switched socket ring?

[unclebob1]

I'm gonna go with the two ring solution, just make sure i plan well and leave enough wire between sockets to change if possible!

I guess i could always place junction boxes where i could change wires from one ring to the other, but not really practical to pull up the floor to do this i guess!

 

[JohnW2]

I'm gonna go with the two ring solution, just make sure i plan well and leave enough wire between sockets to change if possible!

Very sensible, IMO.

I guess i could always place junction boxes where i could change wires from one ring to the other, but not really practical to pull up the floor to do this i guess!

If any of the sockets are on stud (or other 'hollow') walls, you could perhaps have JBs which were accessible after removing the socket?

Kind Regards, John

 

[unclebob1]

I guess i could always place junction boxes where i could change wires from one ring to the other, but not really practical to pull up the floor to do this i guess!

If any of the sockets are on stud (or other 'hollow') walls, you could perhaps have JBs which were accessible after removing the socket?

Kind Regards, John

Not quite had plans finalized for what walls will be removed/moved and will be staying but defo worth considering for areas where there will be hollow or access through other means (false ceilings etc)


Thanks for your assistance!

 

[stem]

I can see plenty of these that you can plug into the standard socket, but not many as a direct face replacement!

If you look at the end to my previous post there's a link to a website that has them.

 

[unclebob1]

I can see plenty of these that you can plug into the standard socket, but not many as a direct face replacement!

If you look at the end to my previous post there's a link to a website that has them.

I did see that, though at £30 per double socket, vs £4/5 for a double socket, as pointed out by other members, its not likely to save me much money considering the initial outlay compared to the saving by switching off standby devices.

 

[JohnW2]

I did see that, though at £30 per double socket, vs £4/5 for a double socket, as pointed out by other members, its not likely to save me much money considering the initial outlay compared to the saving by switching off standby devices.

Not only that, but I think it might actually be quite fiddly to use. It's not clear to me that the remote control would be able to turn off several (selected) sockets simultaneouldy, so you might have to do them one at a time - and if it were that much of a hassle, you may well not bother!

Kind Regards, John

 

[dhutch]

Could you not wire a 4mm radial circuit to say an 8 way grid box, then have 8 dp 20 amp switches and run 8 feeds to 8 sockets and simply switch on off at the grid. Grid plates come in all sizes 2 port to 24+ If you happy with a 20 amp circuit, do the same thing in 2.5mm ?

That's obviously a theoretical solution (better with dhutch's idea of DPDT switches), and would make sense if one wanted to make changes on a daily, or even weekly, basis. However, as I understand it, the only reason the OP wants 'flexibility' (rather than just two separate rings) is in case he wants to change some sockets from one ring to the other at some point in the distant future (and maybe never). As I've said, all the cost and effort of those switches and extra cable just doesn't seem justified for a possible 'once in a blue moon' operation of one or two of those switches.

Kind Regards, John

I guess they wouldnt have to be doublepole depending on the installtion, but otherwise this is what i was talking about.

Daniel

 

[JohnW2]

I guess they wouldnt have to be doublepole depending on the installtion, but otherwise this is what i was talking about.

SPDT switches would mean that the two circuits would have to share a neutral which, as I said, would raise all sorts of issues. DPDT would be much better, although they are not readily available as electrical accessories (even as grid components). Whatever, as I've said, I really don't think that any such approach makes any sense for the OP's requirement.

Kind Regards, John

 

[dhutch]

Whatever, as I've said, I really don't think that any such approach makes any sense for the OP's requirement.

Well indeed.

Ive just read the post I quoted again and realised the propostal was to use the switches to isolate sockets remotely, rather than switch them between a switched and a hard feed.

The idea of having you tv/sterio/etc on a switched ring main (card or ocupancy switched maybe) to reduce waste is comendable in my book, but at the same time, as setop boxes need hard power, and a lot of hifi's and tvs have hard power switches, you could proberbly equally well run it the other way and spec power freindly products.

However, it would be sort of fun.

