[HN Gopher] Idea for a new hand tool: Automatic Wire Twisting Pl...
___________________________________________________________________
Idea for a new hand tool: Automatic Wire Twisting Pliers
Author : nikisweeting
Score : 34 points
Date : 2024-01-25 08:03 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (docs.sweeting.me)
(TXT) w3m dump (docs.sweeting.me)
| ansgri wrote:
| Why would you even use twisting as connection method for
| professional work (i.e. not when you just don't have any proper
| tools around)? Various quick connectors like Wago exist for
| temporary connections, and for permanent ones handheld hydraulic
| crimping presses are not that expensive.
| nikisweeting wrote:
| Plenty of reasons, not all electrical work is professional, and
| even then it's not just for electrical work. It's useful for
| chicken wire, cable management ties, making long twisted pairs,
| etc.
| OJFord wrote:
| Earths are to be connected to a single point, not multiple
| terminals of a Wago block or similar, in the UK at least.
| Twisting is not afaik a requirement, but it's common, and
| _adds_ to the security of it. (At least, as long as the solid
| core hasn 't been twisted and untwisted repeatedly and near the
| point of breaking.)
|
| OP appears to be doing it to make a fatter gauge cable out of
| smaller ones though?
| BrandoElFollito wrote:
| You mean that the earth cable should run uninterrupted as a
| single wire from the connector of the device to the power
| cabinet?
| OJFord wrote:
| Take a ceiling rose light fitting for example; you have:
| - twin core & Earth line - twin core & Earth to
| next fitting (or back to cabinet to complete the ring)
| - live to switch & switched live return - flex live
| & neutral (+ Earth if not double insulated) to light
| fitting
|
| those 2-3 Earths obviously need to be electrically
| connected, and that is not supposed to be done with a
| multipoint terminal block. They are supposed to be under a
| single screw in the light fitting say, or twisted together
| & sleeved.
|
| I believe it's thought that it reduces the chance of
| failure - one connection to check vs. a terminal block of
| three 'connections' where it's easy with solid core to
| think that they're secure when actually the middle one
| isn't, it's just roughly prevented from slipping out by the
| stiffness of the others, and potentially isn't a good
| electrical connection.
| Maxion wrote:
| The UK electric code is wild.
|
| A ceiling rose light fixture in Finland has three wires:
| - Earth - Neutral - Live
| OJFord wrote:
| It can be like that, it's not a requirement, but once you
| know what's going on it's actually quite convenient to
| have the chaining. Not if you're trying to stuff it all
| in a small fitting that wasn't designed for it, but
| otherwise.
|
| I suspect Finnish spotlights are similar - they run in a
| chain not all individually to the switch? So only the
| last one has just the feed and nowhere to go?
|
| Difference is in the UK we have 'ring' circuits, where
| the 'end' as it were goes back to the consumer unit
| (power cabinet). It's mostly a post-war hangover: if the
| load is assumed fairly even then it means you can use
| half the wire diameter vs. not having the return, which
| was thought with typical and logical layout would mean
| less cable overall, since the 'end' would already be back
| around the other side close to the CU again. It has some
| safety advantage too, but AIUI it's slowly fading out of
| vogue for new installations and it will likely end
| eventually. (Some critique it that with modern patchy
| load distribution it actually now ironically requires
| _more_ copper than the equivalent radial circuit, and
| probably not post-war level but copper 's expensive
| again.)
| zokier wrote:
| > Twisting is not afaik a requirement, but it's common, and
| adds to the security of it.
|
| Not clear what sort of connection you are referring to here?
| And how twisting improves it? But I'd be surprised if there
| wasn't better option available
| mauvehaus wrote:
| Wire nuts, likely. The directions on the last box I bought
| say that twisting is allowed but not required. I would
| think the reason to twist is to improve the mechanical
| connection, not the electrical one.
|
| It should make it more resilient to grabbing two wires and
| pulling in opposite directions. Which shouldn't happen in
| practice anyway, but, you know.
|
| Regardless of how you feel about wire nuts, if you're in
| the US, your house is probably full of them.
| OJFord wrote:
| No, I've never seen them (not that I'm an electrician,
| but nor for sale) in the UK.
| OJFord wrote:
| To a single point as I said, I'm not really sure how else
| to describe. Could be ring terminals crimped on and under a
| single screw, that would be better. But twisted cores under
| screw beats not twisted under screw - even just twisted and
| no screw (as is common especially in say light fittings
| that are double insulated/no metal to begin with, no Earth
| point) is probably better.
| zokier wrote:
| So screw/stud termination. Yes, ring or spade(/fork) lug
| would be much better than bare wires, twisted or not. As
| I understand it, crimping is almost always the preferred
| way to terminate/connect wires.
| OJFord wrote:
| Yep, there's often not a lug though, and they'll either
| be twisted and flapping about, or in the (same side of,
| if applicable) a single terminal; in the latter case I
| would think twisting is better than not, or better than
| separate straight crimps. Certainly not worse.
