H
holmslaw
..
Double sockets
- Thread starter JohnW2
- Start date
Sponsored Links
Sorry, what don't you think is correct? If you mean the term "expert", that's the word used for those who do the actual drafting in working groups or project teams (and yes, I am aware that an ex is a has-been, and a spurt is a drip under pressure!)
I sit on a double-digit number of standards committees, and some are more political than others. I don't know any committee in which each person gets one proposal accepted. However the actual publication of a standard depends on a positive vote on at least two and usually three stages of the standard's development. Voting is done by member countries' national standards bodies, in the UK's case BSI. The European Parliament has no role in the process.
Agreed. Perhaps we should start another thread?
Don't worry on my account, I can just about still see the wood through the trees! However, I'm not so sure that this essentially political side discussion requires a new thread - a more appropriate forum might be an even better idea!
Kind Regards, John
lol, well b***er me sideways, you can't get a fuse larger than 13A to go into a plug top?? wot, really ?? I guess every day is a school day.I don't think anyone has got anywhere near suggesting that anyone should contemplate attempting a load greater than 13A on a 13A socket - and, in any event, where would they find a fuse of large enough rating (>13A) to put in the plug?Until then, i'm happy to accept the (perhaps simplistic) rule of thumb that the total load connected to a 13A socket should be limited to 13A. Its not too leftfield an idea and I like it
My bad, i was a bit sloppy by talking about a 'socket' when what i meant was 'socket outlet' - this could be a single or a double, thats 1gang or 2gang ( or even a triple?). Even when its a 2gang socket outlet, i still tend to refer to it in the singular, this may not be grammatically accurate, but given that title of this thread was all about double sockets, i didn't think anyone would be confused.
Thanks not only for pointing out the obvious, but also taking the time to bother to highlight the word 'double' as bold, just incase i still couldn't read properly
Ah, now, the 2x13A loads from one socket outlet thing.
If you have knowledge of the testing requirements of BS1363, then you may decide that it will not be a problem.
If you accept that the 'total load' connected through the accessory should be limited to 13A, then 2x13A (which BTW equals 26A
) is exceeding the stated rating of 13A by 100% (thats double)Whilst considering this, i would also ask you to consider the guidance written somewhere in the regs (or OSG possibly) that permanently connected loads over 2kW should be supplied by its own dedicated circuit.
So, connecting 2 x 3.1kW to a single socket outlet, whereas may not be explicitly prohibited by the regs, should not sound like a good idea to any knowledgeable electrician.
You may choose to talk about the duty cycle or diversity of the connected loads, but would you ask Mr or Mrs J. Public to appreciate this aswell?
If you want my opinion,
If the sockets belonged to me, in my property, i would consider the 26A connected load to be acceptable in certain circumstances. (e.g. I could have 2 welders in my garage, connected simultaneously, but used alternately)
If i was installing a socket outlet for a customer, and i had knowledge that they intended to connect 26A worth of load to it, i would not advise it at all.
Although, having said that, i think the chances of such a situation arising in a modern home are fairly slim.
Also, like Prince of darkness asked, whats the worst that could happen?
In my garage - the socket outlet could melt/catch fire. (Hay-ho it wouldn't be the first time i've had flames in the garage, its all part of the fun.
)In a customer's house - the socket might melt/catch fire. The result of this may be catastrophic, including material damage, injury or death (or it might not) The blame for this could possibly be directed toward the person who installed socket outlets in such a way as to give rise to this scenario.
And as if to go full circle ending where i started - until someone can post a photograph of a standard socket outlet which has something other than 13A embossed onto the accessory itself, i will accept that the max connected load is to be limited to 13A. Very, very simple.
you make your choices, you take your chances.
Sponsored Links
Even that leaves the terminology ambiguous, since it begs the question as to what people in general mean by a 'socket outlet'. You take it to mean the entire thing, be it single, double or triple, but others seem to use it to mean each of the 'sockets' (set of three pin holes) present - and I have to say that I would normally use that latter meaning.
If you look at the MK technical specs, they refer to the current rating of their sockets as "13A per socket outlet". They therefore could be agreeing with you, but they then add "(except 3 gang, which is 13A total)", thereby seemingly implying that they probably mean 2x13A for 2 gang sockets (and also that they are using a different meaning of 'socket outlet' from you).
