A basic lighting question

[keith.baker]

I have a loop-in lighting system and have recently had an extension with lots of new rooms to decorate and add decent lights to. The builders just installed basic ceiling roses with the plastic 8 slot connectors plus metal earth connector.

I've ascertained how to wire up the new light fittings using connectors so that I'm left with just the single Live and Neutral wires (plus the earths). However, because there are up to 5 cables involved, there are too many wires to fit into single connectors. I think I'm right in saying that I could daisy-chain these connectors until I'm left with 1 wire for each - but I decided instead to remove the plastic connector strip from the rose and re-use it as well as the separate metal connector block from the rose for the earths.

I would have liked to have pushed this connector strip up above the ceiling plasterboard, as well as the earth connector, but the hole in the ceiling is not big enough. Rather than make a bigger hole, I left these connectors below the ceiling and fitted them inside the recess of the light fitting. I did insulate all connections with electrical tape.

Is what I have done acceptable, dangerous or somewhere in between? In this particular case, the light fitting didn't have a transformer in it, but I do have other lights to put up which do have one - should I be more careful in this case about leaving the connectors inside the light fitting?

I'm a newcomer to fitting lights with a loop-in system - so please be gentle - although I did talk through what I was doing with someone with electrical knowledge.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Sounds like a dangerous bodge.

This type of ceiling rose is designed to accept:- TW&E feed TW&E loop to next fitting TW&E switch pair Twin flex to pendant.

All contained within a fire resistant enclosure.

If you don't want to use this method - say because of a non 'standard' light fitting - you use proper junction box in the ceiling void.

Anything just insulated with tape and left dangling just won't do.

[Guy King]

The message from "Dave Plowman (News)" contains these words:

Oh, it'll do several things. Give you a nasty shock if you're groping around under the floorboards, for a start.

[meow2222]

how youve managed to have 5 cables in each fitting I cant imagine. On this basis I have to wonder whats going on.

NT

[Christian McArdle]

It's common enough.

Loop in, loop out, switch, lamp, slave lamp

You can have 6, if you loop out an extra point, or have multiple slaves in star topology.

Christian.

[David Hansen]

On 4 May 2006 08:48:29 -0700 someone who may be [e-mail] wrote this:-

Did they wire them up?

Presumably you have connected all the leads within the new fittings to a terminal block.

That's a lot of cables. There should be four terminals to wire up a light, live, neutral, earth and switched live. How many wires go to each terminal depends on the layout.

Depending on the circumstances the best approach may be to leave the existing ceiling rose wiring to look after itself and take the switched live, neutral and earth to a terminal block that also has the wires from the lamps in it. This might all fit in the enlarged ceiling rose cover of some fancy light fittings.

Doing so is illegal. Not only are you exposing people to a shock hazard but there is a chance you may burn the house down as the connections are not in a fire resistant enclosure.

[keith.baker]

"Sounds like a dangerous bodge.

This type of ceiling rose is designed to accept:- TW&E feed TW&E loop to next fitting TW&E switch pair Twin flex to pendant.

All contained within a fire resistant enclosure.

If you don't want to use this method - say because of a non 'standard' light fitting - you use proper junction box in the ceiling void.

Anything just insulated with tape and left dangling just won't do."

Thanks for the advice - I had my doubts which is why I asked. I have read that using connectors and pushing these up into the ceiling void was a common practice. From what you've said, I guess that this is still unacceptable, unless you use a junction box?

I've left the rose connections exactly as fitted by the electrician, so I assume there's no problem with these - but in taking the connector strip out of the plastic case of the rose, I guess that's the problem? The round plastic case is too big to fit into the recess of the new light fitting, so that's why I can't use it.

[keith.baker]

Yes. And I've left this wiring exactly as it was because I've removed the terminal block from the plastic rose case.

I've used the Live and Neutral single wires from the rose terminal block and these feed into another terminal block which came with the new light fitting. I also fed a sleeved wire from the earth connector block on the rose to the earth connector on the new fitting.

Well this is what I've tried to do - except the plastic case of the original rose won't fit into the new light fitting, so I removed the terminal block from it and used it without the case. The existing rose wiring is therefore left as it was.