|
| It was just an example of when it's done, I was never
| trying to say it's the absolute best, no other way.
| flipbrad wrote:
| My electrician (UK) was recently very upset at use of
| twisting in sockets - made uncoupling them (to bisect the
| ring and thereby find where a fault was occurring) very time
| consuming.
| BrandoElFollito wrote:
| Why are you saying that wagos are for temporary connections?
| ovi256 wrote:
| This seems to be some sort of meme existing in the US
| electricians mindspace, which prefer use of cheaper wirenuts
| on twisted wire. Wagos are approved for permanent connections
| in the whole world.
| petee wrote:
| From what I've heard many electricians are wary because of
| old poorly designed back-stabbed outlets, thus anything
| held by a tiny burr & pressure is forever untrustworthy.
| lucvh wrote:
| A modified version of a wire wrapping gun might work:
| https://uk.farnell.com/metcal/g200-r3278/wire-wrap-tool-manu...
| lucvh wrote:
| With one of these in it: https://www.amazon.com/Neepanda-
| Connector-Accessories-Simult...
| nikisweeting wrote:
| Great idea, this is the closest thing I've seen yet! I've seen
| wire wrap circuits before but never seen this particular tool.
| JakubDotPy wrote:
| I would advise against using this for electrical work. See the
| internet for "wago vs twisting".
|
| Chicken wire, crafting, etc. sure.
| jstanley wrote:
| You're not twisting electrical wires together to make an
| electrical connection, it's just to keep a bundle of wires
| together.
| almostnormal wrote:
| Cable lacing keeps them together without any twisting.
| idiotsecant wrote:
| The twisting is in fact part of the electrical connection. On
| a good wire nut connection the wire nut is just insulating
| the bundle and if it falls off the bundle is still secure.
| mschuster91 wrote:
| > On a good wire nut connection the wire nut is just
| insulating the bundle and if it falls off the bundle is
| still secure.
|
| The problem is, a good wire nut is impossible to
| distinguish from a bad wire nut. A transparent Wago (or its
| clones) are virtually foolproof to install and to inspect.
| dreamcompiler wrote:
| No. If you use a good wire nut (i.e. use a good brand, have
| experience, and never reuse a wire nut), the nut itself
| makes the electrical connection. A good wire nut
| application will never fall off. If it does, you didn't
| attach it right. I concede this is a function of experience
| and it's not foolproof.
|
| All that having been said, I still pre-twist because it
| helps keep the wires together which makes it easier to put
| the nut on in the first place -- especially if you're
| connecting more than two wires.
|
| Edit: One point I left out is that if you don't pre-twist,
| correct attachment means you should put the nut on with
| enough tension that _the nut itself_ causes the wires to
| twist together. This hurts your fingers if you do it all
| day, so using a wire nut twisting tool is recommended.
| avar wrote:
| You're comparing apples to oranges.
|
| You need to twist or otherwise adhere wires together before
| soldering them, e.g. when using heat shrink solder sleeve,
| unless you've some other way to hold the wires in place.
|
| There's places where you can substitute wago, but often not,
| e.g. when working with limited space, e.g. repairing a broken
| wire harness in a car, or similar.
| Mashimo wrote:
| > There's places where you can substitute wago, but often
| not, e.g. when working with limited space, e.g. repairing a
| broken wire harness in a car, or similar.
|
| Don't fear! The wago inline splicing connector is here!
|
| https://www.wago.com/global/electrical-
| interconnections/disc...
| avar wrote:
| I knew about that, actually. It's way too big still for
| some uses, and I'm guessing won't deal well with anything
| that repeatedly lightly pulls on the wire (e.g. a trunk
| hinge). But for some other cases it's great.
| londons_explore wrote:
| Heat shrink solder connectors are the thing to use in
| this case:
|
| https://www.amazon.co.uk/-/dp/B073RMRCC3
|
| Waterproof, tension proof, will handle more current than
| the wire itself, hard to install wrong, and very reliable
| (ie. No fires)
| weinzierl wrote:
| Maybe use a small rebar wire twister with the hook replaced by
| pliers. Something similar to this
|
| https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ExFB-mbvt9k
|
| These things need to be fast because it's usually done by piece
| workers.
|
| There are smaller versions used to tie up sacks also.
| nikisweeting wrote:
| Thats a good idea. Ideally I want something that doesn't have
| to apply much tension on the wires, but a smaller version with
| the right pitch angle on its internal threads might work.
| MawKKe wrote:
| The traditional(?) version of that tool[1] could also maybe
| work if you are allowed to make a loop of the wires for
| twisting. The tool itself is just a hook on a angled axle that
| rotates in the handle. It's called 'surrauskoukku' in finnish,
| not sure about the english name
|
| [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1BJQorsaCQ
| wkipling wrote:
| The wire twisting pliers in the first picture are used for lock
| wire, not electrical wire and they are very good at that specific
| task. Used in industries such as aviation to prevent
| movement/rotation of a fastener or a part such as a screw on oil
| filter.
