Isolation switches for kitchen island

[STEVEROG]

Does this look sensible?

Specifically, isolation switches on the side of the island?

I like this approach because

(a) Switches aren't too close to the ovens/hob
(b) Switches aren't too far away from the ovens/hob (2m is now guidance I believe and not a reg)
(c) Switches are not above 1.5m height (I think that's a reg albeit only for new build)

However, there seems to be confusion over whether fitting switches to any part of a kitchen island is within regulations as is is not clear if this is part of the "fabric" of the building. I'm therefore thinking that to ensure I comply I Could quite easily build in a short timber stud wall at the back of the island where the worktop overhangs. Is it then fair to assume that this wall IS part of the fabric of the building and that I can then fit my switches here and be fully reg compliant? I guess is must be compliant otherwise a normal stud wall couldn't have compliant sockets and switches in it.

If I don't switch at the island, my only other option would be to try and squeeze in three new isolation switches on the brick wall where I take the 2.5mm spur from. However, this would require a lot more disruption.

Thoughts?

Untitled

• STEVEROG
• 19 Sep 2013
• 2

 

[EFLImpudence]

What you want to do is fine.
'Cooker switches' are not actually mandatory so you can put them anywhere you want (within reason) although it defeats the object of them if you hide them.
I don't know where the fabric of the building comes into it - you will have the ovens and hob fitted to this 'non-fabric'.

Personally, I would prefer only ONE switch as they are (it is) for emergency switching.
Do you have a reason for not putting all three appliances on the same circuit.

Also, I think it would be better to earth the conduit at its other end separately.

 

[JohnW2]

However, there seems to be confusion over whether fitting switches to any part of a kitchen island is within regulations as is is not clear if this is part of the "fabric" of the building. I'm therefore thinking that to ensure I comply I Could quite easily build in a short timber stud wall at the back of the island where the worktop overhangs. Is it then fair to assume that this wall IS part of the fabric of the building and that I can then fit my switches here and be fully reg compliant?

What regulation is it that you think constrains you to only have switches fitted to the 'fabric of the building'?

In common sense electrical terms (whether you have switches on the island or not), the important thing is that the island be fixed (to the floor). Otherwise, if it moved, cables could be damaged where they emerged from the floor. If the island is fixed to the floor, then I really don't see any problem. Many a kitchen island or workbench has switches (or sockets) attached to it. Hotel bedrooms quite often have switches, sockets and other electrical accessories attached to bits of 'built-in furniture'.

Kind Regards, John

 

[STEVEROG]

Firstly,

Thanks for the replies, much obliged.

Response...

1. Regarding "Fabric" of building.

This seems to appear in a lot of posts on various forums but I couldn't find a link to a specific electrical regulation or other type of regulation. Maybe a big red herring!

2. Reason(s) for not having all on one switch

(a) The ability to isolate each appliance separately - ok perhaps overkill!
(c) The combi/microwave thing is on a separate 2.5mm so it needs it's own switch. (note that I did consider putting all three appliances on the one 6mm cable. With diversity this would have been just within cable spec with a sensible choice of ovens and hob. However, I thought it would be sensible to ease the load on the 6mm by putting the second oven, planned as a plug-in type, on separate 2.5mm feed. This would then also allow a higher power oven or hob to be fitted in future). In an ideal world I would rip out the 6mm, put in a 10mm and put all three on this but this would mean major disruption throughout the house!

3. I guess the the conduit could be earthed at the other end.



Regards,

Steve

 

[JohnW2]

1. Regarding "Fabric" of building. ... This seems to appear in a lot of posts on various forums but I couldn't find a link to a specific electrical regulation or other type of regulation. Maybe a big red herring!

Yes, I think it's probably a red herring. I certainly can't think of any part of the Wiring Regs or Building Regs which say anything about that.

2. Reason(s) for not having all on one switch (a) The ability to isolate each appliance separately - ok perhaps overkill!

Fair enough. Anyway, it wasn't me who questioned that

(c) The combi/microwave thing is on a separate 2.5mm so it needs it's own switch.

