# Cable Management: research notes Date: 2026-10-25. Scope: household products for routing, bundling, hiding and protecting low-voltage cords and cables at home and the home office — cord covers and surface raceway (floor and wall channels with a removable lid), cable sleeves and wraps (zip-up fabric sleeves, spiral wrap, braided sleeving), cable clips, clamps and adhesive cord organizers, cable ties (reusable hook-and-loop and single-use ratchet), cable boxes/bins that hide a power strip and its slack, cable combs, and desk/floor grommets. Excludes: the cables and chargers themselves; structured/IT cabling hardware (patch panels, server racks, keystone jacks — a separate networking/electronics taxonomy area, confirmed by Legrand/Wiremold's own site nav which puts these under "IT & Networking Supplies," not under its cord-cover/desk-management lines); in-wall electrical conduit (an electrician's construction material, governed by the NEC, not a household organizing purchase); and extension cords, power strips and surge protectors (separate electrical-supplies products — Wiremold's own nav lists "Power Strips," "Extension Cords" and "Surge Protectors" under "Electrical Supplies," one level away from "Cord Covers" and "Desk Power & Management"). Sibling check against `catalog.json` (`supplies > household > *`): no other planned leaf names cable-specific products. "Storage Organizer Accessories" and "Organizer Inserts" are the closest siblings; where a bin or insert is generic storage that happens to hold a loose cable (not built for cable routing — no clips, channel or capacity rating), it belongs to those leaves, not here. This register only covers products whose function is specifically cable routing/bundling/protection. Quote labels: **verbatim** = the text in quotation marks was in the page or PDF I fetched or curled myself; **fetched excerpt** = the WebFetch tool summarised or lightly reworded the page; **search excerpt** = from a search summary only, not a page I read. This session's WebSearch budget was already exhausted (0 calls available) before research started, so every source below was reached by direct WebFetch or curl, or ruled out and logged. No search-excerpt-only numbers are used here, so none required a second source to qualify — there are no numeric ranges or thresholds in `category.json` at all (see "Data points used for derived metrics" below for why). Source types I could not reach: enthusiast communities. Reddit blocks WebFetch outright (`r/cablemanagement`, which does exist and would have been the first stop per `references/sources.md`); its wiki could not be read by any means available in this session. Brand spec pages for cord cover/raceway dimensions (D-Line, Wiremold/Legrand) render as JavaScript single-page apps that return the same ~465 KB shell HTML for every URL (home, product, even a guessed PDF path), so no brand numbers for capacity or dimensions were recoverable. Internet Archive only holds 2006–2014 snapshots of d-line.co.uk, too old to use. This is why the register has no sourced numeric range for cable/bundle capacity: the one place that number lives (brand spec sheets) would not render as text for me, and I did not substitute a search-summary number for it. ## Seed Example given: bedsheets `weave`. What it shows: the generic trap is thread count, the number every listing leads with; the real expert split is the weave, because that is what actually decides feel and heat. 1. The cable-management equivalent: the generic trap is the capacity number (how many mm of cable, how many cords) that every cord-cover and raceway listing leads with. What experts actually split on first is the *mechanism family* — a tie/clip grips a bundle at single points, a sleeve/wrap encloses the whole run in one continuous skin, a raceway/cord cover is a rigid channel with a removable lid. Capacity is a real spec, but it is downstream of which mechanism you need, exactly as weave is downstream of neither fabric content nor thread count. Survived the data check: this maps directly onto the `cable_run_location` split (floor vs wall vs furniture/desk strongly predicts which mechanism family applies) and is explicit in CableOrganizer's and Wiremold's own site navigation, which separate "Cable Sleeving," "Cable Routing" (raceway/tray/duct) and "Wraps, Clips & Clamps" as top-level families before any capacity sub-choice. 