[David Hansen]

On 5 May 2006 04:12:20 -0700 someone who may be [e-mail] wrote this:-

Do you mean the cover of the old rose, or the base which it screws to and which contains the terminals, or both?

[keith.baker]

Apologies for my use of the terminology!

I can't use the cover or the base. Neither will fit into the recess of the new light fitting. I removed the terminal block from the base, with its wiring intact and retained this alone.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

It may well be, but still a bodge.

Yes.

It's a common problem. Personally, I'd force all makers of such things to fit a loop in loop out connector system within their 'fancy' cover, since pretty well all new homes come wired like this. Rather in the same way as all appliance makers must fit plugs.

[David Hansen]

On 5 May 2006 04:40:23 -0700 someone who may be [e-mail] wrote this:-

Then I would get hold of a small junction box for lighting circuits. I would then remove one set of connections and connect all of these to one terminal, then repeat this for the other three sets of terminals, leaving a short length of twin and earth to feed the light. Then I would put the junction box into the ceiling via an enlarged hole and fasten it there with a short screw. Then I would repair the hole and fit the new fitting.

This could have been avoided by getting the builders to wire up at a junction box and just put in a drop for the fitting.

[David Hansen]

On Fri, 05 May 2006 13:35:38 +0100 someone who may be "Dave Plowman (News)" wrote this:-

They would certainly complain that this made the fittings non-standard and thus they could not use the same thing throughout Europe.

[keith.baker]

Thanks for this David - very helpful.

To clarify - the terminal block in the junction box replaces the

8-terminal connector in the rose base? In some cases will this will mean putting up to 5 wires into one terminal? That was one of the reasons why I kept the original rose connector because it has multiple connector terminals for live, neutral and loop.

Is what I'll have to do demonstrated in this diagram:

go from 3A to 3B as per the diagrams in the link? If you can't get all of the wires into the appropriate single terminal slot, what do you do?

[Dave Plowman (News)]

As does the fitting of a 13 amp plug?

I'm not really concerned about maker's objections. If they were allowed to just do as they wish there would be far more dangerous fittings on the market than now.

[David Hansen]

On Fri, 05 May 2006 15:08:16 +0100 someone who may be "Dave Plowman (News)" wrote this:-

That involves no changes to the equipment itself, only the lead. That even applies to power supplies, which have interchangeable bottoms with the pins attached.

Tony would not agree with you.

I'm just the messenger.

[David Hansen]

On 5 May 2006 07:06:59 -0700 someone who may be [e-mail] wrote this:-

There is no terminal block in the junction box. It has four terminals, one for each of the functions I mentioned. If you get the MK version it may have two terminals for each function, a good idea,

In some cases will this will mean putting up to 5 wires into one

That shouldn't be a great problem as the terminals have plenty of space. However, I would question the number of wires for the reasons others have given.

terminal block inside it.

I think you will. If you can't then there are a number of mounting boxes which the terminal block from the rose can be fitted into.

Cables should be clipped before they enter either sort of box, to resist the cables being pulled out. A small hammer is useful to do this.

You should find a joist by the hole in the ceiling, to which you can fix things. That includes the new fitting.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

As would fitting a junction box. Pretty well the same as a plug. Could be designed so it was moulded on too.

[David Hansen]

On Fri, 05 May 2006 16:41:36 +0100 someone who may be "Dave Plowman (News)" wrote this:-

As we all know, many of these fittings don't have any sort of junction box. Some may have a terminal block fitted to the end of the wires, others don't. One could argue that they should all have a junction box moulded in, with four terminals. However, I don't think the manufacturers would be keen on changing their designs in such a dramatic fashion.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

No manufacturer is keen on doing anything that might cost in production. Like fitting a plug - the same arguments were trotted out then.

However, given the number of times this sort of question comes up on here about replacing a loop in loop out box with a fitting which doesn't include a proper terminal block, and the stories of lights being on with the switch off and the fuse blowing when its switched on it's a pretty common problem. Usually fixed by bodging.