Again, fair enough [by the way, where's (b)?? ]

3. I guess the the conduit could be earthed at the other end.

It's always desirable for conduit to be earthed at the 'upstream' end (as well as anywhere else it might be earthed). If you only had it earthed at the downstream (island) end and someone were somehow to chop through the cable (and conduit), the conduit would then not be earthed, but could become live if the chopped cable came in contact with it.

Kind Regards, John

 

[EFLImpudence]

This would then also allow a higher power oven or hob to be fitted in future).

Fair enough, run cable and use in future when needed.

I just think a row of three emergency switches is not ideal.

 

[JohnW2]

I just think a row of three emergency switches is not ideal.

If they were literally just 'switches for use in emergencies' (and all on the same circuit), then I would agree. However, there are, IMO, some advantages in having a way of isolating individual appliances, for example, whilst one is waiting for them to be mended.

Kind Regards, John

 

[EFLImpudence]

If they were literally just 'switches for use in emergencies' (and all on the same circuit), then I would agree.

So, you agree - but inserted 'literally just'.

However, there are, IMO, some advantages in having a way of isolating individual appliances, for example, whilst one is waiting for them to be mended

Nevertheless, three emergency switches are not ideal.

 

[JohnW2]

If they were literally just 'switches for use in emergencies' (and all on the same circuit), then I would agree.

So, you agree - but inserted 'literally just'.

Hmmm How about "only", rather than "literally just" - any different/better?!?

Nevertheless, three emergency switches are not ideal.

Seriously, I'm not sure what you are saying. Are you merely saying that you personally find a line of three isolators to be aethetically unappealing, or are you suggesting that it might be dangerous because, in an emergency, one might not know which one to switch off? ... or maybe something else?

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Ironically they often don't meet the requirements for emergency switches anyway, IIRC....

 

[EFLImpudence]

Irony apart.

If they were literally just 'switches for use in emergencies' (and all on the same circuit), then I would agree.

So, you agree - but inserted 'literally just'.

Hmmm How about "only", rather than "literally just" - any different/better?!?

No different at all.
The switches are primarily for emergency switching.

That they may be used for other purposes doesn't alter the fact.

Nevertheless, three emergency switches are not ideal.

Seriously, I'm not sure what you are saying. Are you merely saying that you personally find a line of three isolators to be aesthetically unappealing, or are you suggesting that it might be dangerous because, in an emergency, one might not know which one to switch off? ... or maybe something else?

Obviously because it could be dangerous.

 

[JohnW2]

Ironically they often don't meet the requirements for emergency switches anyway, IIRC....

Indeed so - and, as I've said before, in the event of a significant fire in/around the appliances (which is one of the few relevant 'emergencies' I can think of), I would probably be moving in the opposite direction, not towards the fire to operate an 'isolator' located in the vicinity of the appliance!

Kind Regards, John

 

[EFLImpudence]

In that case (if not for emergency use) the OP can hide them any where he likes.

Near the CU would be good.

 

[Nozzle]

Are isolators designed to break the current while a cooker is at full load?

In my field of work (not installing domestic electrics, I admit) a contactor/breaker and an isolator are two very different things, that just happened to be enclosed in the same housing.

Nozzle

 

[JohnW2]

No different at all. The switches are primarily for emergency switching. That they may be used for other purposes doesn't alter the fact.

I really do wonder what these perceived 'emergencies' actually are. Fires (or serious overheating) and a 'live' appliance are the only ones which come to mind and, as I've just written, in neither of those situations would I approach the appliance to operate a nearby 'isolator'. In reality, I stongly suspect that, whatever you may feel is the 'primary' purpose of such switches, in practice they are nearly always used (if at all) for 'other purposes'.

Seriously, I'm not sure what you are saying. Are you merely saying that you personally find a line of three isolators to be aesthetically unappealing, or are you suggesting that it might be dangerous because, in an emergency, one might not know which one to switch off? ... or maybe something else?

Obviously because it could be dangerous.

Thanks for clarifying. With two separate supply sources, the OP would presumably need at least two 'emergency isolators' - or are you suggesting that they should be mechanically linked in some way, to avoid that danger?

Kind Regards, John