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 23 replies
  • Subscribers 32 subscribers
  • Views 2494 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in
This discussion is locked.
You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

Wiska boxes with wagos

Baldyhugh

Evening all

I’ve been a fan of wiska boxes for a while now and have been more commonly using the 407’s which come with the 3 lever 221 wagos and a mounting block included. Whilst I find the wagos great for lighting circuits I find the mounting block a bit fiddly and as such tend not to use them, just tucking the wagos neatly into the box once terminated. My question is, do wagos need to be fastened or suppported on some way inside an adaptable box? 
 

thanks

  • 0
    Thanks for the replies everyone. There were some comments regarding whether the cable was supported externally to the enclosure wiska box where the wagos were housed. In my example there is plastic conduit entering and exiting the enclosure left and right. This conduit contains stranded conduit singles cable so there is no way of supporting it, but in my opinion it doesn’t need supported as it is lying horizontally in the conduit. There is a flex leaving the wiska box going to a laminate suspended on chain. There is a compression gland in the wiska box where the lighting flex passes through thus providing support. Externally the flex is cable tied to the lighting chain. I believe that this provides adequate support but was curious if as a general rule, terminations in an enclosure required fixing in place. The replies seem  to indicate that it’s up to the installer to decide. As a matter of interest, has anyone used the 407 wiska box with the mounting plate to hold the wagos and if so what are your thoughts in them?


    thanks


    Peter
  • 0

    mapj1: 
     

    Soldering is a bit less off-beat, at least it can be un-done non-destructively, but I agree it is not in the average sparky's standard solutions. Those of us who do electronics could probably solder all the cores at a ring end faster than a socket or similar could be fitted, but I do not think anyone would want to.

     

    Mike.

     

    Is the use of soldering/tinning with screw terminals not frowned upon due to the issues with solder creep? There is a nod to this in 526.2  This results in initially tight terminals becoming loose over time all on their own.  Maybe a bit less of an issue with solid core conductors if the terminal screw compression gets right in to the copper but probably still not the best idea…..

  • 0

    solder can indeed spread, and so can a badly twisted multi-strand copper - I suspect that a few meter tail fires are caused by the copper relaxing into the gaps between the strands  where the twist is slightly open. Done well solder joins have a good pedigree, but I'd not recommend it to someone who has not learnt to do it well. And despite having see the fused copper ends thing, I'd not recommend that to anyone, ever. (Actually there are a few Eastern bloc wiring practices where that statement is true!)

    In terms of creep, and thermal cycling, there is a lot to be said for terminals with a bit of spring to them, like wago types, or the clock-spring like ‘constant force’ designs used to get  onto lead sheaths, pipes and certain types of braided cable  (at least if you can fit them without injury - some constant force springs seem to be designed to inflict pain  in the same vein as the fray bentos corned beef can.)

    Mike.

Join us to get the best from IET EngX.

Joining EngX lets you personalise your experience so you stay up to date on the topics that interest you, plus you’ll be able to make connections who are looking to collaborate, exchange ideas and more.

Join us Not now

Community Rules & Guidelines