2 way wall socket question

[graykev]

I have a washing machine, fridge and freezer beside each other. I bought a mini freezer to put alongside them so had to move things around. I noticed that they were all plugged into a 4 gang extension lead and the washing machine plug was half way unplugged. When I went to plug it in properly I noticed the neutral pin was black and cruddy and the pin was twice the size it should be and totally burned out.

Now this could be due to loose connection or being overloaded. Either way I won't use that extension lead again (and will replace plug on washing machine). Anyway, the extension lead is connected to a cable that goes straight down a hole under the floor boards. If I turn the power off and get an electrician to wire this cable to a 2 way wall socket, will that socket be able to safely handle a 13 amp load per socket?

Unfortunately I do not know if the cable goes under the boards into a plug or not.

 

[deadshort]

All sounds a bit dodgy ! Get an electrican to install as many sockets as required to plug all your kitchen items in safely.

Regards,

DS

 

[graykev]

All sounds a bit dodgy ! Get an electrican to install as many sockets as required to plug all your kitchen items in safely.

Regards,

DS

Yeah I will definitely. But would they be able to use the cable going below the floor to fees the new sockets? Does it matter if it's going into a socket below my floor or direct into the houses circuit?

 

[ban-all-sheds]

If I turn the power off and get an electrician to wire this cable to a 2 way wall socket, will that socket be able to safely handle a 13 amp load per socket?

Probably not.

Some makers do make products better than the standard required, but BS 1363 only requires a double socket to cope with 20A, so there's no guarantee.

Unfortunately I do not know if the cable goes under the boards into a plug or not.

No electrician will (should) use that cable without knowing where it runs and where it originates.

 

[stillp]

BS 1363 only requires a double socket to cope with 20A

BAS, please tell me which subclause of BS1363 says that a 13A socket-outlet is not a 13A socket-outlet when it shares a faceplate with another 13A socket-outlet. You are of course correct that the temperature-rise test uses a total current of 20A, but each individual socket-outlet must withstand a current of 14A.
Unfortunately there are some (many?) manufacturers who can't read standards properly.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Each one, yes.

But not each one simultaneously.

 

[stillp]

Each one, yes.

But not each one simultaneously.

Show me where the BS says that then.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I think the sudden warm weather might have disturbed your thought processes if you believe that BS 1363 says that a twin socket must not be able to cope with 26A. Or indeed that any BS ever limits the maximum performance of something in that way.

I can show you where it only requires a twin to sustain a 20A load (14A through one outlet of a twin, and 6A through the other) without overheating.

I cannot show you where it makes any requirements for any abilities for a twin to sustain a load of 26A. Or 28A.

Can you?

 

[stillp]

I think the sudden warm weather might have disturbed your thought processes if you believe that BS 1363 says that a twin socket must not be able to cope with 26A.

Well you were the one who wrote "

Each one, yes.

But not each one simultaneously.

"

I cannot show you where it makes any requirements for any abilities for a twin to sustain a load of 26A. Or 28A.

They are 13A socket-outlets. Nowhere in the standard is that requirement reduced for a twin socket-outlet. 2 X 13A = 26A.
In addition to the requirement to carry 13A ±0.4A, there is a requirement that socket-outlets shall not attain excessive temperatures in normal use. This requirement is verified for twin socket-outlets by a test at 14A + 6A, again ±0.4A, for a period of at least 4 hours until thermal equilibrium is reached, with a maximum of 8 hours.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Well you were the one who wrote

Yes, but that wasn't a claim that BS 1363 says that a twin socket must not be able to cope with 26A, was it.

They are 13A socket-outlets.

That is indeed what they are called, and there are places in the standard where performance in some things at a current of 13A is specified.

But nowhere does it require anything of a twin socket above 14+6A.

Nowhere in the standard is that requirement reduced for a twin socket-outlet. 2 X 13A = 26A.

Nowhere in the standard does the number 26 appear, apart from paragraph, figure and page numbers.

In addition to the requirement to carry 13A ±0.4A, there is a requirement that socket-outlets shall not attain excessive temperatures in normal use. This requirement is verified for twin socket-outlets by a test at 14A + 6A, again ±0.4A, for a period of at least 4 hours until thermal equilibrium is reached, with a maximum of 8 hours.

So 14+6A is the only "normal use" which the standard requires a twin socket to manage without attaining excessive temperatures.

If you load it more heavily than that you have no guarantee that it will not get too hot.

 

[Gteuk]

When there is a bad connection on an inductive load it is common for the neutral to raise in temperature and burn, I have found this most common on immersion heaters and electric floor heating where the terminations were poor.

I am not going to get into the BS of what rating your socket is as it is clearly compromised now and needs replacing.

 

[stillp]

Yes, but that wasn't a claim that BS 1363 says that a twin socket must not be able to cope with 26A, was it.

No, it wasn't, but it was close.

nowhere does it require anything of a twin socket above 14+6A

But it does require each socket0outlet to meet certain performance requirements at a current of 13A, regardless of what is in the vicinity.

Nowhere in the standard does the number 26 appear, apart from paragraph, figure and page numbers.

So?

14+6A is the only "normal use" which the standard requires a twin socket to manage without attaining excessive temperatures

No, that is a test condition.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Rather a futile test, then

 

[stillp]

Why? It's intended to represent a realistic in-use scenario.

 

[EFLImpudence]

But not one to which it may be subjected and Mr. Public rightfully may expect.