If things were clear and unambiguous, I think everyone would agree with you. However, these discussions only really exist because of the uncertainty as to what the 'stated rating' of a 2 gang socket actually is. To my amazement, apart from the MK one (which, as above, is unclear), I can't find any manufacturer's specs which even mention 'current rating' - but if you look around this forum, and other places, you'll find many people asserting that they are generally 'rated' at 20A (except for MK ones, at 26A). I think that's probably misguided, since it seems to derive only from the BS1363 test conditions for temperature rise, and I think we can probably agree that test conditions and 'ratings' are not the same thing.Ah, now, the 2x13A loads from one socket outlet thing.
If you have knowledge of the testing requirements of BS1363, then you may decide that it will not be a problem.
If you accept that the 'total load' connected through the accessory should be limited to 13A, then 2x13A (which BTW equals 26A
No, I wouldn't, and that's why I've said that it would not seem to make safe sense to allow Mr & Mrs Public to have double sockets not 'rated' (safe with) 2x13A, since no-one can expect them to know that there is anything wrong at all with fully loading both halves of a 2 gang socket. You go on to say:
... but the point surely is that you would have no way of knowing what portable devices the customer (or subsequent occupiers) might decide to plug in at some point in time. You would therefore really have to refuse to ever install double sockets if you felt this was a concern.
Yes, I have sympathy with that - but we are back to the question of what the 'rating' actually is, and what that embossed '13A' actually means. As I wrote at the time, I'm inclined to agree with you - if what it says on the tin is 13A, then one's inclination is to believe that it means 13A, rather than 2x13A. However, I don't think I ever heard anyone but you suggesting that that embossing really does mean that the 'total rating' is 13A - the lowest opinion about 'rating' I've ever seen expressed in 20A.
It would certainly make no real engineering sense for the maximum capacity of a 2 gang socket to be 13A. As I've written before, the terminals are really the only part common to the two 'halves' (and those terminals may be having to support 32A in connected cables), so there is very little material difference between one 2 gang socket and two 1 gang ones side-by-side.
The amazing thing about this whole discussion is that it shouldn't be necessary. In this highly regulated and documented world, it seems quite amazing that there is scope for so much debate about the 'rated' safe maximum load on a 2 gang socket!
Kind Regards, John
Hi John,
I won't bother quoting and inserting into previous posts as it could get a bit messy to read. I just try to respond to your points in order..
As we know, people oft have familiar terms for things which may not be a true reflection of the actual name of the thing in question, (thinks hoover and vacuum as an obvious example) For (some) clarification, see definitions, page 29 of the BRB. it refers to a 'device, provided with female contacts' it does not expand to say how many sets of female contacts can be built into the device. For this reason i take it that 'the device' has a stated rating of 13A, irrespective of the number of gangs.
Testing methods illustrated in BS1363 have no relevance to the stated rating on the device.
You may have overlooked the fact that earlier in this thread, i have already referred to the MK tech sheets and was already aware of them before you mentioned them.
Any single component will have just 13A embossed, i have not seen anything other than this, which you seem to agree with and nobody else has disagreed with. I think when its says '13A' and it means '13A' it is very far from ambiguous. When it says '13A' and people go on to interpret that to mean 13A or 20A or 26A based on some loose grasp of the requirements of BS1363, only then it becomes ambiguous. I imagine there are very few people outside of the electrical world who would even consider reading BS1363, so i would dismiss the '13A is ambiguous' statement as being incorrect. There is a difference between something being ambiguous and somebody not being able to comprehend a statement. Lack of understanding a statement does not automatically mean that statement is ambiguous.
For those who assert that a socket outlet is rated (note the word 'rated' not 'tested' ) at <something other than 13>A, i would invite all those to take a photo of the back of the device in question and post it here so we can all see it.
Again, the stated rating of the device is written on the device, how does anyone see this being ambiguous? To me it seems clear and simple.
Again, you may have overlooked the fact that in my first post in this thread i did say that this subject crops up from time to time and that i have already been down this road before. Hence the reason why i ask my very simple question regarding the photo, it just cuts to the quick IMO. I was already aware of other contentions regarding this subject.
Generally i don't know what is going to be connected to a socket outlet for general use, thats fairly obvious. You may have noted that in that sentence, i very deliberately wrote the words IF and THEN
If it were a socket outlet in a wall somewhere, thats one thing, if it were a socket located in a kitchen, which were to have an appliance or two pretty much permanently connected, then it would be reasonable to have some understanding of the likely loading on that socket outlet throughout its working life.
