Rules and Guidelines
Want to participate in the discussions? Please read our Community Rules and Guidelines. Need some help? Visit Support and Answers.

  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 140 replies
  • Subscribers 32 subscribers
  • Views 16156 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

What is the best way to wire ceiling lights?

Arran Cameron
The ceiling rose junction box with its loop-in wiring is now really showing its age and is no longer a practical (or even safe) installation for most residents who wish to install fancy light fittings. It is still, however, the most common arrangement for new build houses and rewires, probably as the result of the electrician's training and how they consider it to be the norm or they cannot think of (potentially better) alternatives.


So, what is the best way to wire ceiling lights? Should neutral wires be taken to the switches or not?
Parents
  • 0

    I can see an argument for not having a dedicated supply, unless the unit is capable of indicating the supply has been removed.

    For example, smoke alarms that silently switch to battery may be better on a shared low current radial such as lights, as they are then less likely to trip and then be switched off and forgotton.



    Agreed. Conventional wired alarms do sort of have such a mechanism. Both the panel and the outside bell box have their own backup batteries. Once the panel's battery is exhausted it ceases to send a 'hold off' (or tamper) signal to the bell box, which then starts to sound the alarm, thinking the cable might have been cut by a ner'do'well. (Which is why you often hear alarms going off during power cuts - those are the system where the panel battery need replacing). There is a risk of course that if you're away for a fortnight and don't hear anything while both sets of batteries are running down, then there will inevitably be a gap in protection, but hopefully that'll be spotted quickly on your return if you're in the habit of deactivating the alarm every time you come home. If not, then certainly the same approach that many take for smoke alarms - i.e. piggybacking on a regularly used circuit so that any trip is quickly spotted has an advantage.

       - Andy.
Reply
  • 0

    I can see an argument for not having a dedicated supply, unless the unit is capable of indicating the supply has been removed.

    For example, smoke alarms that silently switch to battery may be better on a shared low current radial such as lights, as they are then less likely to trip and then be switched off and forgotton.



    Agreed. Conventional wired alarms do sort of have such a mechanism. Both the panel and the outside bell box have their own backup batteries. Once the panel's battery is exhausted it ceases to send a 'hold off' (or tamper) signal to the bell box, which then starts to sound the alarm, thinking the cable might have been cut by a ner'do'well. (Which is why you often hear alarms going off during power cuts - those are the system where the panel battery need replacing). There is a risk of course that if you're away for a fortnight and don't hear anything while both sets of batteries are running down, then there will inevitably be a gap in protection, but hopefully that'll be spotted quickly on your return if you're in the habit of deactivating the alarm every time you come home. If not, then certainly the same approach that many take for smoke alarms - i.e. piggybacking on a regularly used circuit so that any trip is quickly spotted has an advantage.

       - Andy.
Children
No Data

Community Rules & Guidelines