Sockets operated by light switches

[plugwash]

There is also the option of using 13A sockets on the socket circuit and controlling them with 20A DP switches like is done in many kitchens.

 

[FingRinal]

559.6.1.6

 

[JohnD]

Is that supposed to be helpful to lukens?

 

[FingRinal]

Yes, but mainly in response to Plugwash's post just above. Are you encouraging Lukens not to comply with BS7671?

 

[JohnD]

Lukens asked a question.

This is a DIY website.

If you have a sensible reply to give to Lukens, give it.

If you have nothing better to do than squabble, **** off.

 

[Adam_151]

559.6.1.6

For the benefit of posters without access to the standard:

Lighting circuit incorporating B15, B22, E14, E27 or E40 lampholders shall be protected by an overcurrent protective device of maximum rating 16A

The BS1362 fuselink in the BS1363 plug should meet this requirement? , no?

Same as it does a tablelamp plugged in anywhere else

 

[FingRinal]

Lukens asked a question.

This is a DIY website.

If you have a sensible reply to give to Lukens, give it.

If you have nothing better to do than squabble, p**s off.

If DIYers want their work to comply with the Regs, it has to comply with the Regs. No amount of your petty insults changes that fact. If they don't want their work to comply with the Regs, to which standard do you advise them to comply? British non-Standard Lash up and Bodge it 2008??

 

[FingRinal]

559.6.1.6

For the benefit of posters without access to the standard:

Lighting circuit incorporating B15, B22, E14, E27 or E40 lampholders shall be protected by an overcurrent protective device of maximum rating 16A

The BS1362 fuselink in the BS1363 plug should meet this requirement? , no?

Same as it does a tablelamp plugged in anywhere else

Well, it would seem so. But the Reg is worded in a way that suggests that it is the 'circuit' and not 'part' of the circuit. Circuit is defined in Part 2 as supplied from the same origin and protected by the same device(s). Does this mean the demise of FCU fed lights taken from socket final circuits?

This is a DIY website.

If you have nothing better to do than squabble, p**s off.

I was hassled just the other day for saying that this was a DIY website. I wish the hecklers would make up their mind that's all.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

If DIYers want their work to comply with the Regs, it has to comply with the Regs. No amount of your petty insults changes that fact. If they don't want their work to comply with the Regs, to which standard do you advise them to comply? British non-Standard Lash up and Bodge it 2008??

My comments in this thread and others have explicitly made the distinction between typical domestic installations and commercial/industrial installations.

BS7671 applies to all the above but some Regs may or may not be relevant nor applied in the same way (spirit). It's important to think about a REG within the context of the installation and situation at hand and not to goose step forward regardless.

 

[FingRinal]

Ah BAS, back to taking posts from completely different threads and piecing them together to make up a story. The old politician's trick again. Disinformation. Something you are adept at.

A tip. Use a dictionary. Select whichever words you like then to assemble and create works of fiction to your heart's content.

 

[FingRinal]

Oh..sorry..you seem to do that anyhow...pardon me....

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Ah BAS, back to taking posts from completely different threads and piecing them together to make up a story.

Different threads yes. And showing (not making up) a story of inconsistency on your part.

Sometimes you argue that the regs are the regs are the regs and must always be followed.

And sometimes you argue that some regs are more equal than others, and that it is the spirit behind them that should be divined, and adhered to, not the letter of them.

A tip. Use a dictionary. Select whichever words you like then to assemble and create works of fiction to your heart's content.

A tip - reflect that both of those quotes were from you, are unedited, and both were made in the context of you arguing with other people about regulations in a domestic context.

And reflect that more and more people here are realising that all you want to do is argue, to the extent of flatly and explicitly refusing to provide constructive help when politely asked.

 

[FingRinal]

Ah BAS, back to taking posts from completely different threads and piecing them together to make up a story.

Different threads yes. And showing (not making up) a story of inconsistency on your part.

So you admit it's all made up. Why are you making things up? I thought you were against the use of ad hominem fallacies in arguments.

Sometimes you argue that the regs are the regs are the regs and must always be followed.

And sometimes you argue that some regs are more equal than others, and that it is the spirit behind them that should be divined, and adhered to, not the letter of them.

It's called using one's loaf. I understand that you would like a noddy guide to simplify things for you, but I'm afraid the IEE don't publish one. If you aren't able to apply knowledge and experience, perhaps you shouldn't comment.

A tip. Use a dictionary. Select whichever words you like then to assemble and create works of fiction to your heart's content.

A tip - reflect that both of those quotes were from you, are unedited, and both were made in the context of you arguing with other people about regulations in a domestic context.

I was arguing with you, NOT other people. Have the decency to stick to the truth if you start with it.

And reflect that more and more people here are realising that all you want to do is argue, to the extent of flatly and explicitly refusing to provide constructive help when politely asked.

I'm afraid that's one of your most peddled 'ad hominem' lies BAS. Take a look at some posts I made today. Someone actually thanked me.

 

[securespark]

A few posts ago...

FR:

Ban I'd like to complain about your conflicting & distorted advice about Part P...

Copied into this thread...

FR: Sometimes you must follow the regs to the letter, but at other times, hey, what the heck?


The pieces of text may be from different threads, but they are talking about the same topic.

And yes, they do contradict each other.

So, can you make up your mind which it is to be, please?

It would be a little pot & kettle if you do what you've accused BAN of doing and offer conflicting or distorted advice to DIY'ers, wouldn't it?

 

[ban-all-sheds]

So you admit it's all made up. Why are you making things up? I thought you were against the use of ad hominem fallacies in arguments.

Err - exactly what part of "not making up" reads like an admission of "making up" to you?

I was arguing with you, NOT other people. Have the decency to stick to the truth if you start with it.

No you weren't.

In the first quote you were arguing with John D, and in the second it was with 333rocky333.

And it was not an argument with me that caused John D to write

Lukens asked a question.

This is a DIY website.

If you have a sensible reply to give to Lukens, give it.

If you have nothing better to do than squabble, p**s off.

And reflect that more and more people here are realising that all you want to do is argue, to the extent of flatly and explicitly refusing to provide constructive help when politely asked.

I'm afraid that's one of your most peddled 'ad hominem' lies BAS. Take a look at some posts I made today. Someone actually thanked me.

1) I did not say "everyone", I said "more and more", and that is not a lie.

2) That you flatly and explicitly refused to provide constructive help when politely asked is not a lie either.

3) Lies and ad-hominem fallacies are not the same thing, surely you know that?