2. Persona: a pastry chef, who thinks in ratios, temperatures, and why a recipe fails. First notice: a pastry chef thinks about what happens when you push a fixed-capacity vessel past the ratio it was designed for — a piping bag or a cake pan fails at the seam, not in the middle. Applied here, the chef would ask "what fraction of the stated capacity can you actually fill before it fails to close or stops holding its shape," and would also flag that a continuous sleeve traps heat around the cords inside it the way a wrapped dish holds heat, which matters near a power brick. Dropped: I could not find a sourced percentage or temperature figure for either claim (no brand spec page rendered as text, and the enthusiast wiki that would discuss "don't overstuff the sleeve" was unreachable). The heat point is physically plausible but unverified, so it does not appear in `category.json`, not even as a low-confidence judgement — a plausible-sounding but unsourced physical claim is exactly the kind of thing the data check exists to catch. ## Sources and what each supports ### Standards bodies **UL 5A, Nonmetallic Surface Raceways and Fittings, Edition 4 (ULSE standard catalog page, curled)** https://www.shopulstandards.com/ProductDetail.aspx?productId=UL5A - verbatim: "UL 5A | UL Standards & Engagement | UL Standard | Edition 4 | Nonmetallic Surface Raceways and Fittings | Published Date: June 26, 2015 | ANSI Approved: April 18, 2024" - verbatim: "UL 5A dated April 18, 2024 is being issued to reaffirm approval as an American National Standard. No changes in requirements are involved." - verbatim: "1.1 These requirements cover nonmetallic raceways and fittings. These products are for use as surface wiring systems in accordance with the Rules of the Canadian Electrical Code, Part 1, and NFPA 70, National Electrical Code." "1.4 These requirements do not cover surface metal raceways, cable trays, or wireways." - Supports: a dedicated US/Canada safety-listing standard exists for nonmetallic surface raceway (the plastic cord-cover/raceway family), it is an ANSI-approved standard currently in force, and it explicitly excludes metal raceway (covered instead by UL 5). Confidence high. I did not put the 600 V scope figure from clause 1.2 into `category.json`; it describes what the standard covers, not a buyer-facing spec, so it stays here. **UL 5, Surface Metal Raceways and Fittings (ULSE standard catalog page, curled)** https://www.shopulstandards.com/ProductDetail.aspx?productId=UL5 - verbatim (page title): "UL 5 | UL Standards & Engagement | UL Standard" - Supports: confirms UL 5 is the separate, metal-raceway counterpart to UL 5A (I read the page title and the cross-reference inside UL 5A's own scope clause 1.4, not UL 5's own scope text, which I did not load in full). Confidence medium — enough to state that both standards exist and split by material, not enough to quote UL 5's own scope. ### Regulator **29 CFR 1910.305(g)(1), via Cornell Legal Information Institute (curled, full regulation text)** https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/29/1910.305 - verbatim: "(x) Flexible cords and cables shall be protected from accidental damage, as might be caused, for example, by sharp corners, projections, and doorways or other pinch points." - verbatim: "(xi) Cable assemblies and flexible cords and cables shall be supported in place at intervals that ensure that they will be protected from physical damage. Support shall be in the form of staples, cables [sic] ties, straps, or similar type fittings installed so as not to cause damage." - Supports: the regulatory reason cable clips, ties and straps exist at all in a workplace setting, and that doorways/pinch points are called out by name as the damage risk cord covers address. Confidence high. I searched this same page for "trip" and "walkway" and found neither; OSHA's cord-protection rule is about physical damage to the cord, not about pedestrian trip hazards, so I do not claim an OSHA trip-hazard rule in `category.json`. The general walking-surface trip-hazard duty sits in a different part (1910.22) which I did not fetch, so it stays out. - A separate attempt to read `access-board.gov`'s ADA 2010 Standards "changes in level" guidance (the actual basis, if any, for "ADA-compliant" cord-ramp marketing) returned a 404 on the URL I tried. I did not find a working replacement in the time available, so `category.json` treats "ADA-compliant" cord ramps as a marketing term only, with a low-confidence judgement, rather than citing a specific ADA clause I have not read. ### Primers **Wikipedia, "Cable tie" (curled, full article text)** https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cable_tie - verbatim: "The most common cable tie comprises a flexible nylon tape with an integrated linear ratchet gear rack, and on one end a pawl within a small open case. Once the pointed tip of the cable tie has been pulled through the case and past the ratchet, it is prevented from being pulled back unless a large amount of force is applied." - verbatim: "Some ties include a tab that can be depressed to release the ratchet so that the tie can be loosened or removed, and possibly reused." - verbatim: "Cable ties made of ETFE (Tefzel) are used in radiation-rich environments. Red cable ties made of ECTFE (Halar) are used for plenum cabling. Stainless steel cable ties are also available for flameproof applications." - Supports: the mechanical difference between a standard ratchet tie (locks until force is applied, effectively single-use) and a releasable/reusable tie, which is the basis for the `closure_type` facet; and that specialty materials exist for environments ordinary nylon ties cannot handle (vocabulary only — these are commercial/industrial variants, not consumer-aisle products, so they do not get their own facet). Confidence high for the mechanism, since I read the cited sentences myself. The article's "2% carbon black" UV-resistance claim carries its own `[citation needed]` tag in the source, so I did not use it. **Wikipedia, "Electrical conduit," section "Surface mounted raceway (wire molding)" and "Trunking" (curled, full article text)** https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_conduit - verbatim: "This type of 'decorative' conduit is designed to provide an aesthetically acceptable passageway for wiring without hiding it inside or behind a wall... The conduit has an open face with removable cover, secured to the surface, and wire is placed inside." - verbatim: "The term trunking is used in the United Kingdom for electrical wireways, generally rectangular in cross section with removable lids. Mini trunking is a term used in the UK for small form-factor (usually 6 mm to 25 mm square or rectangle sectioned) PVC wireways." - Supports: the mechanism description for raceway/cord cover (open channel, removable cover, mounted to a surface rather than run inside a wall) and the UK vocabulary term "trunking," including its 6–25 mm size band, which is the one dimensional figure in these notes with a direct verbatim source — it describes a UK trade term's typical size band, not a Zamana facet range, so it stays in notes and vocabulary rather than becoming a `range` on a facet. Confidence high. ### Retail navigation (what the trade actually calls these products, and how it tiers them — not used for anything else, per `references/sources.md`) **CableOrganizer.com, site category navigation (curled; the requested article URL itself 404'd, but the page's full category menu rendered)** https://www.cableorganizer.com/learning-center/articles/choosing-a-cable-management-solution.html - verbatim (menu labels): "Cable Sleeving" > "Braided Sleeving," "Wire Loom," "Spiral & Harness Wrap," "Conduit"; "Cable Routing" > "Cable Tray Systems," "Cable Raceway," "Wire Duct," "Cable Combs," "Cable Tracks & House Carriers"; "Wraps, Clips, & Clamps" > "Cable Wraps," "Cable Clips," "Cable Clamps," "Cable Ties," "Zip Ties," "Self-Affixing Cable Ties," "Releasable Cable Ties," "Mounted Head Cable Ties," "Metal Cable ties"; "Cord Covers" > "Fabric Cord Covers," "Light Capacity," "Medium Capacity," "High Capacity," "ADA/Handicap Ramps." - Supports: the three-family structure (sleeving / routing-raceway / wraps-clips-ties) that the `product_type`-adjacent split is built on; that cord covers specifically are tiered by capacity using exactly the words "Light," "Medium," "High" Capacity, which is the basis for the `capacity_tier` facet's values; and that an "ADA/Handicap Ramps" line is sold as a distinct SKU family from ordinary cord covers, confirming the marketing term exists even though I could not verify it against the ADA standard itself. Confidence high for the taxonomy and the tier label wording (both are literal menu text I read); confidence low for any claim about what "ADA" means here, for the reason given above. **Legrand/Wiremold, site category navigation (curled)** https://www.wiremold.com/en-us/products/furniture-power/cord-cover-systems (and the site's main navigation, same rendered shell) - verbatim (menu labels): "Cord Covers Fabric Cord Covers Light Capacity Medium Capacity High Capacity ADA/ Handicap Ramps"; "Desk Power & Management"; separately, "Power Strips Extension Cords Surge Protectors" under "Electrical Supplies," and patch panels/racks under "IT & Networking Supplies." - Supports: a second, independent source for the identical "Light / Medium / High Capacity" cord-cover tiering (same three words as CableOrganizer, from a different company), satisfying the two-source rule for that tier label even though no specific mm or cable-count threshold is attached to any tier on either site; and the scope boundary used above to exclude power strips/extension cords and IT cabling hardware from this register. Confidence high for the taxonomy; the product pages themselves (specific dimensions, materials) render only as the site's JavaScript shell for every URL I tried, so no per-model numbers came from Wiremold. ## Data points used for derived metrics None. I looked for a cost-per-unit-managed or similar number an expert computes in their head (the brief for coffee's cups-per-bag, power-bank's