Using wagos to extend cable run

[matt84]

Hi

I've just bought the connectors and wagobox to run a spur from a ring but the ring cable is going to be too short to fit into the wagobox after I've cut and stripped the ends so I was going to extend the cable a little first using a few wago connectors and placing them in a choc box.

That way I'll have enough cable to run the new spur from the wago box without any stress on the exisitng cable.

Would this be okay safety wise?

Thanks!

 

[PrenticeBoyofDerry]

Is the joint going to be left accessible?
Can you not spur from a socket? rather than cut into the ring final circuit.

 

[matt84]

No to both questions. I thought wagos were maintenance free and could be left under floorboards screwed to a joist? Only reason I bought them really.

 

[PrenticeBoyofDerry]

No to both questions. I thought wagos were maintenance free and could be left under floorboards screwed to a joist? Only reason I bought them really.

I don't believe wagos comply to BS5733MF, you would be better of with an ashley/hager MF box.

 

[matt84]

Ok thanks

 

[Johnmelad]

WAGO do a MF box.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Last time I looked they did not. The Wagobox is not made by Wago, it's made by one of their distributors.

Connexbox Ltd is a premium reseller of the Wago range of pushwire and cage clamp connectors. Connexbox Ltd is also the manufacturer of the innovative Wagobox and Wagobox-Light junction boxes which can be used in combination with a selection of Wago pushwire and cage clamp connectors.

The problem is that it's just a box. They say:

"The Wagobox junction box system in normal use is a BSEN60670-22 compliant system. In order to meet the requirements of BS5733 for a Maintenance Free accessory different limitations and instructions need to be adhered to when installing the Wagobox."

I.e you are required to use the right connectors and fit them into the box in the right way, but once you have the box in your hand there's nothing to stop you not doing it right. Or stop you doing it egregiously wrong. I am absolutely certain that one day someone will open up a Wagobox and find conductors twisted and taped inside.

The Ashley boxes seem like a better bet.

 

[bernardgreen]

i wonder how well a modern "maintainance free" connector survives the sort of current overload that could occur for some time before the protective device ( MCB ) operates.

I recall early spring cage contacts used on printed circuit board connector lost a lot of spring pressure following heating due to an overload when in service. This lead to a design change to use screw terminals.

 

[Monkeh]

i wonder how well a modern "maintainance free" connector survives the sort of current overload that could occur for some time before the protective device ( MCB ) operates.

I recall early spring cage contacts used on printed circuit board connector lost a lot of spring pressure following heating due to an overload when in service. This lead to a design change to use screw terminals.

They have to test this. The results are published, it just takes a little digging. They do well.

 

[PrenticeBoyofDerry]

WAGO do a MF box.

A link of his would be appreciated. As I am unaware of one, unless something has been marketed very recently, they do enclosures for their connectors but that is all it is.

 

[flyingsparks]

WAGO do a MF box.

A link of his would be appreciated. As I am unaware of one, unless something has been marketed very recently, they do enclosures for their connectors but that is all it is.

I don't get it. Surely the wago connector is the maintenance free part and not the actual enclosure? What is the difference if wago's themselves are MF if they are in a 'wagobox' or even just a single box with a blank plate on? (Obviously not taking into account strain relief for the cables)

In this case tho, I too recommended the Hagar Ashley MF JB's.

 

[diyer56]

What is the difference if wago's themselves are MF if they are in a 'wagobox' or even just a single box with a blank plate on? (Obviously not taking into account strain relief for the cables)
.

I assumed the difference was the strain relief provided for the cables which completes the specifications for the maintenance free requirement.

The additional guidelines relate to the total current via the Wagobox to comply with BS5733 for maintenance free accessories:
https://www.wagobox.com/docs/files/wagobox-mf-qna-v4.pdf

 

[JohnW2]

I don't get it. Surely the wago connector is the maintenance free part and not the actual enclosure? What is the difference if wago's themselves are MF if they are in a 'wagobox' or even just a single box with a blank plate on? (Obviously not taking into account strain relief for the cables) ... In this case tho, I too recommended the Hagar Ashley MF JB's.

We've been over this ground many times before, and it's certainly not as simple as you imply.

AIUI, a Wago connector, alone, could not be 'MF', any more than would the connector block taken out of a Hager/Ashley MF JB (and housed in something different) - since the requirements for 'MF' seem to encompass such issues as cable strain relief, temperature rises etc. Hence, AIUI, only an entire product (connectors plus enclosure etc.), 'type tested' as a whole, could ever be 'MF'.

What is true is that, since Amd 1 of BS7671 came into force, Wago's documentation has indicated/'claimed' that certain combinations of certain Wago connectors, IF used in a Wagobox and if used on circuits with certain current limits, do qualify as 'MF'. Whether or not that is actually true, I haven't got a clue.

Kind Regards, John