Crimping tool - DIY use

[flameport]

416.2.4 Also states if the intermediate barrier provides a degree of protection to IPXXB or IP2X then a key is not required.

A tool is not required bot ONLY if the intermediate barrier (the connector in this case) is not removeable without a tool.

Pushfit connectors are insulated to that degree..

They are.

Of course a pushfit connector can be removed without a tool or key

Therefore they do not comply. The outer box can be opened without a tool and the connectors inside can be removed without a tool.
The wording is identical in the 16th edition, so they did not comply with that either.

Some other interesting information:
The site selling the connectors with the box is not the manufacturer. Wago, who make the terminals, do not claim their terminals are compliant with BS7671, since they only make the terminals. They don't list them as 'maintenance free' either.
It is certainly possible to use the Wago connectors in a compliant way - by enclosing the connectors in a suitable box which can only be opened with a tool, and locating the box in an accessible place.

Wago do NOT make the 'maintenance free junction box' or any kind of junction boxes.
It seems that someone has either had the junction box designed and made, or obtained it from some other manufacturer, put it together with the Wago connectors and claimed that the combination is 'maintenance free' and also complies with BS7671. Neither of these claims are true.

 

[pushwire]

I'll stick to the reasoned argument and let others read what I write and decide whether my argument is valid or not. It is after all what forums like this are about.

I've fitted many crimp connections and each time I do a connection I pull on it to make sure that the crimp has been effective. I do this because that is my training. This training is born out of experience that crimp connections can be unreliable and can occasionally pull off and so need to be checked. How hard I pull on the cable has to be a matter of judgement. Pull too hard and the insulation could be compressed exposing the inner core. Not pull hard enough and it could be that the crimp hasn't taken properly and could fail at some point in the future. How do I tell? Do crimps come with guidance notes regarding the newton force required to be applied to ensure long term viability? No, I say again "it's a matter of judgement"

Now a pushfit connector is a precision engineered part with deterministic behaviour that has been verified under test conditions. I have also fitteed 100's of pushfit connectors and my experience is that I have never had a conductor pull out of a pushfit connector without exerting a force sufficient to break the terminal, and that's a lot of force. In fact the design of a pushfit connector works to grip harder with increasing force.

Now in the face of the evidence of my own experience that crimp connections are non-determinstic and prone to failure during installation and an alternative that I have found to be highly reliable. I have chosen the reliable option.

Another reason for me choosing pushfit over crimp is product safety. Who is ultimately responsible for the safety of a crimp connection? In the event a correctly fitted pushfit connector fails because the product is defective the manufacturer will be held responsible. Who is responsible for the crimp?

For my part a fair and reasoned analysis of the evidence has lead me to judge pushfit terminal blocks to be safer than crimp or screw terminals.

Whether you choose to use pushfit over crimp in inaccessible areas is not precluded by the regs given the junction box conforms to BS60670-22 and the terminals are maintenance free. But it clearly it is a judgement call as to whether you trust one system over another.


Ultimately if you are set in your belief that a crimp is more reliable than a pushfit terminal then no amount of reasoned argument will prevail in making you change your mind but we are free to make that choice.

 

[pushwire]

Flame,

I'll let manufacturers worry about compliance.

http://www.wago.ltd.uk/

Didn't have to go any further than the home page.

If you choose not to use a particular product than that's your choice.

 

[RF Lighting]

I don't see your point?

All the wago website says is that their connectors comply with BS7671.

No one has ever disputed this. I for one am quite happy to use them for certain tasks.

It could be said a 13A socket complies with BS7671, but you couldn't argue that it was still compliant when installed in the bottom of a swimming pool.

Just like these connectors. They are absoloutly fine for general use, but they are not suitable for use as an inaccessible joint.

Are you going to tell us why you have such a vested interest in this product anyway?

 

[Softus]

Are you going to tell us why you have such a vested interest in this product anyway?

Of course she isn't - she's too busy producing "reasoned arguments".

And I'm still awaiting an answer to this one:

Now are pushfit terminal blocks maintenance free... i think so!

How many qualified people have you found that have agreed with you?

 

[pushwire]

http://www.wago.us/company/397.htm

 

[RF Lighting]

What does that prove?

They are very nice pictures, but it stil does not show how they would comply with regulation 526.3

 

[pushwire]

Regulation 526.3 identifies exceptions from the requirement for connections to be accessible for inspection, testing and maintenance, one exception being a joint forming part of the equipment complying with the appropriate product standard.

Appendix 15 does NOT say

"Junction boxes with screw terminals must be accesible for inspection, testing & maintenance or, alternatively use connections (Regulation 526.3)."


Appendix 15 in fact says:

"Junction boxes with screw terminals must be accesible for inspection, testing & maintenance or, alternatively use maintenence-free terminals / connections (Regulation 526.3)."


I don't know how to make it any clearer. Personally I'm satisfied that when manufacturer states that their terminal blocks are maintenance free and can prove they have been tested to the appropriate standard and they have been tested within a BS60670-22 compliant junction box then the result is a maintenance free junction box. As I said before if you would rather solder or crimp your connections then fine that's ok but it's also ok to use an appropriately certified BS60670-22 Junction box with maintenance free terminals.[/b]

 

[JohnD]

it's also ok to use an appropriately certified BS60670-22 Junction box with maintenance free terminals.[/b]

For my information, can you show me the certification of your product that shows its OK to do that?

 

[pushwire]

Make a direct request to the manufacturer I'm sure if you are persistent enough you should be able to extract a copy of their BSEN60670 test certificate.

 

[JohnD]

You mean you can't support your assertion?

 

[RF Lighting]

Regulation 526.3 identifies exceptions from the requirement for connections to be accessible for inspection, testing and maintenance, one exception being a joint forming part of the equipment complying with the appropriate product standard.

Appendix 15 does NOT say

"Junction boxes with screw terminals must be accesible for inspection, testing & maintenance or, alternatively use connections (Regulation 526.3)."


Appendix 15 in fact says:

"Junction boxes with screw terminals must be accesible for inspection, testing & maintenance or, alternatively use maintenence-free terminals / connections (Regulation 526.3)."


I don't know how to make it any clearer. Personally I'm satisfied that when manufacturer states that their terminal blocks are maintenance free and can prove they have been tested to the appropriate standard and they have been tested within a BS60670-22 compliant junction box then the result is a maintenance free junction box. As I said before if you would rather solder or crimp your connections then fine that's ok but it's also ok to use an appropriately certified BS60670-22 Junction box with maintenance free terminals.[/b]

I don't see what your fascination with appendix 15 is.

Are you tring to tell us that these connectors are suitable for use as an inaccesible joint when used on a socket circuit, but not for any other circuit type such as a lighting circuit which is not covered by appendix 15 ?

That would seem a little strange to me at least.

 

[Softus]

Now are pushfit terminal blocks maintenance free... i think so!

How many qualified people have you found that have agreed with you?

I don't know how to make it any clearer.

Hm. How's about answering the above question?

As I said before if you would rather solder or crimp your connections then fine that's ok

It was already OK before you joined on 12th February, but previously you said that crimped joints were not OK, so what changed your mind?

but it's also ok to use an appropriately certified BS60670-22 Junction box with maintenance free terminals.

It would be if they were maintenance free.

 

[csh]

mankind has been to the moon. anywhere on earth is accessible
maybe this will help pushwires argument?

 

[RF Lighting]

This is a reasoned debate between adults with opposing view points.

If you have nothing constructive to add, please feel free to post in the general discussion forum, but do not make a habit of littering our grown up threads with your childish comments.