DIY replacement of electrics in kitchen, sanity check & questions

[JohnW2]

Really? Take a look at Note 1 in Table 4E1E for example.

There appears to be no such table in my BYB.

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Is there anything in BS1363 which stipulates the maximum CCC of the socket terminals?

I don't think there are any maxima stipulated for any characteristics where what matters is minimum performance.

I am aware of the temperature rise test conditions, but are these not conditions under which the test must be performed, rather than the absolute maximum rating of the terminals?

They are, but they are the only tests specified. The problem is that nothing is required of a socket wrt overheating when more than 20A is flowing in the cable supplying it.

Given that the A2 radial using BS1363 sockets is a 'standard' circuit in BS7671, and given a socket's terminals are *designed* to accommodate 4 or 6mm cables safely, I find it odd that this would be considered unsafe. Indeed if it was unsafe, then I would expect either standard to be explicit in such a manner as to prohibit the A2.

As inconvenient as it may be, the fact remains that BS 1363 requires nothing of a socket wrt overheating when more than 20A is flowing in the cable supplying it.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

There appears to be no such table in my BYB.

Sorry for the typo. Try 4E1A

 

[mwatsonxx]

Please take note of the title of this thread - electrics in kitchen, sanity check & questions

 

[JohnW2]

Sorry for the typo. Try 4E1A

I think that note is a bit of a red herring, and I think it is very significant that it only appears in relation to 90° thermosetting cables.

It appears to simply be saying that one cannot run a thermosetting cable up to its "full 90°" if that would be too hot for the connected equipment.

Given the absence of such a note in relation to thermoplastic cables, and also given what BS7671 itself says about ring finals, it is presumably regarded as acceptable for a conductor at 70° (i.e. the temp deemed to be achieved when the cable is carrying its full CCC) to be connected to a BS1363 socket on a ring final.

Kind Regards, John

 

[echoes]

As inconvenient as it may be, the fact remains that BS 1363 requires nothing of a socket wrt overheating when more than 20A is flowing in the cable supplying it.

That's not in dispute, but it seems to be of little inconvenience to BS7671.
Using your logic, the ring final spur from an existing socket would also operate outside the test scope of BS1363, since the socket from which the spur was taken may quite readily have ≥26A flowing through it under non-overload conditions if the spur was carrying 20A.
(If I've just repeated someone else's point,I apologise.)
This also does not seem to have troubled BS7671 w.r.t. ring finals. It might not be 'best practice', but that does not automatically make it wrong or unsafe to wire a spur in this manner. Or perhaps you think it does, and a JB should be inserted.

 

[echoes]

Please take note of the title of this thread - electrics in kitchen, sanity check & questions

Sanity is certainly being tested. I think the OP did get good advice and answers on page 1, before it all started...

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I think that note is a bit of a red herring, and I think it is very significant that it only appears in relation to 90° thermosetting cables.

It is absolutely not a red herring.

It shows that your claim that "the current-carrying-capacity of a cable ... is obviously not going to be dependent upon what it is connected to" was incorrect.

It shows that the CCC of a cable may indeed have to take account of what it is connected to

It appears to simply be saying that one cannot run a thermosetting cable up to its "full 90°" if that would be too hot for the connected equipment.

And how does one ensure that it does not get to 90°? Might it be by having a lower limit on the amount of current it may carry?

We still have the situation where you are happy for the CCC of a circuit to be limited by how the cable is installed, but not by what it is connected to.

 

[TonyBelfast]

This is a strange forum - I am following with interest. But am inclined to go ahead as planned, without trucking, as per suggestions. Thank you all for your input. Including, what seems the legalistic and esoteric advise of Mr Sheds, which has derailed proceedings somewhat.

 

[Risteard]

This is a strange forum - I am following with interest. But am inclined to go ahead as planned, without trucking, as per suggestions. Thank you all for your input. Including, what seems the legalistic and esoteric advise of Mr Sheds, which has derailed proceedings somewhat.

It's worth nothing that ban-all-sheds is a DIYer and is not and never had been an Electrician. He also doesn't even know where he lives.

 

[Mike10]

This is a strange forum

You'll get used to it. Just don't ask them what rating of fuse you should use....... that one could go on for a long time.

 

[EFLImpudence]

This is a strange forum - I am following with interest. But am inclined to go ahead as planned, without trucking, as per suggestions. Thank you all for your input. Including, what seems the legalistic and esoteric advise of Mr Sheds, which has derailed proceedings somewhat.

Yes, carry on.

This thread and the supposition put forward is quite frankly nonsense and nothing to do with what must be in every house in the country.

 

[JohnW2]

This thread and the supposition put forward is quite frankly nonsense and nothing to do with what must be in every house in the country.

Indeed, total nonsense, and I've had enough of it (and the perpetrator).

It rather worries me that unsuspecting DIYers are reading assertions, which they may regard as authoritative, suggesting that 'standard practices' which have been with us for decades are unsatisfactory, and may actually be unsafe.

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

Using your logic, the ring final spur from an existing socket would also operate outside the test scope of BS1363, since the socket from which the spur was taken may quite readily have ≥26A flowing through it under non-overload conditions if the spur was carrying 20A.

Amidst all the other nonsense we're reading, I think you're probably onto a loser there, since I think that he was suggesting that each socket should be on its own separate spur (from a ring) or branch (of a radial), the only thing on the ring or the 'backbone' of a radial being junction boxes - so any cable which could carry more than "one socket's worth" of current would be connected only to JBs ('rated' at 30/32A), and nothing else.

Whilst I have occasionally seen or heard of that sort of design being used as a matter of convenience (e.g. with all sockets as unfused spurs, dropping from a ring above ceiling which had only JBs) I reckon it's pretty unlikely that anyone has ever adopted the design for the daft reason he is suggesting.

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

He also doesn't even know where he lives.

Are you simply wrong about that, or are you actually lying?