Ring Connection in Electrical Installation: Boxless vs. German Socket Wiring Technique

Hello everyone, I have recently come across the concept of a ring connection in a kind of electrical installation, from the description of the person with whom I spoke, I concluded that it was a boxless installation, but a colleague argued that the Germans wrapped the cable around the socket connecting the circuits, or is it some way of connecting circuits or just a reserve for the future ???

A circuit connected in a ring is one where the conductor from the switchgear goes to the outlet, then to the next, and so on, and from the last to the switchgear again. Then it is powered from both sides.
I do not recommend using something like this, possibly with a correspondingly smaller protection (some people think that if the cable is doubled, you can give 2x more protection - but what if the circuit is broken at some point?).

A boxless installation is simply one where all connections are made in boxes under the fittings and no boxes are used under the ceiling (generally very good and probably the most popular solution now). May or may not have anything to do with the ring.

If you mean excess wire in the box, it's no wonder, it's normal practice. If the cable breaks / gets hot, etc., there is something to get, and so is the bowel.

Thanks, buddy for the comprehensive answer, i.e. ring connection where the cable returns after powering all the circuits in the node to the switchboard, but the Germans use it?

It was used in blocks of the so-called large slabs.

As far as I know, this solution is used in the UK.
The topic was discussed extensively in another electric forum.

Okay, but only L returns to the switching station or does PE and N also make a ring loop?

The entire circuit, i.e. L, N and PE, returns to the switchboard.

However, the use of this method in Poland does not make any sense.
Although the only advantage is that the impedance value in each slot is the same.
And this is where the benefits end and the stairs begin, because there is no equipment in the country to fully use this method.

The British secure such a circuit with a value of 32-40A, but the construction of their terminals successfully allows for the connection of two wires with a cross-section of 4mm2. Although the sockets have a load capacity of 13A, each plug connected to them has its own protection from 3 to 13A.
Of course, both ends of the loop are connected to the safety terminals in the switchgear.

As you can see, the use of this solution in Poland is just a thoughtless aping that can end up with unforeseen consequences.

Hello.

I already wrote about it - at the beginning of the 70's several electrical installation systems were developed, both for switchgear devices
as well as internal supply lines, through installation in residential premises.
The following systems were created at that time:
- Szczecin
- Gdańsk
- Katowice
It was then that the two-piece knife attachment was born, adapted to be glued to concrete (Wierbek),
This is when non-cut loops were born. It concerned 2-core cables in the circuitry of plug-in sockets.
Lighting circuits with CPR were connected differently.

Hello.

Yes it can.
Unfortunately, communism and the times of joyful socialism forced our engineers to develop cheap methods. The eastern friend would not allow much.
Such a method is to increase the reliability of supplying the receiving devices with the meager means at our disposal.
The loop is a double-sided power supply, where you can afford to reduce the cross-section of the wires as such, it is possible to provide further power in the event of a failure, wire breakage.

Hello.

You have to go buddy to an installation failure involving such installations, you will see this. After all, there were only a few circuits, so what kind of spider web?

Obviously not PEN, or you would have to write penning, not zeroing.

Hello.

Quote:

Let's skip the topic of this reset because you are an electrician, probably from the "communist" years

And even longer

Quote:

only that during the 3 years of study, no one mentioned what it used to be called.

Probably also young
As for the lack of education - fact. I am learning the Sorok three days and I still do not know enough.

PS. I thought I was up to date, and here zonk - a dinosaur.
(Good thing I didn't get wrinkled or limped: roll :)

lordpakernik wrote:

used to be differently taught now we still have PEN, PE and N. So I assume it was a PEN conductor.

Finally, I have to finish off the respondent (I can't resist the temptation). Zero could not be performed on a network with a phase-to-phase voltage of 220V,
and both phases went to the apartment. Fuses on both cables.
Here you have a problem to figure out (with your professor)

Hello. The topic is general. So without going into the nomenclature, the ring connection is not forbidden, there are conditions for that - deep boxes, 3x2.5 wires will be easily connected to the above-mentioned everything in accordance with the standards when it comes to security. Applicable or not depending on who is doing and whether you want to tighten the second cable to the switchgear. Regards

Hello.

