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

Maintenance free approach to jointing different CSA conductors

Good day

An effective and regulation justifiable maintenance free joint of differing CSA e.g. 10mm to 4mm: is it realistic and if so what might satisfy please and specifically the splice approach (crimp, screw terminal , etc) ?

(A similar  question some time back produced the suggestion of a compound filled joint perhaps - but that was for matching CSA )

Or is it a case (as it feels) that a joint like this really ought to be accessible for maintenance because of its factors ?

Thank you.

Parents
  • Regulation 526.9.2 prohibits tinning of multi-wire, fine wire and very fine wire conductors if screw terminals are used.

    Likewise 526.9.2 prohibits tinning of multi-wire, fine wire and very fine wire conductors if there’s relative movement between the soldered and non-soldered parts of the conductors.

    When appliance manufacturers tin conductors of appliance flexes I normally cut them back and throw the tinned part away.

Reply
  • Regulation 526.9.2 prohibits tinning of multi-wire, fine wire and very fine wire conductors if screw terminals are used.

    Likewise 526.9.2 prohibits tinning of multi-wire, fine wire and very fine wire conductors if there’s relative movement between the soldered and non-soldered parts of the conductors.

    When appliance manufacturers tin conductors of appliance flexes I normally cut them back and throw the tinned part away.

Children
No Data