Worth converting 2 radial circuits to ring?

[JohnW2]

I'd be one of those that thinks their house burning down is a bad thing..

Of course, but I personally would not think you should take that comment (presumably intended to indicate a 'downside' of rings) too seriously.

The question now is - do i need to be concerned those sockets burned out? Will the new RCD CU prevent that happening?

That is clearly what should be concerning you. 'Burning out of sockets' clearly has the potential to start fires, and you need to try to find out what caused it (poor connections at the sockets, or sometimes overloading of sockets, are probably the most likely). A new CU may well not have stopped that happening.

Am I better off converting to radials (to turn the whole post a full 180 degrees)

I can think of very few advantages, if the ring already exists.

Kind Regards, John

 

[ekmdgrf]

When you break a ring, you get two radials. The slight downside of this is that if one of the radials draws all 32A available to it, your house might burn down. Many people consider this to be a bad thing.

I suppose I can't knock you for saying that, since its a sort-of 'party line', but do you seriously believe that, in reality, 32A flowing through a cable which would quite probably have a CCC of 27A would produce any noticeable problems at all, let alone a fire?

Do I take it that you are one of those who is 'anti ring'?

It was mostly for comedy effect, although one might argue that if it doesn't really matter then we should run 32A radials in 2.5mm and get the best of both worlds.

I wouldn't go as far as to say that I was anti the ring but at the same time I don't think it necessarily needs to be the defacto standard. Thinking about my own home, the downstairs, office and upstairs could all quite happily live on a 20 or even 16A circuit. The kitchen is a different matter.

The idea of a ring silently splitting in two doesn't sit all that comfortably with me. It reminds me a little of the recent debate on oversided MCBs. On the other hand, one might argue that CPCs can silently fail. If a circuits CPC spontaneously jumped free of it's terminal at the CU, how long before anyone would notice? I guess we then get into the argument of how likely those things are to happen.

 

[JohnW2]

It was mostly for comedy effect, ...

I presumed it was - but, as you will have seen, you confused and worried the OP with you mention of houses burning down. ... you might at least have included a smiley!

... although one might argue that if it doesn't really matter then we should run 32A radials in 2.5mm and get the best of both worlds.

Yes, but if you actually designed the circuit to take 32A, you would be eating a bit into the (undoubtedly very generous) 'safety margin' which exists. That's rather different from designing a circuit to be within the official 'CCC' of the cable but accepting that, very occasionally, faults may push the current into that 'safety margin' territory.

I wouldn't go as far as to say that I was anti the ring but at the same time I don't think it necessarily needs to be the defacto standard. ...

I think that many would agree with that. However, if one has already got a ring, I would think that it would be fairly unusual for there to be any particularly good reasons for splitting it into two radials.

The idea of a ring silently splitting in two doesn't sit all that comfortably with me. It reminds me a little of the recent debate on oversided MCBs. On the other hand, one might argue that CPCs can silently fail. If a circuits CPC spontaneously jumped free of it's terminal at the CU, how long before anyone would notice? I guess we then get into the argument of how likely those things are to happen.

Exactly. All of those things can happen, in some cases (as you say) silently, but all are very rare. ... and then, of course, there are some other side of the coin - e.g. a break in the CPC of a ring can break without any (at most one) socket losing it's 'earth' connection (even those Zs may get 'too high'). Rings are, in some senses, a strange concept (which probably would not be accepted if they were first thought of today), but they have their pros and cons.

Kind Regards, John

 

[ekmdgrf]

My apologies to the OP. I thought a smilie might destroy the dead-pan delivery.

I don't think there's a compelling argument for splitting a ring.

 

[JohnW2]

My apologies to the OP. I thought a smilie might destroy the dead-pan delivery.

Maybe, but one does have to be careful with this medium of communication. When all one has is written words, from someone who is usually a total stranger, without any clues from body language etc., misunderstanding can easily occur - it can be very hard, particularly for those 'not in know' to realise when writers 'have their tongue in their cheek'. Emoticons/smilies, annoying though they can sometimes be, can be of some help in attempting to avoid that!

Kind Regards, John