# Interest group forums > Electrical Contracting Industry Forum >  open wiring

## murdock

what are your thoughts on the short piece of exposed wire between the pipe and the ceiling board feeding lights...i believe this is such a trivial thing and should not be regarded as a fault which will stop the issuing of a coc...so long as the joint is not done in the roof space.

----------


## Sparks

I agree, what I do, if the wires are more than a few inches, is to use a piece of PVC spragging. A slit down the side & clipped over the wires takes only a moment. My freebie for the day.  :Smile:

----------


## murdock

what makes putting a piece od slit sprag over the wires any better?

is  it to protect the wire is so...from what.

if it is to stop the dust and miggies getting in...that is hardly a solution.

and lastly what is the difference between a piece of house wire covered in a braid like sleeve laying in the roof and a piece of wire between a pipe and hole in the ceiling?

----------


## Sparks

Dust & miggies won't harm the wire like rats. The sprag will afford some protection. Extending the conduit & fitting a bend & junction box will cost more than the public are prepared to pay. With the joint below the ceiling all service personel are protected against shock.
Alternatively a through box with a piece of surfix would be acceptable, but I still prefer the sprag because the rat will get tired of the plastic before getting to the conductors as opposed to T&E.

----------


## TECHNICIAN 810

A one way pvc box allso works well, most domestic light fitings holes line up with the box holes, and fix with 2 m5's. Open conections in the light fitting itself are acceptable.
I use the Hellerman Tyton scotch lock, where you just skin and push in, very conviniant with short ends and hard to reach applications, however not sure if they are compliant.

----------


## murdock

> Dust & miggies won't harm the wire like rats. The sprag will afford some protection. Extending the conduit & fitting a bend & junction box will cost more than the public are prepared to pay. With the joint below the ceiling all service personel are protected against shock.
> Alternatively a through box with a piece of surfix would be acceptable, but I still prefer the sprag because the rat will get tired of the plastic before getting to the conductors as opposed to T&E.


what if your house has T&E and rats?

----------


## Sparks

Precisely why I use conduit for new installations. The guy selling his house is going to go with the lowest quote to bring his mess to standard though.

----------


## AndyD

> I use the Hellerman Tyton scotch lock, where you just skin and push in, very conviniant with short ends and hard to reach applications, however not sure if they are compliant.


If scotch lock's are what I think they are then they're for telephone wires only. They're not rated for 220v nor are they current rated. 

I'm guessing you mean these things...?

----------


## Sparks

Scotch-locks is the name given for a number of quick couplers. The ones' telkom use are round and can only be used for 2 wires up to 1mm. The scotch locks referred to are a great product from Hellerman Tyton for connecting solid wires like T&E or Surfix up to 2.5mm. They do indeed comply with the requirements for connectors, but must still be enclosed in a junction box. An excellent replacement for screw connectors. They come in 2/3/4/5/6 and 8way blocks which are colour coded. Unfortunately they are scarce in PE, but whenever I can get my hands on some I load up with them. They are multi spring loaded and once used cannot be re-used.

----------


## AndyD

I think I'm confused by the trade names. I would call what you're describing 'Wago's' link. Can you link to the item you describe?

----------


## murdock

you must be talking about this product helacon plus...brilliant i use them all the time.

http://www.hellermanntyton.us/products.aspx?cat=486

you can reuse them by the way...you just use a very thin pin type screwdrivers to release the wire

----------


## Sparks

Yip thats the one I use when I can get my hands on them. They are also referred to as scotch locks. I would not trust the spring to work 100% a second time though. Since they came out a good few years ago I have never had a single joint give problems where they were used. With the screw connectors one sometimes tends to over tighten then either the connectors breaks the one wire off or you shatter it by pressing it too hard. It is a pity they are not freely available here. Very user friendly and time efficient.

For comms I use the same as Telkom, it is a little round button which takes only two thin wires, it has a little insect repellant grease inside which also protects against moisture and just gets squeezed with your fingers over the un-stripped ends of your wires.

----------


## TECHNICIAN 810

Andy, you can visit the hellrman tyton web page, these connectors are state of the art. I don't think they comply with Sans because I cant see a 2.5 mm drawing 16 - 19A, not enough grip.
i use them on lights only 10A, very confident, 15A max. remember a welder or heater drawing 15 - to 20A, lot of heat involved, especial on your joints.