If a customer said to me 'i want a double socket putting just there so i can connect two 3 kilowatt heaters into it' i would advise them against doing so.
If a customer said to me 'i want a double socket putting just there and its none of your business why i want it' then they get a double socket, as requested.
On a slightly different note, car tyres have speed ratings on them, lets say, for example that a 'n' rated tyre is good for upto 87 mph, however, you have 4 of those on the vehicle. Following the rationale here, does that mean (if the car were capable) that the maximum safe speed would be 87mph or 348mph?
I perhaps think that when you look to scrutinise something in the finest detail, there is the danger of missing something that is abundantly obvious to others who, rather oddly, have less knowledge on a subject but have a better understanding of it. Sometimes you can't see the wood for the trees.
You ask, 'Is this discussion necessary?'
My answer to this is, no it is not. At least not until someone can post that photo i ask about. At that point it may become necessary.
At the moment, i'm almost certain enough that the photo will never arrive that i am prepared to offer one whole english pound to the first person who can offer up such (non-photoshopped) evidence
I won't bother quoting and inserting into previous posts as it could get a bit messy to read. I just try to respond to your points in order..
As we know, people oft have familiar terms for things which may not be a true reflection of the actual name of the thing in question, (thinks hoover and vacuum as an obvious example) For (some) clarification, see definitions, page 29 of the BRB. it refers to a 'device, provided with female contacts' it does not expand to say how many sets of female contacts can be built into the device. For this reason i take it that 'the device' has a stated rating of 13A, irrespective of the number of gangs.
Testing methods illustrated in BS1363 have no relevance to the stated rating on the device.
You may have overlooked the fact that earlier in this thread, i have already referred to the MK tech sheets and was already aware of them before you mentioned them.
Any single component will have just 13A embossed, i have not seen anything other than this, which you seem to agree with and nobody else has disagreed with. I think when its says '13A' and it means '13A' it is very far from ambiguous. When it says '13A' and people go on to interpret that to mean 13A or 20A or 26A based on some loose grasp of the requirements of BS1363, only then it becomes ambiguous. I imagine there are very few people outside of the electrical world who would even consider reading BS1363, so i would dismiss the '13A is ambiguous' statement as being incorrect. There is a difference between something being ambiguous and somebody not being able to comprehend a statement. Lack of understanding a statement does not automatically mean that statement is ambiguous.
For those who assert that a socket outlet is rated (note the word 'rated' not 'tested' ) at <something other than 13>A, i would invite all those to take a photo of the back of the device in question and post it here so we can all see it.
Again, the stated rating of the device is written on the device, how does anyone see this being ambiguous? To me it seems clear and simple.
Again, you may have overlooked the fact that in my first post in this thread i did say that this subject crops up from time to time and that i have already been down this road before. Hence the reason why i ask my very simple question regarding the photo, it just cuts to the quick IMO. I was already aware of other contentions regarding this subject.
Generally i don't know what is going to be connected to a socket outlet for general use, thats fairly obvious. You may have noted that in that sentence, i very deliberately wrote the words IF and THEN
If it were a socket outlet in a wall somewhere, thats one thing, if it were a socket located in a kitchen, which were to have an appliance or two pretty much permanently connected, then it would be reasonable to have some understanding of the likely loading on that socket outlet throughout its working life.
If a customer said to me 'i want a double socket putting just there so i can connect two 3 kilowatt heaters into it' i would advise them against doing so.
If a customer said to me 'i want a double socket putting just there and its none of your business why i want it' then they get a double socket, as requested.
On a slightly different note, car tyres have speed ratings on them, lets say, for example that a 'n' rated tyre is good for upto 87 mph, however, you have 4 of those on the vehicle. Following the rationale here, does that mean (if the car were capable) that the maximum safe speed would be 87mph or 348mph?
I perhaps think that when you look to scrutinise something in the finest detail, there is the danger of missing something that is abundantly obvious to others who, rather oddly, have less knowledge on a subject but have a better understanding of it. Sometimes you can't see the wood for the trees.
You ask, 'Is this discussion necessary?'
My answer to this is, no it is not. At least not until someone can post that photo i ask about. At that point it may become necessary.
At the moment, i'm almost certain enough that the photo will never arrive that i am prepared to offer one whole english pound to the first person who can offer up such (non-photoshopped) evidence
Fair enough. I will do the same.
