Spur question

[Tally101]

Thanks EFLImpudence
I need a double or 2 single socket for the washer and dryer in the new position and a socket where the existing dryer is as the new freezer is going there so I think I will need to extend the ring main to a double socket then connect the existing spur back to the new freezer
thanks

 

[ebee]

To mitigate the age old question of a 13A twin socket only being rated for 13A total not 26A you could fit a dual (rather than a twin) box and mount two single sockers on it, preferably both on the actual ring or, if you like, one on the ring and one spurred from it.

PS it does not always follow that all twin sockets rated at 13A total would only take 13A and not a fraction more, in fact I would expect some of the better brands to actually be capable of taking far more but some of the cheaper ones no. It`s just that the standard says the rating for both twin and single is 13A but the 13A ones are type tested for singles at 14A and the twins for 14 in one side and 6 in the other side.

There was a thread on the IET forum a couple of years back about this

Current rating of twin 13 amp sockets ? - Wiring and the Regulations BS 7671 - IET EngX - IET EngX

Is there any reliable information as to the current rating of a twin 13 amp socket. Sounds simple enough, but views seem to differ. I was taught (decades ago) that

engx.theiet.org

 

[EFLImpudence]

It really is not good enough.

A long protracted inconclusive discussion on THE IET website forum about this matter is ridiculous.

If THE IET believes that two 13A plugs (which is what everyone calls them) cannot be plugged in to a twin socket then why don't they - THE IET - make regulations stipulating the maximum joint fuse rating that the two plugs may have.
After all they make daft rules about things because someone might do something stupid in the future.


I once asked on the IET forum why they had a forum as such and not just someone from the IET definitively answering people's questions and was rebuked because "we like having discussions".

 

[Murdochcat]

I think the IET deliberately have vagueness to keep them selves busy

Arrogant idiots

 

[plugwash]

Standards are created through a formal process. The IET can't just come along and "definitively answer a question" that the standard itself doesn't answer. They can issue guidance but that guidance is ultimately just the opinion of whoever wrote it.

And as far as I can tell, much as some may wish that it did, BS1363 doesn't say anything about the rating of a double socket in normal use, it merely specifies a set of test conditions which products claiming to meet BS1363 must comply with.

 

[DetlefSchmitz]

it merely specifies a set of test conditions which products claiming to meet BS1363 must comply with.

...which are less onerous than a normal typical usage of a double socket would require, therefore leaving everyone in limbo...

 

[ebee]

OK.
My take on it.
BS sets the minimum standard which must apply and also sets 1 set of tests.
Manufacturers say the items comply .
Decent manufacturers in practice easily exceed these standards but some manufacturers might not do in order to cut costs.
A customer asks me to fit a socket that they provide, it might not be a make I am keen on, they still choose that socket even though I might advise otherwise.
Many folks have sockets that run for many years, particularly the better makes. Also, in practice, anything reaching or exceeding the max current is very often not for long.
In practice not often a real problem.
But sometimes we see the charred remains, often one of the less decent types. We should , if possible, also look at the plug used because that might have been the culprit really.
Should we be aiming to reduce the chances a twin socket exceeding13A ? I think so.

 

[SUNRAY]

OK.
My take on it.
BS sets the minimum standard which must apply and also sets 1 set of tests.
Manufacturers say the items comply .
Decent manufacturers in practice easily exceed these standards but some manufacturers might not do in order to cut costs.
A customer asks me to fit a socket that they provide, it might not be a make I am keen on, they still choose that socket even though I might advise otherwise.
Many folks have sockets that run for many years, particularly the better makes. Also, in practice, anything reaching or exceeding the max current is very often not for long.
In practice not often a real problem.
But sometimes we see the charred remains, often one of the less decent types. We should , if possible, also look at the plug used because that might have been the culprit really.
Should we be aiming to reduce the chances a twin socket exceeding13A ? I think so.

Hmm better makes and the plug. This was one of the many MK sockets I replaced in one year, must have been 15 years ago:

This particular pair were fitted during the Easter holiday in a school, sort of coffee shop/tuck shop place and the device connected being an urn which ran all day. Before September start we were unable to do PAT as the plug could not be withdrawn from the socket.

 

[ebee]

I`m not sure if I think that MK is "one of the better makes" these days in that it once upon a time might have been one of them. My perception (others might disagree) is that MK at least since the 70s has run more on it`s previous good name since that time and also in the last few years has become far worse still. In fact in the late 70s, 80s and 90s and later, quite a few trade professionals on hearing someone mention MK have made a comment such as - expensive crap!

PS - one innovation, back in the day, was the perception that their flex terminals on plugtops and FCUs was a great thing - Caged washer screwhead in a threaded pillar for you to wind the flex around, whilst I agree that it was an improvement on some that went before I still preferred a round hole for the flex with a dome point end screw on the decent makes. (Again, others might disagree).

 

[SUNRAY]

I`m not sure if I think that MK is "one of the better makes" these days in that it once upon a time might have been one of them. My perception (others might disagree) is that MK at least since the 70s has run more on it`s previous good name since that time and also in the last few years has become far worse still. In fact in the late 70s, 80s and 90s and later, quite a few trade professionals on hearing someone mention MK have made a comment such as - expensive crap!

PS - one innovation, back in the day, was the perception that their flex terminals on plugtops and FCUs was a great thing - Caged washer screwhead in a threaded pillar for you to wind the flex around, whilst I agree that it was an improvement on some that went before I still preferred a round hole for the flex with a dome point end screw on the decent makes. (Again, others might disagree).

This other will not disagree.
I have never been convinced their superior reputation was justified, I'm not disputing they were good but getting back to my old chestnut I don't think they were better than Bill.
I have never been convinced their wrap around terminals are good and most of the other makes moved away from similar terminations way back before BS1363 fittings were introduced but MK seemed to be steadfastly stuck in a rut with them. For really small wires like 0.22 & 0.34mm² (think about some of the HiFi from 60/70's) the wire would be pushed outwards and not clamped and the heavier wires (such as a coarse stranded 1.5mm² or any 2.5mm²) is too bulky to bend round the screw. Also my experience of their cable clamp arrangement was crap for thin cables resulting with botches with cable ties, PVC tape or knots and didn't allow big cables without removing one side or even both.
Before people mention it yes I know BS1363 plugs are specc'd to 1.5mm² max but even that was usurped by a BS permitting plugs without fuses under license where ≥2.5mm² was mandatory.

These day I'm happy to agree

MK - expensive crap!

Sorry to mis quote you