----------


## murdock

according to the link i posted they are rated to 24 amp max

Features Double Spring Technology for safe, secure and reliable connections
Low Insertion Forces + High Retention Values
Accommodates both solid and stranded wire cores
Polycarbonate Housing for quick visual inspection; Meets UL 92V2 standards
Low insertion forces reduces buckling of stranded wire
Able to combine solid and stranded within same housing
Separate test port for fast, easy confirmation of connection
Quick Fit Insertion relieves installer in difficult spots like overhead installations, eliminates twisting motion and reduces overall assembly and connection time.
Max Current Rating to 24 A
Max Voltage Rating to 600 V (c UL us)

----------


## sparkydelux

Yes he means WAGO.

They are pretty good. i brought back about 1000 of each when I can home from UK. Read up on them. They carry quite a bit of current. and they guarentee not to come free. They pretty expensive this side of the pond, but so convenient.

only thing i can say, is make sure you strip the cable properly and ensure that the solid strand goes all the way in. No flex wire either. Use a crimp!!

----------


## murdock

use a bootlace ferrol...which should become a standard for all connections which have screws directly onto the wires like the ones issued with stove islolators

----------


## natal21

As far as I knew every pipe feeding a light unless ending in a adapter screwed into the light , had to be ended off in a box. By law

----------


## murdock

> As far as I knew every pipe feeding a light unless ending in a adapter screwed into the light , had to be ended off in a box. By law


give us the code reference or description...

----------


## Sparks

I've also used non-existing regs as an excuse to teach someone a more acceptable work ethic. If it works why not?

----------


## AndyD

Hmmm, I'm not sure making up regs to suit the situation is a good idea, even to promote good work ethic.

----------


## natal21

page 196 6.16.1.9
6.16.1.9 Unless part of the appliance or self contained in their own
enclosure, control components of fixed appliances that form part of the fixed
installation, including their input terminations and associated protective
switchgear that are not mounted in the distribution board, shall be
incorporated in a suitable enclosure(s) that comply with the requirements of
6.6.1 and 6.6.4. Enclosure(s) shall be
a) non-flammable,
b) located as near to the appliance(s) as is practicable,
c) permanently installed,
d) such that they cannot be opened without the use of a tool, and
e) readily accessible.

now light fittings are a fixed appliance

page149 4.8 wiring thru building elements

if wiring passes through a building element including a ceiling it shall be non flammable enclosure or wireway

only by putting as box flush with the ceiling and screwing  the light fitting to the box can you have an enclosure, or of course put the pipe through and into the light fitting

so accordingly I still say no exposed wiring in the ceiling

----------


## murdock

i just need to get this straight...so you telling me every single light fitting you install has a box above the light where the light is terminated or a pipe which is flush with the ceiling?

do you do twin + e installations?

----------


## natal21

use a screw in gland as an entry point, not gonna argue with you , feel free to do your installations as you see fit but the question was about exposed wiring  not twin and earth

----------


## natal21

sorry forgot to answer your question , but we don't do flush pipes to ceiling, every light ends in a loop in box when we do pipe and wires and the boxes vare all fastened to a batten so they sit flush with the ceiling when its installed.

----------


## Sparks

Couple of crossed lines here. The supply circuitry is not included in: "page 196 6.16.1.9
 6.16.1.9 Unless part of the appliance or self contained in their own
 enclosure, control components of fixed appliances that form part of the fixed
 installation, including their input terminations and associated protective
 switchgear that are not mounted in the distribution board, shall be
 incorporated in a suitable enclosure(s) that comply with the requirements of
 6.6.1 and 6.6.4. Enclosure(s) shall be
 a) non-flammable,
 b) located as near to the appliance(s) as is practicable,
 c) permanently installed,
 d) such that they cannot be opened without the use of a tool, and
 e) readily accessible."
It specifically states:control components; terminations and switchgear.

The main thing here which we all agree on it seems is not quite "open wiring" but rather "exposed conductors" are a no-no. If the installation is old enough to have "open wiring" and that wiring is still as installed with all the cleats in place and no sagging, illegal joints, the correct spacing etc. and the insulation resistance readings are >1MOhm then I see no reason to fail the installation based on the fact that it is "open wiring". In most cases I have found the readings much better than T/E

Even T/E needs to be installed as per guidlines, not just loosely thrown over the beams where it is easier to work with.

----------


## Dave A

> If it works why not?


Because it'll bite you in the ass one day. Rumour and misinformation seems to have a knack for spreading faster than the dry truth.

I had one about a month ago - a purchaser of a property we'd issued the COC on had been told a whole pile of tripe by another electrician. The on-site meeting (with SANS codes firmly to hand) to clarify was actually a pleasant experience (at least for me  :Big Grin:  ). Biting my tongue and taking the pile of abuse that was hurled at me as I was working on setting up that meeting was definitely *not* a pleasure.

