[with my highlighting]
Kind Regards, John
Are they to be allowed to 'have it both ways'?
Kind Regards, John
PIV electrics
- Thread starter BRIGHTHOPE
- Start date
I've just found this thread - my ears must have been burning
John has never really suggested that 'his method' (which id far from unique to him) would/could/should result in a significant reduction in fires in the manner you suggest, since I would think that it must be very rare for a malfunction ("fault" in everyday sense) to arise which results in a current high enough to blow, say, a 3A fuse but not to blow a 13A fuse or cause a 16A MCB/RCBO to operate.
Kind Regards, John
No, I accept that but Stillp was suggesting that fewer fires in the UK were the result of lower rated plug fuses than they have elsewhere.
As he accepted that the 13A fuse has no advantage over the 16A MCBs, then it would follow that it must be because of the 5A or 3A fuses.
If not, then the lower number of fires must be because of something else.
As he accepted that the 13A fuse has no advantage over the 16A MCBs, then it would follow that it must be because of the 5A or 3A fuses.
If not, then the lower number of fires must be because of something else.
That's not the point though, a 3A fuse will allow much less energy through to the appliance (and, indeed, its supply cord) than a 13A one would.
I've often wondered that (in relation to everything to do with BS1363, not just BS1362 fuses) and came to the conclusion that it was probably because they felt that a load of 3kW was the greatest they anticipated would/should be plugged in. I think that's largely true (eric would probably say that things >2kW should not be 'plugged in') and, in any event, there are very few things (other than the occasional oven) which take between 13 and 15A. However, that's all just my speculation - does anyone know of any 'chapter and verse' about why 13A was chosen?
I don't think I've ever suggested that I fit them 'only because they exist'!
As stillp and myself have said or implied on a number of occasions, it is possible that the UK felt that it was "necessary" to work to what they believed to be higher safety standards than most of the rest of the world.
If and when someone can provide a convincing electrical (rather than commercial) downside to using a fuse which is the smallest that will allow normal functioning of the load, I may change my mind (if that 'downside' appears to outwight potential {probably very small} benefits).
Kind Regards, John
Not quite. I was stating that fewer fires in the UK demonstrates that our UK wiring system is safer that the systems used elsewhere. A significant difference between us and most of the rest of the world is our use of plug fuses.
I realise that - but was merely pointing out that "even I" had not suggested that the lower-rated fuses would result in a significant reduction in fires, so I'm very doubtful of that as an explanation for between-countries differences in 'electrical fires'.
I thought that the UK fire service was 'bad enough' in blaming fires on 'electrical causes' when they could not find a better explanation, but maybe the fire services in other countries are even 'worse' in that respect, thereby explaining the apparent differences in figures??
Kind Regards, John
I'd agree with you that it was thought at the time that 3kW was the maximum that would be needed by any appliance using a plug.
It's hard to imagine how they could be worse!
I think you're playing with words.
You presumably wouldn't fit them if they did not exist therefore you are able to fit them only because you live where they exist.
I don't believe that is the reason.
They only exist because of the ring final which was not contrived for electrical reasons.
Yes, I appreciate that.
I cannot prove a negative.
Yes it was, in order to have redundancy of the CPC. It was only later that someone thought of reducing the conductor size to save copper.
I don't think it's just words. I obviously couldn't fit them if I lived somewhere which didn't used fused plugs.
Given that I live in the land of fused plugs, I obviously have to fit some fuse - so that's not what we're primarily debating. However, given that I have to fit a fuse, I would not fit anything other than 13A ones if I did not think that, in appropriate circumstances, that might offer some conceivable advantage - it would be simpler only to buy/stock just 13A ones. Therefore I do not use sub-13A plug fuses 'just because they exist'.
Why specifically blame ring finals? I would imagine that you would not be happy with unfused plugs on 32A radials, not the least because of the size of appliance flexes which would, at least in some cases (and some people would say all cases), be required!
You don't need to. Just 'prove' (or, at least produce a convincing argument supporting) a 'positive' downside (of using a sub-13A plug fuse, where possible) and I will certainly re-consider my position.
Kind Regards, John
Why would anyone decide to specifically do that?
It was to double the capacity of an existing radial by using a shorter (than the existing circuit) length of cable back to the CU.
Thus saving copper as well.
That doesn't make sense.
Playing with words again. You're only able to use them because they exist.
What has that got to do with it?
You only have 32A rings because (as my answer to Stillp above) they were specifically contrived after the war for economic reasons and the fuses were only introduced to avoid the disadvantages you mention. Chicken and egg come to mind.
32A radials with BS3036 fuses would have necessitated the use of very large csa cable and rewiring existing properties.
I said I can't prove a negative. I have never said there is a positive downside.
I maintain that there is no positive upside - otherwise (at least some of) the rest of the world would have introduced them.
Conversely, give us an example of a positive upside of fitting 3A fuses..
I am sure you would already have done so were there one.
Do they save the flex to small appliances?
Do they save any small appliances?
Never mind what you are told.
Cite the evidence which justifies your assertion that overseas societies are satisfied with a lower level of protection than is accepted in the UK wrt circuit OPD protection of appliances.
Or stop making such a claim, for to persist would be at best irrational and at worst racist.
Cite the evidence which justifies your assertion that circuit OPDs are indeed meant to protect appliances.
Or stop making such a claim, for to persist would be irrational.
Totally unacceptable.
Find them, and publish them, or reference the original sources, or stop relying on them.
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