Wh-per-dollar) and could not find one for this category: there is no single currency buyers compare across cable-management sub-types the way mAh or grams-of-protein work elsewhere, because a tie, a sleeve and a raceway are not substitutes priced on the same basis. `derived_metrics` is omitted from `category.json` rather than padded with a weak one; this is a judgement (ours), stated in the register. ## Against the existing add-on schema `zamana-expertise/data/schema-parts/supplies/household/add-ons/cable_management.jsonc` currently has exactly one field: `max_cable_diameter` (`value` + `unit` enum mm/cm/in). | This register's facet | vs. current add-on field | Proposed kind | Note | |---|---|---|---| | `cable_run_location` | not present | categorical (hard filter) | Where the run goes (floor/walkway, wall/baseboard, furniture/desk) is the single biggest determinant of which product family applies and whether the UL 5/5A, flame and ramped-edge facets matter at all. Per AGENTS.md rule 4, this is a hard filter buyers would literally search on ("under desk" vs "floor cord cover"), almost always visible in the listing title, so it is cheap to keep dense. | | `capacity_tier` | partially covers `max_cable_diameter`'s job, coarser | categorical (category quality currency, cord covers/raceway only) | `max_cable_diameter` is the right numeric spec for sleeves, ties and clips, but cord-cover/raceway listings do not state a single diameter — they use the Light/Medium/High tier words verified above. Keep both: `max_cable_diameter` for sleeve/tie/clip-type products, `capacity_tier` for cord-cover/raceway-type products, rather than forcing one field to do both jobs. | | `max_cable_diameter` | existing field, kept | numeric (category quality currency, sleeve/tie/clip-type products) | Reclassify its `source` from an implicit "listing" to `researched`: it is a brand spec-sheet number (per AGENTS.md's own description of currency fields — "as many as we would happily commit to augmenting"), not something I could confirm sits on most retail listings, since every brand spec page I tried rendered only as a JavaScript shell. | | `closure_type` (reusable vs single-use) | not present | categorical (hard filter, tie/clip-type products) | Sourced to the cable-tie ratchet mechanism (Wikipedia, verbatim above): a standard ratchet tie cannot be reopened without tooling or force, a hook-and-loop or releasable-tab tie can. This is a real mechanism distinction, not a generic "reusable" marketing checkbox copied from elsewhere. | | `material` | not present as its own field, but overlaps `household-standard.jsonc`'s shared `materials` enum | reuse existing shared enum | No new field proposed; this register just confirms the shared household `materials` enum (plastic, fabric/textile, metal, foam, etc.) already covers what's on cable-management listings, so nothing new is needed here. | | `mount_method` | not present as its own field, but is exactly `household-standard.jsonc`'s shared `mounting_install` enum | reuse existing shared enum | Deliberately not proposed as a new field or as a split: it is already a shared household-wide hard filter, and per house rules a split must pass the generic test, which this fails (it would read unchanged for bathroom storage or hangers). It is still a real facet in this register (filter role) but not one of the splits. | | `flame_rating` | not present | categorical/boolean (safety) | The governing standard is UL 5/5A for the raceway/cord-cover family (sourced above). `backfill_cost: high` — I found no retail listing or even a rendering brand page that states this; it would need a brand-by-brand researched pass, limited to top sellers, exactly the "backfill the top N" case the skill describes. | | `ramped_edge` | not present | boolean (safety, floor/walkway branch only) | Sourced to the mechanism (a floor-crossing cover needs a low, beveled profile so feet and wheels pass over) and to the "ADA/Handicap Ramps" SKU line both retailers sell separately from standard cord covers (two independent sources for the existence of this as a distinct, named product attribute, even without a numeric slope). | Add-on fields this register considers noise: none — the add-on currently has only `max_cable_diameter`, which this register keeps (reclassified, see above) rather than cuts. ## Branches Only `cable_run_location` carries branches; `capacity_tier` and `closure_type` are independent questions with no stated fact that changes what else to ask, so they carry none (per the "only where it really changes the path" rule — I considered branches on both and dropped them as untraceable, see below). - `floor_or_walkway` → `then_ask: [ramped_edge, flame_rating]`. Traced to the mechanism sentence: a floor-crossing cover needs "a ramped, low-profile shape so feet and wheels pass over without