32A Industrial socket for cooker?
- Thread starter DIYbot2
- Start date
Sponsored Links
I've just looked at that link. Have you seen the last post, only posted ¾ hour ago so 21:45?Thanks again John. A switch to select either of the socket circuits is a good idea.
Reading this thread
I want a 16 amp socket in the garage with 3 double sockets
Glad you got it resolved.www.electriciansforums.net
it sounds like an interlocked switched socket such as
32A 2 Pin + Earth 230V Interlocked Switched Socket IP44
Suitable for small commercial and industrial applicationswww.cef.co.uk
would meet the regulations.
No I hadn't, so thanks for bring that to our attention. I As you say, it says:
I've already said that in terms of electrical common sense, an interlocked unshuttered socket would seem to satisfy the spirtit of BS 7671's requirement for shuttered sockets, so we're only talking about people who feel the need for strict compliance with the every word of BS7671.
For those concerned with 'the every word of BS 7671', I imagine there would be some debate as to whether or not the above suggested 'workaround' would be compliant. BS 7671 says that every socket must be of the shuttered type if it is "for household and similar use", but without defining what that means, and without suggesting that use by a 'correctly trained person', within a domestic environment, would not be regarded as "domestic and similar use".
In general, something which is disallowed by regs (because it is potentially 'dangerous') does not automatically become acceptable if it is only accessible by a 'correctly trained person'.
There would also be the question of how one would ensure that the only user(s) was/were 'correctly trained', and how one could ensure that only a 'correctly trained' person could have access to the key.
However, as above, common sense is not necessarily the same as strict compliance with every word of the regs.
Kind Regards, John
If they don't define "household and similar use" then the only thing anyone can, in fact must, do is to use a dictionary/legal definition.
So "household" is people, nothing to do with type of use, not synonymous with "domestic", and "household and similar use" isn't the same as "domestic and similar use".
If it's for use by the people living there, then it's household use, no matter how "non-domestic" it may be (e.g. 3-phase vehicle lift in the garage, or an extensive workshop at the bottom of the garden with a 5-axis milling machine). But a "domestic" socket for a "domestic" use like a "domestic" vacuum cleaner is not household if for some mad reason it's locked and the only person who uses it is a visiting cleaner.
So "household" is people, nothing to do with type of use, not synonymous with "domestic", and "household and similar use" isn't the same as "domestic and similar use".
If it's for use by the people living there, then it's household use, no matter how "non-domestic" it may be (e.g. 3-phase vehicle lift in the garage, or an extensive workshop at the bottom of the garden with a 5-axis milling machine). But a "domestic" socket for a "domestic" use like a "domestic" vacuum cleaner is not household if for some mad reason it's locked and the only person who uses it is a visiting cleaner.
Sponsored Links
I'm not sure about that.
As you say, in the absence of a definition in the regs, one is left relying on dictionary/legal/'everyday use' definitions. Despite what you suggest, when "household" is used as an adjective (as in "household use") many dictionaries give a synonym as "domestic". However, since the regs don't mention 'domestic' (in the context we're discussing), I'm not sure of the relevance of that.
I agree with you up to a point, in which case the regs' requirement for shuttered sockets would apply to any socket used by people who lived in the building whose electrical installation included that socket. However ....
I don't think that the fact that someone lives in a building necessarily means that everything they do in that building is a "household activity". A good few people live in buildings which are, at least partailly,clearly 'workplaces'.
As above, the reg we are discussing says nothing about 'domestic', so I'm not sure of the relevance of that comment. In any event, I don't agree with your statement as a generalisation. If I, for some mad reason, #locked away' one of the sockets in my house and restricted access to that,it would not necessarily preclude its use for 'household' (or 'domestic') purposes.
I'm going to regret getting involved in this, but...
If the user of the workshop only unlocks the box around the socket and plugs the milling machine in when she's on billable time to a client is the ceeform socket now allowed?