| nikisweeting wrote:
| Yeah but they they're usually too big for the work I have in
| mind, and not nearly as smooth as a potential pump-action
| equivalent.
| ryandrake wrote:
| Yea one of the flaws of traditional safety wire twisting
| tools is their size and inability to get into really tight
| spaces. The solution in the article still seems too big. I'd
| buy something like it but only if it was the size of a small
| ratchet.
| nikisweeting wrote:
| Yeah it's hard to depict when there's no existing examples,
| I was imagining it should be something as small as a pair
| of side cutters or small pliers. I tried ChatGPT image
| generation and it failed miserably haha.
| keep320909 wrote:
| Alibaba has all sorts of wire twisting machines, tools and
| pliers...
| nikisweeting wrote:
| I've looked through many of them in the past, but none quite
| fit in the niche I'm aiming for.
| rainbowzootsuit wrote:
| This seems to basically already exist. The safety wire twister
| pliers probably won't have enough leverage for solid core
| household wiring especially compared to a cordless drill.
|
| Drill Powered Wire Twister and Stripper That Has Gone Viral
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxyTou4pMqQ
| nikisweeting wrote:
| I've seen these but I wanted something hand powered for the
| 24~14awg range.
|
| The target use-case isn't houseold wiring as Wago's or real
| terminals are better for that anyway. It's more for smaller
| low-voltage hobby projects, chicken wire, making twisted pairs,
| etc.
| rainbowzootsuit wrote:
| It seems like toward the smaller end of that range but a wire
| wrap tool with a scaled version of that bit might be along
| the lines of what you're after. Wire wrap is meant to go
| around a long relatively rigid pin as the host for the
| wrapped wire.
|
| https://jonard.com/network-it/wire-wrap-tools
| rainbowzootsuit wrote:
| Also I've had good success with just chucking multiple
| strands wire into a regular drill to make twisted pairs when
| needed.
| mtpockets wrote:
| I've used the drills clamp to hold the end of stripped wires then
| twist.
| tussa wrote:
| I'm sure I saw a method of making a circuit that used twisting
| instead of soldering. Apparently it was used quite a bit in the
| days gone by.
|
| Anyone knows what that night have been?
| nikisweeting wrote:
| Are you thinking of "Wire wrap construction" perhaps?
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wire_wrap
| tussa wrote:
| Yes! Thanks!
| linsomniac wrote:
| Probably not what you're talking about, but everyone should
| know the Lineman's Splice:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Union_splice
|
| TL;DR: It's a method of joining two wires that won't pull apart
| under load; the wire will break before the splice comes apart.
| Add solder, trim any pointy bits, and you have a NASA approved
| joint.
| jdmichal wrote:
| Looks very similar to knots used to join fishing line, like
| the blood knot.
| tussa wrote:
| Thanks! I had this one and the Wire Wrap somehow linked in my
| mind but forgotten the name. Must have seen them both
| described on the same page a long time ago.
| linsomniac wrote:
| I came very close to describing it as "two wires, end to
| end, with the free end wire-wrapping the opposite wire."
| :-)
| icameron wrote:
| I'm trying this now with 20ga solid core, at least without
| solder it is still pulling apart even with more then 6 wraps.
| It could be my technique, still working on it. Thanks.
| xyst wrote:
| Sounds like this person just needs a wire nut twister attachment
| for their power drill tool.
|
| Professional electricians use something like this to finish the
| outlet boxes.
|
| https://www.amazon.com/T-Line-Twisting-BOWT-001-Power-Access...
| nikisweeting wrote:
| As mentioned in other comments below, the whole point is that I
| don't want a big unwieldy tool, it should be the size of the
| gun-type automatic wire strippers.
| bArray wrote:
| You can get very small drills, I have a USB powered one with
| enough torque to twist wires.
| nikisweeting wrote:
| That's not a bad idea, I have a small electric screwdriver
| that could work. What I really want is something with a
| spinning head angled 90o facing forward though, like the
| gun-type automatic wire strippers [1]. It's a lot easier to
| hold a trigger-type interface and reset it quickly than a
| screwdriver-grip-type interface.
|
| [1] Like this: https://docs.monadical.com/uploads/88cd3519-
| 84a4-413e-b266-1...
| hacknewslogin wrote:
| Just put this wire nut tightening tool into a 1/4" multi-bit
| screwdriver. I used that a lot when I was doing electrical
| work.
| CapitalistCartr wrote:
| As an electrician, do NOT do this. Electrical screwdrivers
| sometimes already include a wirenut wrench, but the ones that
| mount on a drill are a joke, and dangerous to wiring. Wires for
| line voltage especially, need to be well-connected.
| graiz wrote:
| Why not build a prototype?
| m463 wrote:
| related, is there a way to automatically tighten nuts from the
| side?
|
| there are clicky box-end wrenches that you put over a nut, but
| something like that for an open ended wrench when you come in
| from the side.
|
| Basically, a ratcheting or powered open ended wrench?
| BobbyZero wrote:
| It's called a drill chuck.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-01-26 23:00 UTC)