I would agree with virtually everything you say if it made reasonable sense in terms of engineering and safety. Whilst it does 'appear' (per embossed '13A') that 2 gang sockets are rated at 13A total, this makes little engineering sense and is very suspect in terms of safety (given the uncertainty as to what will be plugged in). That's why I suspect that there is some confusion here, and maybe even misleading information about the ratings' (i.e. the embossed '13A').
There is some uncertainty about what they mean by 'socket outless', but I do suspect that the MK technical spec (the only one I can find that mentions current ratings) is probably trying to say that a 2 gang socket is rated at 2x13A (despite embossing), but I obviously may be wrong. I guess that somneone ought to ask them!
Kind Regards,
John
lol, who said engineers have to make sense? Do bear in mind here that we are talking about UK electrical standards and regulations.
I understand that it is be possible to connect an excessive load to a single accessory for a prolonged period of time, but i still think it would be a fairly obscure scenario and to be advised against anyway. If the installation was designed in such a way that it would be likely to get into this situation, then i would suggest that the designer has not done a very good job from the start.
How many situations can you think of that would result in 2 high load appliances being plugged in for a long time which may give rise to the dangers you allude to?
I've already given one possibility, but even then i doubt there would be any significant increase in danger. Whilst typing this and thinking about it, the only others i have come with are repetitive use of multiple kettles and multiple wall paper steamers/strippers used from full to empty (although, i think most strippers are 2kW, not 3kW). Neither of which i feel would be likely to happen.
Just to indulge me on a little flight of fantasy - forgetting other factors like cabling sizes, cost implications et al, just imagine that for a moment all electrical appliances draw 13A - TV, DVD, phone chargers, xboxes, alarm clocks etc, etc. If that were the case then i imagine 2gang sockets would be incredibly dangerous if they were rated at just 13A. I think every street in the country would have at least 1 house fire at any given moment in time. However, the reality is that most things with a 13A plug attached to its flex draws nowhere near that amount of energy. Maybe its armed with this knowledge that the devices in question are allowed to exist by manufacturers and the authors of our regs/standards
Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should do it.
To my mind its as simple as saying 13=13 and maybe now light is starting to shine on my initial laconic question?
Maybe you would like to quiz MK about it? Why not let us all know what is said...
I don't favour MK over other brands and as such don't have any myself, so:-
Does anyone (still bothering) reading this have one of these MK sockets that are allegedly rated at something other than 13A?
If so, would they be so kind as to post a photo of the back of the socket showing the rating as marked?
Do bear in mind here that we are talking about UK electrical standards and regulations.I understand that it is be possible to connect an excessive load to a single accessory for a prolonged period of time, but i still think it would be a fairly obscure scenario and to be advised against anyway. If the installation was designed in such a way that it would be likely to get into this situation, then i would suggest that the designer has not done a very good job from the start.
How many situations can you think of that would result in 2 high load appliances being plugged in for a long time which may give rise to the dangers you allude to?
I've already given one possibility, but even then i doubt there would be any significant increase in danger. Whilst typing this and thinking about it, the only others i have come with are repetitive use of multiple kettles and multiple wall paper steamers/strippers used from full to empty (although, i think most strippers are 2kW, not 3kW). Neither of which i feel would be likely to happen.
Just to indulge me on a little flight of fantasy - forgetting other factors like cabling sizes, cost implications et al, just imagine that for a moment all electrical appliances draw 13A - TV, DVD, phone chargers, xboxes, alarm clocks etc, etc. If that were the case then i imagine 2gang sockets would be incredibly dangerous if they were rated at just 13A. I think every street in the country would have at least 1 house fire at any given moment in time. However, the reality is that most things with a 13A plug attached to its flex draws nowhere near that amount of energy. Maybe its armed with this knowledge that the devices in question are allowed to exist by manufacturers and the authors of our regs/standards
Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should do it.
To my mind its as simple as saying 13=13 and maybe now light is starting to shine on my initial laconic question?
Maybe you would like to quiz MK about it? Why not let us all know what is said...
I don't favour MK over other brands and as such don't have any myself, so:-
Does anyone (still bothering) reading this have one of these MK sockets that are allegedly rated at something other than 13A?
If so, would they be so kind as to post a photo of the back of the socket showing the rating as marked?
Yes you did. Unless you can tell us of another way in which the EU could implement a ban on the sale of bananas of a particular shape.
True, you did not quote a specific regulation or directive, but there's a reason for that.
No - any normal person can see that you're deranged and have no interest in the truth of the things you say.
That has nothing to do with your nonsense about bananas.
