Kitchen sockets circuit

[SUNRAY]

Non Combustible and Fire Resistant are not worlds apart - depends how you define the terms, I was using non technical everyday speech but yes point taken.
I was invoking the Alice in Wonderland defence of Humpty Dumpty I think

Don`t worry though EFLI my friend, A council employee was trying to educate me on the difference between Litter and Rubbish when telling me I was not allowed to put my remnants of my lunch (eaten in my car) into as litter bin because I had magnetic vehicle trade plates on my estate car whilst eating lunch therefore it was trade waste (yes a sandwich) , he told me that the council would fine me.
I replied that the council did not have the authority to fine me, the only authority that could fine me is a court of law.
Anyway I drove down to his next bin stop and put it in just as he was wheeling his bin trolley towards it - miserable twerp he was LOL

I know of a shopkeeper fined for flytipping. Put his trade rubbish out in the evening for collection the following day, 2 boxes, one standing on top of the other but only put a 'trade waste' sticker on the top one just as he had done for ages and sometimes a decent pile, the bottom box had his delivery address on it, just like many before.

 

[JohnW2]

When?

Post #9 ...

T..... one of the sockets circuits does both middle and upper floors (all bedrooms/bathrooms, so essentially fine), one does just the kitchen/utility .....

 

[JohnW2]

A plastic CU with a metal box outer cover? e.g. inside a metal cabinate - a few less points of possible contact by conductors.

That would certainly be a fair bit 'safer'.
I suppose a lot of people may have been 'saved' by the paint but, in my opinion, having a large pile of earthed metal surrounding live parts and conductors which some people might 'fiddle with' is simply "a death waiting to happen" (and may already have happened).

I must admit that I felt far happier when an all insulated consumer unit was permissible to be fitted in most instances. It`s a pity that they were not at all as fire resistant as they were supposed to be!

Non-combustible. Just another cock-up.

In relation to the LFB's desire to reduce house fires, the reg which appeared would seem to be quite ridiculous, and inadequate. Even if they had used (and defined) a more appropriate/correct term than "non-combustible", the reg involved no requirement for fire containment - provided what little material left 'did not burn easily' (e.g. ferrous metal), the case could be covered in 12mm diameter holes all over front, sides and bottom, and yet me compliant with the reg!

 

[JohnW2]

I replied that the council did not have the authority to fine me, the only authority that could fine me is a court of law.

Unfortunately in some cases (since no proper judge, magistrate or jury is involved - and 'appeal' can be difficult), LAs seemingly do have the authority to impose all sorts of financial penalties - although I don't know whether, strictly speaking, they should call them'fines'.

 

[JohnW2]

Non Combustible and Fire Resistant are not worlds apart - depends how you define the terms, I was using non technical everyday speech but yes point taken.

One would certainly hope that regulations/legislation etc.would use defined, ideally technically correct, terminology.

However,in terms of everyday language (including a lot seen in 'technical' literature) there are countless examples of words/phrases comparable with "non-combustible" being used when, in the real world, there is never any 'impossibility'. ...

non-flammable, non-slip, non-stick, non-kink etc. etc.
waterproof, rot-proof, corrosion-proof, stain-proof, child-proof etc. etc.

Kind Regards, John

 

[SUNRAY]

Post #9 ...

Which was 4 posts after I started commenting

 

[JohnW2]

Which was 4 posts after I started commenting

It was - but, more to the point, it was about 7 posts before the one of yours in which you seemed not to have noticed the contents of my #9

 

[SUNRAY]

They don't ... and I have now discovered that they haven't

I can more-or-less 'cancel' my OP. Never trust the labels on a CU . It seems that the guy who did the (re-)wiring was more sensible than I had thought, other than being incompetent with his labelling!

I obviously hadn't actually checked before, but I was now moved to do so, and have discovered that one of the sockets circuits does both middle and upper floors (all bedrooms/bathrooms, so essentially fine), one does just the kitchen/utility and the third one the rest of the ground floor - in other words, probably exactly what I would have done if designing myself.

I therefore think that the present arrangement is fine, and am sorry for having wasted people's time with a non-question

Kind Regards, John

Now I'm totally confused, I'd read that and completely understood the situation, as far as I was concerned a line had been drawn under the original question.
In my #16 I fail to see where I gave any impression I didn't understand the situation.

When?

Was totally based on my #4.



EDIT: Ah I see the issue, in my #18 my 'assumed' comment is totally related to my #4 if the quotes are followed back.

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

non-flammable, non-slip, non-stick, non-kink etc. etc.
waterproof, rot-proof, corrosion-proof, stain-proof, child-proof etc. etc.

'Resistant' is a better, more accurate word.

 

[JohnW2]

Now I'm totally confused,

I'll leave you to unconfuse yourself

 

[JohnW2]

'Resistant' is a better, more accurate word.

Indeed - and, thankfully, we often see that word used in the place of "proof" in examples like I quoted (e.g. "water resistant", "corrosion-resistant" etc.)

 

[JohnW2]

Hi folks, having been recently discussing, in a different thread the 'choice of CU' for someone else's electrical installation, I am now returning to the matter of the electrical installation in the house I am refurbishing.

As I wrote above, once I identified the mis-labelling of the CU, it transpired that what I have for the ground floor (installed around 2000) is two 32 A ring finals, one supplying the kitchen+utility room and one supplying the other rooms, plus a 32 A cooker circuit. There is another 32 A sockets circuits supplying the bedrooms in the upper two storeys of the house.

I am getting fairly close to getting the CU 'updated' (it is currently a 'single RCD protects everything' Wylex board) which, together with the fact that there are currently no floor coverings, offers an opportunity to consider any 'improvements' to the actual circuits (I will make my own 'choice of CU', so we don't need to discuss that further!).

The kitchen+utility room will have just the 'usual' loads - WM and dryer (or washer-dryer), dishwasher and fridge-freezer, plus the usual 'plug-in' items (microwave, kettle, toaster etc.). I imagine that most people would be more than happy with all that being supplied by one 32 A circuit, but I am toying with the idea of restricting the existing circuit to the kitchen and adding a new circuit (probably a 20/25 A radial) for the utility room (which, for some reason, currently has only one socket -so needs 'additions' anyway!).

I wonder what people think about whether it would be 'worth' adding such an additional circuit for the utility room?

Kind Regards, John

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

I wonder what people think about whether it would be 'worth' adding such an additional circuit for the utility room?

Might there be any value, in sharing two circuits, between both kitchen and utility? That way, if one circuit fails, there remains one working power circuit it each space.

 

[JohnW2]

Might there be any value, in sharing two circuits, between both kitchen and utility? That way, if one circuit fails, there remains one working power circuit it each space.

Thanks. Yes, I thought about that, but there are some potential catches. For example, if the primary purpose were to limit the current drawn in either of the circuits, someone who did not know/understand 'which socket was on which circuit' could unwittingly put most/all loads on one circuit.

There is also the possibility that it could represent a bit of a hazard for someone working on one of the circuits if they were not carefu/sensible l enough (particularly in relation to 'testing for dead') - but I'm not sure to what extent one needs to design 'with idiots in mind'!

I'll give a bit more thought to this, but would welcome any other thoughts.

 

[AndyPRK]

What loads will you have in the utility?

For the upper floors, will you have one socket circuit per floor?
How many bedrooms per floor?