You're welcome. As you will have seen, I've just done it as well, but in my case I have nothing other than the connection between my brain and typing fingers to blame
Kind Regards, John
New Oven
- Thread starter Chapistan
- Start date
Kind Regards, John
Sponsored Links
- Joined
- 11 Jan 2004
- Messages
- 42,735
- Reaction score
- 2,633
- Country
I don't believe the oven could generate an overload.
However, the OP wants to add a hood to the cooker circuit and replace the switch with a socket. This cannot be done.
However, the OP wants to add a hood to the cooker circuit and replace the switch with a socket. This cannot be done.
I'm glad to hear it
... and nor, of course, could anything connected via an FCU.Not without an FCU (because I guess we would have to assume that the hood could create an overload). Replacing the switch with a socket and feeding to the hood from that via an FCU would presumably be OK?
Kind Regards, John
Quite. It obviously cannot.
Sponsored Links
The OP wanted to replace his cooker switch with a twin socket (first post)
No RCD protection for starters
and he won't be able to switch off the oven/hob in an emergency.
Just about, I suppose. The existing 'cooker switch' actually includes a (not RCD-protected) socket. One presumably could replace that accessory with a similar one (again including a socket) without invoking a need to add RCD protection. You are therefore saying that replacing the existing single socket with a double one would create the need for RCD protection, which I suppose might be strictly correct, even if it does not make a lot of sense! Shifting the cooker circuit onto the RCD side of the CU (there appears to be a spare way available) would obviously solve that problem.
If that was "for starters", is there anything else which you feel means it 'cannot be done'?
Kind Regards, John
True - but aren't you the one who often points out to people that there is no requirement for such a switch?
Kind Regards, John
There is no requirement for an isolator.
If it is deemed necessary to have an emergency switch then there should be one.
I think it is but you can argue it is not.
If it is not deemed necessary then I suppose you may design a circuit with sockets, oven and hob.
However, I do not think it wise to advise DIYers to replace the cooker switch with a double socket.
If it is deemed necessary to have an emergency switch then there should be one.
I think it is but you can argue it is not.
If it is not deemed necessary then I suppose you may design a circuit with sockets, oven and hob.
However, I do not think it wise to advise DIYers to replace the cooker switch with a double socket.
The isolator/switch distinction is really artificial, since any of the switches we would be talking about would qualify as 'isolators'. I would personally certainly want some sort of switch, and so probably would MIs, but I am not at all sure that ther is a regulatory requirement.
It was the OP who proposed/suggested that, not any of 'us'. The OP should certainly be made aware of the possible issue with not having an 'emergency switch' but if he nevertheless decided that he was happy without one, then I think it's reasonable for us to tell him whether what he proposed was, or was not, acceptable electrically, isn't it?
Kind Regards, John[/QUOTE]
DIYnot Local
Staff member
If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.
Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.
Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local
Sponsored Links