The regulation or directive which you claim specifies the shape of bananas which may or may not be sold in the EU.
You have made this assertion, so please go away and find some proof that it's true.European standards are best demonstrated by bananas.
Somebody could cultivate the tastiest banana in the world but if it was not the correct shape, it would be banned in Europe. ie crushing innovation and progress.
I think it is everybody's duty to challenge rubbish spouted by people who don't care if it's true or not.
P
Paul_C
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2257/94:
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31994R2257:EN:HTML
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31994R2257:EN:HTML
I may not need to quiz them. Life is too short for me to download the 'MK Catalogue' (~630MB download), but I found the following, posted in December 2009 in the IET forum, purporting to be a direct quote from the MK Catalogue:Maybe you would like to quiz MK about it? Why not let us all know what is said...
Assuming the quote is correct, and remains current today, this therefore seems to confirm your view that ('per embossing') each 'unit' (i.e. each double socket) is 'rated' at 13A (total) - even though that say that testing has confirmed that 19.5A is OK 'for an indefinite period' (although 22.3A is not).
Why they chose to 'rate' their product at 13A, when their tests indicate that 19.5A is OK indefinitely, is something you would have to ask them!
I agree with your view that it's pretty (probably very) unlikely that anyone would plug two 'long term' full loads into one double socket. However, since it's not impossible, I'm surprised that our risk-obsessed society does not feel it necessary to at least tell/warn users about this - since virtually none of them will be aware - particularly given that MK say their tests indicate that 24A for 75 hours "would lead to the very real potential of fire" . The embossed "13A" is obviously useless in this regard, since the homeowener would have to dismantle socket outlets to see it! There is plenty of precedent for users/consumers to be 'warned' about risks at least as low as this one!
This does all make me wonder about single sockets, since I still find it hard to believe that a double one is significantly different. If 22.3A (e.g. 11.15A x 2) causes damage to a double socket, then I have to wonder whether a single one should be rated at 13A.
Kind Regards, John.
________________________________________
or to para-phrase 'By using smoke and mirrors to confuse the issue between 'testing' and 'rating' our salespersons like allowing people to believe that our sockets are superior to normal socket outlets for our financial gain, but actually, when you really get down to it, there just the same as any other socket and as such we will actually rate them the same.'I may not need to quiz them. Life is too short for me to download the 'MK Catalogue' (~630MB download), but I found the following, posted in December 2009 in the IET forum, purporting to be a direct quote from the MK Catalogue:Maybe you would like to quiz MK about it? Why not let us all know what is said...
meanwhile, back in the real world - Which jobbing electrician would even bother to get professional design engineers in for a consultation about how to use a standard socket?
indeed, it does.
lol, if thats an open question to all thats fine, but if it were directed at me, you may deduce from my posts here that i do not need to ask them anything as yet again i'll say that to me, its as simple as '13=13', nothing more
risk has not be obliterated, it has been assessed and controlled, maybe thats what has happened in this case?
im not sure i believe that, i think a lot more people than you give credit to will accept the whole '13=13' thing. Nevertheless, i doubt theres any way to prove or disprove this
but if the user accepts that 13=13, then why would they need constant reminders of this?
o? what examples are you thinking about? I imagine that when you buy electrical accessories from a DIY shed, theres a little slip of paper (or the packaging) included, somewhere on that paper there will be somekind of disclaimer, whereby the purchaser is instructed to consult an electrician, or something similar, so warning has been given. Sparks buying kit from wholesalers probably wouldn't get that same warning as they would probably be deemed competent enough not to need telling how to count to 13.
no offence John, but i think you need to turn down the magnification on your microscope, otherwise you'll worry yourself to bits over every little non-problem you encounter. Now, life is waayyyy too short for that!
Kick it off one night before you go to bed.
Interesting - I'll check mine later, because...
is complete b******s.
BS 1363 requires sockets to be tested at less than a 26A load and to not suffer damage at that load. It does not prevent MK from making something which outperforms the standard any more than car safety legislation prevents a maker from building a vehicle which provides the same level of crash safety at 50mph that the law requires it to provide at 35mph.
H
holmslaw
..
Holmslaw - if your belief is that the forum benefits from you dropping in, posting rubbish, admitting you don't care if what you say is true or not, refusing to justify your assertions, refusing to behave like an intelligent adult, then I can assure you that you are grievously mistaken, and that what the forum would really benefit from would be your disappearance.
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
