleeve is forbidden

It is infinitely better practice than using incorrect colours.

I for one would probably agree in some situations if you hadn't used the word infinitely.

 

[SUNRAY]

It would - even worse than double brown!

Those who produced these regs seemed to be concerned only with identifying which conductors might (always or sometimes) be at line potential, rather than the practicalities of knowing 'which are which' - maybe they have had limited (if any) experience 'at the coal face'.

I'm sure you're right, some of the regs do seem to be written by committee rather than people who understand. Sadly that is what we have and are compelled to work to.

I would have thought that a good solution would have been for them to allow that, in single-phase circuits, brown black or grey (not just brown) could be use for 'line' (or 'potentially line') conductors - thereby both identifying them all as potentially being at line potential and also making it clear 'which was which'. One could then have had brown/black or brown/grey T+E and brown/black/grey 3-core+E.

Kind Regards, John

Points I have mooted for many years, especially in the domestic situation where I believe sleeving 'live' conductors with a 'live' marking is pointless and unproductive. Additionally the use of unnecessary sleeves in a crowded backbox or ceiling rose is also a waste of valuable space.

 

[EFLImpudence]

I must say that (per my previous post), I don't usually bother to over-sleeve the black and grey - but it would be nice if the regs acknowledged that to be acceptable in a single-phase circuit.

Do you not think they do? They say the conductors must be identified, alpha-numerically being acceptable.

What is the 'L' or similar marking by the terminal to which they are connected?

Of course, even the 'L' isn't required if all the conductors are connected to light switches with no neutral terminals.

 

[JohnW2]

Do you not think they do? They say the conductors must be identified, alpha-numerically being acceptable. What is the 'L' or similar marking by the terminal to which they are connected?

That's an interesting suggestion

I would have thought that one of the important reasons for having conductors 'identified' was to assist one in ensuring that they are connected to the correct terminal - and an 'identification' on/around the terminal would definitely not achieve that!

Kind Regards, John