This discussion is locked.
You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

Modular wiring home run cable sizing

Hello, I am trying to confirm the appropriate cable size for a home run cable in a modular wiring system. There is a 9-port MDB that supplies  radial circuits with socket outlets. As per BS7671, the appropriate grouping factor to be applied is either 0.5 (table 4C1) or 0.45 (table 4B5) assuming all circuits are carrying more than 30% of the current capacity of the home run cable. This ends up in having to use 6mm2 or even 10mm2 cables instead of 4mm2 that would be expected for radial circuits in 20A MCBs.


What are your thoughts?


Any comments would be appreciated.


Having said that and looking at regulation 2.3.3.1 from appendix 4 I have the feeling that based on the BS even when we are supplying lighting and power circuits in trunking, we would have to oversize all circuits to comply with the grouping factors. So how is it justified when we are installing a power and lighting DB with all these outgoing circuits in different sizes and loads in 2.5 (or even 1.5) for lighting and 4 for power?
Parents
  • If the circuits are never going to be unplugged again to reposition partitions or make other alterations is there really any advantage over running in a forty metre distribution circuit to another distribution board?


    If you look in the text books by Brian Scaddan and others you will see examples of cable calculations where you end up needing 16 mm twin and earth to supply a 3 kW immersion heater, because of correction factors. In reality you use a smaller cable and route it differently along with other tweaks.


    I changed a consumer unit in a two up, two down house. The full tally was living room, kitchen, bathroom, cellar and two bedrooms, the installation has a sixty amp main fuse and five 32 amp socket ring circuits spread across five rooms, where there had originally been one socket ring for the whole house, given that the customer had bought a dual RCD consumer unit for me to install the five circuits were split between two RCDs, two circuits would have been perfectly sufficient.


    There comes a point where there generally ceases to be any advantage whatsoever in having additional circuits, in your installation it sounds like a socket circuit on each phase will do the trick, reducing the number of circuits from nine to three, in turn reducing the number of conductors in the home run significantly, even more so if it becomes a three phase distribution circuit to a distribution board.
Reply
  • If the circuits are never going to be unplugged again to reposition partitions or make other alterations is there really any advantage over running in a forty metre distribution circuit to another distribution board?


    If you look in the text books by Brian Scaddan and others you will see examples of cable calculations where you end up needing 16 mm twin and earth to supply a 3 kW immersion heater, because of correction factors. In reality you use a smaller cable and route it differently along with other tweaks.


    I changed a consumer unit in a two up, two down house. The full tally was living room, kitchen, bathroom, cellar and two bedrooms, the installation has a sixty amp main fuse and five 32 amp socket ring circuits spread across five rooms, where there had originally been one socket ring for the whole house, given that the customer had bought a dual RCD consumer unit for me to install the five circuits were split between two RCDs, two circuits would have been perfectly sufficient.


    There comes a point where there generally ceases to be any advantage whatsoever in having additional circuits, in your installation it sounds like a socket circuit on each phase will do the trick, reducing the number of circuits from nine to three, in turn reducing the number of conductors in the home run significantly, even more so if it becomes a three phase distribution circuit to a distribution board.
Children
No Data