Would you consider the regulation permits such a socket in a church hall (where no one lives*)
*No, don't get all thological on me.... or if you must, the hall is completely detached from the church and on the other side of the road!
FWIW my local church hall wouldn't let me fit Ceeforms some 4m above stage level because their preferred electrician had some bee in his bonnet about them being unsafe for children. When we did the AmDram shows we had to pay him to inspect our kit and would only accept stage lights fitted with them and an adapter cable if they were physically locked together.
Webster does, but it's American.
Oxford Dictionary: noun. /ˈhaʊshəʊld/ /ˈhaʊshəʊld/ all the people living together in a house or flat.
Cambridge Dictionary: a family or group of people who live together in a house.
The Housing Act 2004 defines a household purely in terms of the cohabiting people, and their relationship to each other etc. You could have exactly the same mix of people - numbers, ages, sexes, whatever, but if they don't meet the prescriptions in the act they are not a household.
It's all about the people.
It does. Irrespective of what it is used for. There is no exemption from a reg applying to who uses whatever it is on the grounds that it isn't "domestic" use.
If they are part of a household then if they live there then by definition it is "household activity". It's about the people.
Whether someone "lives" in a space could need lawyers to chew over. I don't "live" (in the everyday meaning of the word) in my WC, but it's an integral part of where I do live. I'd expect back-footedness if you tried to claim that part of your premises was separate from where you live if it was legally (address/land registry/council tax/deeds stuff) not separate.
My scenario was nobody in the household having access to it. If nobody in the household can use it, it's not household.
But if anyone in the household uses it, it's household use, doesn't need unanimity.
Some folk have urinals in their house. It's probably unlikely that the female members of the household would use it. So mum, dad, & daughters, only one person uses it, just as if only one person uses the workshop.
It's about the people.
The problem is that it's all too easy to conjur up ever more "ah but what if she then" complicated paths where you arrive at the same destination (using the milling machine) but the journeys were different.
Does her time being billable make a difference? She may not use the urinal in the house but that doesn't mean it's not for household use, so ditto the milling machine even if she's the only one who uses it? Does ownership of the machine make a difference - is it owned by her in the same way as the bike in the hall that nobody else but her uses, or is it owned by the business she runs? If she has a woodturning lathe and makes a fruit bowl for the sideboard, does that differ from making one for her son who is leaving home, or her M-I-L as a Christmas present? Or if she makes some candlesticks for the church altar at no cost?
BTW - you'd probably end up with the same "err - it depends" scenarios with domestic vs non-domestic.
If it really really matters for some important reason then as I said you'd need lawyers and court cases, and that's only ever going to happen if HMCE are chasing VAT, or a council after some tax, or a mortgager after a higher interest rate, or an insurer trying to get out of a claim where she milled a finger off...
I'm happy with saying that when the regs use the term "household" they mean what UK dictionaries and UK laws mean by the term, and quite frankly I can't think why anybody would be insistent on saying they don't.
Premises can be lived in, or not. A household is a particular group of people living together. If they don't live somewhere, then they are not household, even if they are together. For example a family outing to a restaurant. If nobody lives somewhere then when people go there, even if they are the household from the vicarage, what they do there isn't household use.
Electrical equipment is owned by people, not buildings.
The nature of the group of people is one of the factors that distinguishes an HMO - you could have the same building, and the same mix of people but with different relationships between them and it would not be an HMO. It's all about the people.
Sounds like a few guys I've met in my time, and even some who have been known to post here
Kind Regards, John
You're quote dictionary definitions of use of the word as a noun, but we (per BS 7671) are interested in its use as an adjective ("household use") - and many of the dictionaries don't seem to even give a definition of it as an adjective.
However, I don't really know why you are arguing (unless 'just foe the sake of arguing') since, as I've said, I essentially agree with you.
Given the unsatisfactory situation of a regulation which is not adequately clear/explicit, I think all one can do is to go with everyday/common use of language (which very probably corresponds to the spirit of what the authors of BS 7671 actually meant to write) - and, in that sense, I think most people would be fairly agreed on what is meant by 'household use' (which they probably regard as essentially the same as 'domestic use').