I don't think the pleasure in the end was worth the pain in the beginning, and I'm pretty sure the other electrician wasn't to enamored with the experience either.

Play it straight as you can, I reckon. There's enough BS in this world without adding to it intentionally.

----------


## Dave A

Oh - there's a "next page" I hadn't read when I made the previous reply...

I've got a question:




> 6.16.1.9 Unless part of the appliance or self contained in their own
>  enclosure, control components of fixed appliances...


At the risk of showing my ignorance, isn't this section requiring enclosures relating to the control components, protective switch gear etc. rather than the fixed appliance itself?

If yes, I don't see how it is relevant to light point terminations.

----------


## Sparks

It specifically states:control components; terminations and switchgear with reference to "fixed appliances" which is what a light fitting is. But yet again the actual words can be brought in to it.

Wires /conductors?
Light fittings/ luminaires?
spade/shovel?

----------


## Dave A

At the risk of being difficult, when it comes to input terminations, surely that is the input terminations to the *control components et al*.

Then there's the matter that lights are not just "ordinary" fixed appliances - they're luminaires.

In support of my point, consider 6.16.1.4 which states:
Where a fan or heater is included in a luminaire, the luminaire is regarded as a fixed appliance....

----------


## Sparks

So you would find acceptable the connection of a "light fitting" where the ceiling rose is amiss and the joints are below the ceiling? :-)

----------


## murdock

> what are your thoughts on the short piece of exposed wire between the pipe and the ceiling board feeding lights...i believe this is such a trivial thing and should not be regarded as a fault which will stop the issuing of a coc...so long as the joint is not done in the roof space.


correct it is about the short piece of wire beteen the pipe and fitting...not about twin+e.

so let me ask this question what is the diffrence between the short piece of exposed wire and the whole roof being wired in twin + e

rats eat thru twin + earth just as fast as they can eat thru a short piece of exposed wire...

what i am try to find out is should the coc be held back because you can see 50mm of red and black wire.

the aim of the question is not to "catch" anyone out...just get some feed back from everyone.

just to add...what about the "exposed" earth wire used to earth a ceiling fan when when the metal pipe is used as an earth in an old installation.

----------


## murdock

the way i would like to see light fittings wired(i can dream)...a junction box in the roof with a piece of metal sheathed heat resitant wire connected to the light fitting...no rats...no burnt wires...in the real world this only happens where my customers give me open order numbers.

----------


## Dave A

> So you would find acceptable the connection of a "light fitting" where the ceiling rose is amiss and the joints are below the ceiling? :-)


No (just in case that *wasn't* a rhetorical question  :Wink:  )

I probably should bail out on this discussion at a technical level anyway. I'm probably seeing issues where there aren't any.

----------


## SparkyScott

The way I would wire in the lofts is running boards screwed to the beams,clip the twin and earth to that and joint boxes
 on the running boards alot neater,unlike my sisters loft that is just a mess!

----------


## Sparks

I reckon hair-splitting will be with us for many years to come. This is just one of many points on which there is not a hard and fast rule which has to be complied with. If there is "open wiring" in a flat roof no-one will know. The roofspace just gets excluded from the COC because of inaccessiblity. Guys (registered or not) work the cheapest and fastest they can then grab the money and run. The guy who comes later has the problem of telling the client he was an idiot for being a cheapskate.

----------


## murdock

or worse...when you take on a new customers and you add a light or 2 then the installation starts to fail...you look the a!! because now since you worked on the installtion there are suddenly problems.

i have this issue at present...i did some work for a customer about a year back...notified the customer of the shocking installation...twin+e buried directly in the plaster...no boxes...light fittings and plug boxes used as junction boxes...i keep getting called back for problems with the installation failing...seems like the brickwork must have squashed the cabling in various places especially between the ground floor and first floor...tv guy put nice new dstv cable and nailed it to the wall in the same place were the outside light cables run..

----------


## Dave A

Lots of fun to be had in the electrical contracting game for sure  :Stick Out Tongue:

----------


## Sparks

The worst is, when you expose the guys doing it you have to kiss the DOL ass to try get something done about it. It has taken a few months to get a case submitted to the Senior Prosecutor's office. Had I not stayed on DOL's case and eventually got hold of the Deputy Director, I have no doubt nothing would have happened. There is still a glimmer of hope for now though. Good thing I am such a stubborn SOB.

----------


## Jerrad

I had the same issue when testing, found open wires to the Batten holders of an old house.According to SANS 7.2.2.2 provisions must be made to prevent heat damage of wire/cable ends to a light fitting, it would be advisable to use  a heat resistant cable from a round box to the final wiring of a  batten holder.

