Spurring sockets

[greenstarthree01]

Sorry if treading old ground but I've found past posts with different answers on this (some years old so that may be why!), also I think I may have some other questions depending on the answer!

I know that if you take a non-fused spur from a socket on a ring circuit, you should only take one, and not spur from a spurred socket (the 'only spur from a socket with 2 cables' rule). But I've a couple of questions on the use of FCUs

When putting in an FCU, should it be put in place of the original ring socket, or is it ok after it? i.e:

Or:

Also, is it true that when using an FCU you can spur of a spur more than once?
Thanks!

 

[JohnW2]

I know that if you take a non-fused spur from a socket on a ring circuit, you should only take one, and not spur from a spurred socket (the 'only spur from a socket with 2 cables' rule). But I've a couple of questions on the use of FCUs .... When putting in an FCU, should it be put in place of the original ring socket, or is it ok after it? i.e: .... Or: ....

Either is acceptable, but the former is probably preferable, since it leaves the 'original socket' on the ring, hence not using up any of the 13A maximum that can be drawn by all the sockets downstream of the FCU.

Also, is it true that when using an FCU you can spur of a spur more than once?

Once you have an FCU (i.e. a 'fused spur') you can connect as many sockets as you like 'downstream' of it (i.e. supplied from the 'load' side of the FCU).

Kind Regards, John

 

[greenstarthree01]

You know, the more I look at the second drawing, the less it makes sense.... Thanks!

So what about having an unfused spur with a fused spur taken from it, i.e:

Would it depend what you were running after the FCU (i.e. a light might be ok but not a double socket), or is it a no-no altogether?

 

[EFLImpudence]

No. not allowed.

The FCU must protect all of the spur.

 

[greenstarthree01]

I thought so. Think I already know the answer, but assuming spurring an FCU and an unfused socket from the same ring socket is a no-go too? (Apart from the issue with cramming 4 lots of cable into a socket's terminals)

 

[EFLImpudence]

Think I already know the answer, but assuming spurring an FCU and an unfused socket from the same ring socket is a no-go too?

It is a no-go.

As I said, the FCU must protect all of the spur.



In the context of your posts, all sockets are unfused.

 

[JohnW2]

Think I already know the answer, but assuming spurring an FCU and an unfused socket from the same ring socket is a no-go too? (Apart from the issue with cramming 4 lots of cable into a socket's terminals)

If you mean having one socket as an unfused spur and also (using a separate cable) an FCU supplying one or more other sockets, with both originating from the same socket on the ring, then, yes, there is nothing in the regulations that say you can't do that (even though some might try to disagree with that!) - but, as you observe, there can be some difficulty in getting four conductors into the terminals.

Kind Regards, john

 

[JohnW2]

It is a no-go.

See my reply to the OP. I think that what he was describing was not a "no-go", albeit some people (but not me) might consider it not to be ideal.

Kind Regards, John

 

[EFLImpudence]

Yes, I misunderstood.

 

[greenstarthree01]

Thanks both. Just trying to work out what historical work I need to correct having recently moved! In a couple of areas, they have taken two spurs from one ring socket, one unfused to another socket, and one to an FCU feeding an appliance (e.g. boiler, gas fire, etc).

As you say although there might be nothing 'against the rules' there, the sockets are just barely holding 4 lots of cable.

From what we've said here, wouldn't it have been better for them to install an FCU next to the ring socket, then just spurred both from that? (Assuming it's ok to spur two cables out of one FCU?)

 

[securespark]

How about spurring off the ring, running the cable for 5 metres, then fitting an FCU?

 

[JohnW2]

Thanks both. Just trying to work out what historical work I need to correct having recently moved! In a couple of areas, they have taken two spurs from one ring socket, one unfused to another socket, and one to an FCU feeding an appliance (e.g. boiler, gas fire, etc). As you say although there might be nothing 'against the rules' there, the sockets are just barely holding 4 lots of cable.

Indeed. Compliant with regs, but not necessarily all that easy to do. If one uses reasonable quality sockets, getting 4 conductors into each terminal may not be too much of a problem - but the box could get a bit crowded with four cables (particularly if it were a single socket).

From what we've said here, wouldn't it have been better for them to install an FCU next to the ring socket, then just spurred both from that? (Assuming it's ok to spur two cables out of one FCU?)

Yes, it would probably be 'better'.

You can connected as many things as you like to the load side of an FCU, since the total current taken by them will be limited to 13A.

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

How about spurring off the ring, running the cable for 5 metres, then fitting an FCU?

As I understand it, he wants a socket as an unfused spur as well as a fused spur - but maybe I'm misunderstanding!

Kind Regards, John

 

[mwatsonxx]

As I understand it, he wants a socket as an unfused spur as well as a fused spur - but maybe I'm misunderstanding!

Kind Regards, John

What is the point of this idiotic piece of meaningless nonsense

 

[JohnW2]

What is the point of this idiotic piece of meaningless nonsense

You would have to ask the OP that - it was he who appeared to be suggesting that.

Maybe he knows that one of the new sockets he wants will sometimes need to supply a substantial current (maybe even ~13A), so doesn't want that one to use most/all of the 13A total available to all the new sockets if he put all of them on a fused spur?

Kind Regards, John