Perhaps the professor knows the concept of deliberately electrically connecting parts of a device to a metal conductor in the ground.
This is nothing else, only the commonly known (depending on the task) earthing, as a protection against the appearance or long-term maintenance of a dangerous voltage (for human naprimier) on metal parts, which under normal conditions, etc. etc.
Now it is enough to analyze the modern TT network system, and it will be clear.

Hello,

ele_pp wrote:

Zero could not be performed on a network with a phase-to-phase voltage of 220V,
and both phases went to the apartment. Fuses on both cables.

Why couldn't it be done? Referring to the ring, this is just a good output considering one circuit and two PEN wires ...
Now, unfortunately, wherever you have to convert TN-C to TN-CS by splitting the PEN in the switching station and grounding N.

Hello

macco1987 wrote:

Why couldn't it be done?

I understand that my colleague allows the situation when the fuse blows and unfortunately it will be in the neutral circuit, not the phase (to use contemporary terms)
greetings
pm001

macco1987 wrote:

Hello,

ele_pp wrote:

Zero could not be performed on a network with a phase-to-phase voltage of 220V,
and both phases went to the apartment. Fuses on both cables.

Why couldn't it be done? Referring to the ring, this is just a good output considering one circuit and two PEN wires ...

And because each of these wires had a potential of 127V against ground.
There was no PEN. There was additionally connecting the housings of some receiving devices with ... water pipes.
But we are departing from the topic, we are not supposed to write about it, but about loops in internal electrical installations

Well, these are old installations, I thought about the current security measures - I deserve my honor ...

ele_pp wrote:

macco1987 wrote:

Hello,

ele_pp wrote:

Zero could not be performed on a network with a phase-to-phase voltage of 220V,
and both phases went to the apartment. Fuses on both cables.

Why couldn't it be done? Referring to the ring, this is just a good output considering one circuit and two PEN wires ...

And because each of these wires had a potential of 127V against ground.
There was no PEN. There was additionally connecting the housings of some receiving devices with ... water pipes.
But we are departing from the topic, we are not supposed to write about it, but about loops in internal electrical installations

In old tenement houses it has remained here and there. Mentlik was made because the modernization was not fully completed. Changed power to 3x380 or to 220V for single phase installation. One fuse has been bridged so that there is no fuse at zero. But in some places, the connections to the pipes remained. And there was even newer instead of zero PEN, but how was it supposed to suddenly have 10 mm square and how is the old installation in Polish and new nomenclature. But a few more changes will pass and the old ones will be replaced by new ones, hopefully not only in the name.

I read this thread and admit that I got lost like a little Johnny.

macco1987 wrote:

Now, unfortunately, wherever you have to convert TN-C to TN-CS by splitting the PEN in the switchboard and grounding N.

After all, what the electrician should ground in the switchgear: distribution point PEN, PE or N?

ele_pp wrote:

Now it is enough to analyze the modern TT network system, and it will be clear.

ele_pp wrote:

And because each of these wires had a potential of 127V against ground.

I do not get anything from this comparison of the old "grounding" and today's TT.
What values should be inserted into the drawing to properly depict it?

lordpakernik wrote:

Someone can explain the meaning of power supply from both sides of the same sockets?

London was electrified during World War II when copper was expensive and difficult to obtain. It was then estimated that the system with double-sided power supply gave the best ratio of current-carrying capacity to cable length. All this on the condition of using only one circuit (with a load capacity equal to the connection power) and individual protections at the receivers (in plugs and switches). In Poland, a similarly austerity system was implemented in "rightly past" times. Today, due to the completely different ratio of the price of copper to the cost of the entire installation, the system should be treated as a curiosity.

Hello.

I meant a 3-phase 3-wire star system.



Unfortunately, there is little information on the subject on the net.
These cases were settled by PBUE of 1969 and PN-69 / E-02001 - rated voltage of the network and the maximum allowable voltages of devices and parts of electrical power equipment of direct current and alternating current with a frequency of 50 Hz.

My friend William Bonawentura this is not true as this method is used to this day in both Great Britain and Ireland.

I will write so that when you use boxless installation, 2 wires are connected in the socket anyway, so what's the harm from the last socket, let the cable go to the switching station.

Hello,
buddy jarecki 86 the same "N" is individually grounded by dividing it in the main switchboard, having TN-C installation. PEN is connected to PE, then the bridge from N and to the earth electrode. Thanks to this, in the case of loss of PEN from the pole, we have an earth electrode N. I repeat it TN-C and not TN-S where we ground the partition point PEN