----------


## murdock

i wish you luck trying to get a prosecution on such a remedial item...when you cant even get a prosecution for a totally illegal installation...with life threatening violations

----------


## Jerrad

That is unfortunately true, there is no recourse if someone issues an invalid COC.

----------


## ACEsterhuizen

So if a building's wiring (surfix) is all done with helacon connectors, no inspection / junction boxes, is it reg compliant (or not) because it is in the "inaccessible roof space?" or because the helacon connectors complies with  reg 6.16.1.9 a, b, c, d and e. 

a) non-flammable,
b) located as near to the appliance(s) as is practicable,
c) permanently installed,
d) such that they cannot be opened without the use of a tool, and
e) readily accessible.

----------


## Sparks

No it is not.

----------


## ACEsterhuizen

> No it is not.


Please Sparks can you refer me to the specific regulations that clearly supports that statement. Also, 6.3.7 , 5.1.1 , 6.16.1.9 a, b, c, d, and e,  6.3.7.2 , 7.8.5.1: (IP4X Protection against wire, etc. Cannot be penetrated by a solid object 0.04 in. (1.0mm) or more in diameter) does not exclude helicon joints or terminations. Bearing in mind that most of these are excluded because it is an "existing installation" and falls under clause 5 only.


ps I have a major issue at a casino where these helacon connectors was used (every single joint and termination to a downlight etc) by the contractor and now they want a coc. I would appreciate a good solid set of regs that clearly exclude this type of wiring.

I am unsure about this issue and it is going to cost this client (+-1200 joints/terminations) money to redo all these connections joints and terminations into inspection boxes and junction boxes with glands etc. Also there will be a civil claim against the contractor and I really need to get my facts (and regs) very straight, clear and simple.

----------


## Sparks

For the regs you will have to give me some time, but off pat you can see that the conductors are exposed and you know that joints must be within an enclosure.
The Helicon while being an approved method of joining conductors are not a replacement for enclosures, they are on an equal par with porcelain connectors and insulated ferrules, would they be accepted if not in an enclosure?
When the terminations are truly "inaccessible" (flat roof with no roofspace) it has become common practice to accept that it be excluded from the COC, however, I believe that the installer should still be held accountable.
I will post the regs I believe to be of relevance as soon as I get some time to find them.

----------

ACEsterhuizen (26-Nov-14)

----------


## ians

> they are on an equal par with porcelain connectors and insulated ferrules


Sorry dont agree with you if you are referring to a "skrewit". The helcon connector is by far a superior product. It is spring loaded which means it is always tight and if installed correctly and there are no live parts which can be accessed with the standard test finger and cannot be disconnected without the use of a tool. What i would like to do one day is do some tests with my thermal imager to see how they maintain connected to a 25 amp load.

----------

ACEsterhuizen (26-Nov-14)

----------


## bergie

i agree with sparks.no matter how good a quality helicon is, it will still be classed as exposed,and should be installed in a joint box.
i have seen a new product,a type of pvc round box that splits in half. you install it over the connections without disconnecting and reconnecting. it has a type of bush instead of the gland. i havent used it yet and not sure if its sabs approved,but it will make coc repairs a lot quicker.

----------

ACEsterhuizen (26-Nov-14)

----------


## ACEsterhuizen

Regs that exclude this type of wiring: *The helacon is not SABS approved*  It was, but it has expired in 2011.* It has NO IP RATING*. Good solid regs i was looking for: _(REGULATION 7.8.5.1 Joints in cables shall be avoided, however if required, they shall be made in an enclosure that affords a degree of protection not less than IP4X.)_

RCC- Helacons.pdf

And also Hellermann's reply:

"Ek het nou met Ken gepraat.

Ek het vir jou die RCC sertifikaat aangeheg, dis ongelukkig al wat ons beskikbaar het.

Hierdie connectors het nie n IP rating nie.

Die connections moet in junction boksies wees. (6.3.7.1 Joints and terminations of cables, cores and conductors shall be made in accordance with manufacturers' instructions or the appropriate part of SANS 10198.)

Laat weet asb as daar nog iets is waarmee ons kan help.

Dankie.


Regards,

Jaco Jansen van Vuuren
Internal Sales
HT Logo

Tel : +27 11 879-6600
Fax : +27 11 879-6603
e-Mail : jaco.jansenvanvuuren@hellermann.co.za"

----------


## Sparks

Sorry I never had time to look up regs, glad you found it.

----------