The 'safety consideration' underlying the reg is obvious enough, and I think one has to assume that it is meant to relate to use of a socket by 'ordinary people' living in the building for 'the usual' purposes in such an environment (whether one calls it 'household use' or 'domestic use').
Hence, as I've said (seemingly in agreement with you), I would say that, in the great majority of cases, BS 7671 requires sockets within (or attached to) a 'dwelling place', or in an associated outbuilding to be 'shuttered'. However, as we know, there is no compulsion (unless imposed by some club to which the individual belongs) to comply with regulations in BS 7671 - so it is possible to exercise common sense.
One situation where I would probably disagree with you when part of a building used as a dwelling is clearly also been using for 'commercial' (maybe even 'industrial') purposes. In that situation, I am not at all sure that I would regard use of sockets in that part of the building (in association with the commercial/industrial equipment) as being "household use", even if the individual doing the 'using' was part of the (per dictionary definition) household that used some of the building as a dwelling.
Kind Regards, John
So to understand, say, "garden use" you would need a definition of "garden" as an adjective, and you would be unsure what it meant if all you had was a definition of the noun "garden"?
OK.
No you don't.
Such a view could only be formed by people who don't know that "household" has a specific meaning, it is defined in dictionaries, it is defined in law, and it is not synonymous with "domestic". Anyone who says it is doesn't know what they are talking about.
If the regulations say "household" then they are talking about who uses it, not how or why.
Then you would be regarding dictionaries and Acts of Parliament as being incorrect.
Maybe the people who wrote the regs did mean "domestic" and not "household", but they didn't write that and we can't read their minds and I for one am not a fan of people unilaterally deciding that a regulation or a law means something other than what it actually says just because they disagree with the meaning as written.
other than perhaps in the (very unusual) situation of which a building which is only partially 'a dwelling', in what sense do you believe that I disagree with you?
As I said, in terms of common/everyday use of language, there is little, if any, difference between the terms "household use" and "domestic use". Indeed, even though no definitions are given, there are places in BS7671 where it is implied that the words "domestic" and "household" are being used interchangeably, such as:
Maybe this issue arises from the fact that different people write different bits of BS 7671, using slightly different language, without taking enough notice of what language others have used? The word "domestic" is used very widely throughout BS 7671 (to distinguish from commercial and/or industrial) but in other places (where it would seem that the 'intent' is probably the same) the word(s) used are "household or similar",
Kind Regards, John
On the fundamental issue of what "household" means.
I believe it means what dictionaries and the law define it to mean, you believe it's what people who neither know nor care about the formal definitions assume it means.
There are many such examples in many fields. They are all to be resisted. For example I'd much rather a doctor treated me for what I actually had rather than what people who don't know what they are talking about say I have.
That might prove that even the BSI has people in it who don't know what they are talking about.
Or it might be that as "household" means a group of people living in defined premises it is saying that "domestic premises" are where a "household" lives, as opposed to, say, a separate family-run shop where a household goes to work.
No, it arises out of ignorance and a lack of interest in getting things right.
Maybe that is the case. But no amount of erroneous conflations will change the wording of an Act of Parliament, for example.
If their intent was as you say, then they could easily have only used the term "domestic" throughout, and defined what they meant by it. But they didn't, so you can either support the idea that everybody doing things where the regulations apply has to guess/assume what was intended, heavily influenced naturally by their own lack of knowledge, or you support the idea that if formal regulations use a term and do not define what it means in the context of those regulations then the meaning to be used is the formal/legal one (if it exists, which in this case it does).
I know which regime I prefer.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 11 Jan 2004
- Messages
- 42,742
- Reaction score
- 2,634
- Country
Well, the maximum allowable Zs on a circuit protected by a type C breaker is half that which is allowable on a type B.
If you choose a type D, the maximum allowable Zs on the circuit will be halved again.
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
