Plugging plug in backwards in a trailing socket.

Being able to plug in without the earth is of much more concern. A properly functioning shutter operated the traditional way from the earth slot would prevent the insertion demonstrated, unless somebody went to the trouble of opening the shutters from the earth with something else first. But you can't guard against everything!
I thought that, at least in terms of fixed accessories (I don't know about trailing sockets), BS1363 required that there had to be enough 'material' surrounding the socket's 'holes' so as to physically prevent a plug being plugged in incorrectly (either reversed L/N with no E, or E only), even if the shutters had been opened with some sort of tool?

Kind Regards, John
 
Sponsored Links
I thought that, at least in terms of fixed accessories (I don't know about trailing sockets), BS1363 required that there had to be enough 'material' surrounding the socket's 'holes' so as to physically prevent a plug being plugged in incorrectly (either reversed L/N with no E, or E only), even if the shutters had been opened with some sort of tool?
You may be right. There was a design change in the typical molded sockets found on extension cords here to prevent a similar sort of thing. I have some older extension cords with which it's quite possible to insert a plug the wrong way round, with the ground pin left unconnected. The newer types have a molded extrusion on the opposite side from the ground receptacle to prevent that.

Also, with a simple 2-pin plug, with the older designs you could insert the plug in such a way that one prong went into the socket and the other was left outside, obviously posing something of a shock hazard via the appliance if you happened to be connected to the live side of the circuit. The same could be done with a lot of the old 2-pin 5A in-line sockets in Britain, of course (yes, I got bitten that way once trying to plug in without really looking properly at what I was doing).
 
I thought that, at least in terms of fixed accessories (I don't know about trailing sockets), BS1363 required that there had to be enough 'material' surrounding the socket's 'holes' so as to physically prevent a plug being plugged in incorrectly (either reversed L/N with no E, or E only), even if the shutters had been opened with some sort of tool?

Kind Regards, John
The only requirement I can find is 13.10: No part of the aperture intended for the reception of the line or neutral pin shall be less than 9,5 mm from the periphery of the engagement face of a socket-outlet except that when a shutter is operated by the simultaneous insertion of the current-carrying pins this dimension shall be increased to not less than 18 mm from the lower edge of the socket-outlet.
There is also 13.6: Earth socket contacts shall withstand the stresses imposed on them by the attempted incorrect insertion of plugs. Hover that doesn't seem relevant in this case.
 
The only requirement I can find is 13.10: No part of the aperture intended for the reception of the line or neutral pin shall be less than 9,5 mm from the periphery of the engagement face of a socket-outlet ...
I have to say that I don't really see what that is trying to achieve. Given ~16mm between L/N and E pins, it certainly wouldn't be enough to prevent 'reverse insertion' (assuming shutters had somehow been opened).

Kind Regards, John
 
Sponsored Links
And with a conventional earth-operated shutter it can be 9.5mm to the lower edge, but with the new type operating on the L/N entryways, it has to be 18mm? What exactly is that trying to achieve?
 
And with a conventional earth-operated shutter it can be 9.5mm to the lower edge, but with the new type operating on the L/N entryways, it has to be 18mm? What exactly is that trying to achieve?
Given the ~16mm separation, 18mm would be just about enough to prevent reverse insertion (with no earth) - so that's more logical. What the 9.5mm requirement is meant to achieve escapes me.

Kind Regards, John
 
Given the ~16mm separation, 18mm would be just about enough to prevent reverse insertion (with no earth) - so that's more logical.
Of course - Not sure why I didn't see that before. And thinking about the 9.5mm requirement, possibly aimed at preventing the insertion of a small finger into the gap between plug and socket face and touching a live pin when a plug is partially withdrawn? That would be easier if there was less "in the way" around the pins. I'm assuming that this specification pre-dates the sleeved pin requirement for that to make sense.

Not that it would work, necessarily! My first 240V shock at around the age of 4 was when I went to "help grandma" unplug the vacuum cleaner, got the plug part way out and then put my little fingers behind to get a better grip. Ouch! (Guess I was fortunate it was L-N across one hand and on a rug or carpet, so probably very little earth current.)
 
Of course - Not sure why I didn't see that before. And thinking about the 9.5mm requirement, possibly aimed at preventing the insertion of a small finger into the gap between plug and socket face and touching a live pin when a plug is partially withdrawn? That would be easier if there was less "in the way" around the pins. I'm assuming that this specification pre-dates the sleeved pin requirement for that to make sense.
That's what stillp suggested, but I'm not convinced that 9.5mm is enough for that. As you say, if that was the original reasoning, it's largely been overtaken by sleeved pins.

Kind Regards, John
 

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

 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top