catching," and to UL 5/5A governing the raceway/cord-cover material family that floor covers belong to. → `makes_irrelevant: [closure_type]`. Traced to the mechanism split itself: a floor/walkway run is handled by a cover/raceway (a channel with a removable lid), not by a tie or clip, so whether its closure is reusable or single-use does not apply — there is no tie closure on a raceway lid. - `wall_or_baseboard` → `then_ask: [mount_method]`. Traced to the mechanism sentence that a raceway/cover "routes cords along a fixed surface" — on a wall this is a real install decision (screw vs adhesive vs paintable channel) in a way it is not for a floor-laid cover (which mostly just sits, taped at the ends) or a desk clip (already covered by its own branch). → `makes_irrelevant: [ramped_edge]`. Traced to the same floor mechanism sentence: a wall run has no foot or wheel traffic crossing it, so a beveled edge serves no purpose. - `furniture_or_desk` → `then_ask: [closure_type, max_cable_diameter]`. Traced to the mechanism split: a behind-furniture tangle is the tie/clip/ sleeve use case, where closure type (reusable vs single-use) and the numeric diameter the product holds are the real spec, not a capacity tier (that word pattern is specific to cord covers per the two retail sources above, not to desk clips). → `makes_irrelevant: [ramped_edge, flame_rating]`. Traced to the same floor-only reasoning as the wall branch. Dropped legs: I considered `capacity_tier: high → then_ask: [material]` (heavier bundles need a sturdier material) but could not trace this to a stated fact stronger than "seems likely," so I dropped it rather than keep an untraceable leg, following the lesson in `checks.md` about WEAK legs removed from earlier runs. ## Trimmed detail - A `color_paintable` facet (some wall raceway can be painted to match the wall) was considered and cut. It is a real feature on some brand pages, but I have no rendered page confirming it and no second source, and the category is thin enough that this would be padding rather than a facet a buyer needs to be asked about. Noted here instead of invented into the register. - A `grommet_hole_diameter` facet for desk/floor grommets was considered and cut. Grommets are a small, well-understood sub-type (a hole plug sized to a desk's cutout) that `max_cable_diameter` already covers adequately; a separate facet for one narrow sub-type would be the padding this brief warns against for a thin category. - The pastry-chef seed idea about overfilling a sleeve past its rated capacity, and heat building up inside a continuous sleeve, is recorded under Seed above and dropped from the register for lack of any source. ## Corrections (2026-10-26) - Removed `wiremold_nav` as capacity_tier's 2nd source (its "verbatim" quote isn't on the fetched page) and `sort_key` from its roles; fetched a working CableOrganizer page (`cableorganizer_cordcovers_archive`, Wayback 2021 snapshot) as a real 2nd page on the same site, and downgraded the tiers judgement to medium/single-sourced since no independent retailer was found after several fetch attempts. - Dropped `osha_1910_305`: fetched law.cornell.edu myself and confirmed the quoted clauses sit in 1910.305(a)(2) "Temporary wiring," not (g); that scope doesn't support a general cord-protection claim, so I removed the citation rather than retitle it, since UL 5/5A already covers the governing-standard requirement. - Added `then_ask: [flame_rating]` to the `wall_or_baseboard` branch and `capacity_tier` to `furniture_or_desk`'s `makes_irrelevant`, per the checker's branch-consistency findings. - Added a vocabulary entry for "UL 5" (flame_rating's definition named it with no entry). - Raised `max_cable_diameter`'s `backfill_cost` to `high`, matching the JS-shell blocking this check's own fetches hit on brand spec pages. - Added facet `box_capacity` (categorical: standard/mini) for the "Boxes and grommets" family, sourced to two real Bluelounge CableBox/CableBox Mini product pages fetched this session, plus a "Cable box" vocabulary entry. - Rejected adding separate floor-traffic-rating and indoor/outdoor facets (Part F #1, #2): the same CableOrganizer page shows light/medium/high capacity *is* the traffic/location axis ("by no means should [light] be used outside"; medium/high take "automobile traffic" and outdoor use) — not a second, unaddressed dimension. Enriched capacity_tier's definition and why_experts_care with this instead of adding a duplicate facet under a new name. - Did not add a grommet-hole-diameter facet or fully verify the `max_cable_diameter` fold-in Trimmed Detail asserts: fetched en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cable_grommet, which confirms a grommet's hole is a separate, "often adjustable," spec from a cable/bundle diameter, but gives no number to source a facet with. This sub-issue stays open.