If I ever wire a house its going to have plenty of wiring, 4-6sockets per room, network cables, audio cabling, voip phones, etc. No point in messing about at the first fix stage as you only get it once.


Daniel

Daniel

 

[JohnW2]

Ive just read the post I quoted again and realised the propostal was to use the switches to isolate sockets remotely, rather than switch them between a switched and a hard feed.

Not quite - both of those things, really. In real-time/short-term the OP wants two separate circuits, so that one can be switched off 'remotely' to de-energise everything which doesn't need 'hard power'. However, in the long-term, he wanted the option to be able to change which sockets were on which circuit (should arrangement of rooms/furniture etc. change). Hence your idea would theoretically work for him. Each and every socket could have it's own radial feed, with DPDT switches determining which of the two circuits each socket was connected to. The 'non-hard'circuitr would then have an over-riding on/off switch, which would kill the whole circuit.

However, that seems far too complicated as a means of avoiding the need for possible wiring changes in the (probably) distant future!

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

How about a patch panel next to the CU using PowerCon, or similar compact, connectors?

So if there are N circuits and a total of M sockets in the house, you'd have a panel with (for maximum flexibility) (N+1)M PowerCon chassis connectors and then any socket can be patched to any circuit.

 

[JohnW2]

How about a patch panel next to the CU using PowerCon, or similar compact, connectors? So if there are N circuits and a total of M sockets in the house, you'd have a panel with (for maximum flexibility) (N+1)M PowerCon chassis connectors and then any socket can be patched to any circuit.

Any of these 'clever' ideas would work, but none make any real sense as an alternative to a possible little bit re-wiring (probably) a few years down the road.

Indeed, in the OPs case, if he simply installed his sockets in 'pairs' (one from each circuit), essentially 'side-by-side', the need for any re-wiring (for changing sockets from one circuit to the other) would never arise.

Kind Regards, John

 

[plugwash]

How about a patch panel next to the CU using PowerCon, or similar compact, connectors?

So if there are N circuits and a total of M sockets in the house, you'd have a panel with (for maximum flexibility) (N+1)M PowerCon chassis connectors and then any socket can be patched to any circuit.

Now price that up and compare it to the cost of just having more sockets arround.

 

[SimonH2]

I could see this workable with a SPDT switch as a separate item next to each socket/group of sockets. You'd need a ring with two lives and one shared neutral (not a problem - read on). At the CU you have a contactor with takes a feed from the MCB/RCBO feeding the live feed down one live and selectively feeding it down the other live. You need a contactor with a pole for each circuit to be done this way.
No problem with the shared neutral as it's all off the one MCB/RCBO for each circuit. The switch selects either always on, or switched. For practicality of cabling, you'll almost certainly need to loop the neutral through the box behind the switch - and the attached sockets will become spurs from the ring at the switching point (if you use a ring rather than radial)

However, as said earlier, I suspect you won't find 2.5mm 3core&earth flat. But there are other cables available. You may also struggle to find appropriate switches - they will need to be something like 30A rating unless you restrict the whole circuit to 20A, and even then you may struggle to find a 20A SPCO switch.

I wouldn't be keen on having to remove the socket and alter the wiring. I can see that introducing problems/faults if done frequently.

Also not sure how you'd fare with rings and the wiring regs once you deviate from the "standard" setup - but you could always use radial circuits. You might be able to economise by not making all sockets switchable. Once you've covered ones likely to be used by TV etc and once likely to be used by alarm clocks, then you might choose to leave the rest fixed on one or the other (most likely via the contactor) and save a core from the last switchable socket to the end of the radial.

You'll want a contactor that has a DC coil and recitfier - otherwise it will hum and use the CU case as a sound box.

Personally, I think you'll find it more hassle than it's worth and soon wonder why you bothered.

 

[JohnW2]

I could see this workable with a SPDT switch as a separate item next to each socket/group of sockets. You'd need a ring with two lives and one shared neutral (not a problem - read on). At the CU you have a contactor with takes a feed from the MCB/RCBO feeding the live feed down one live and selectively feeding it down the other live. You need a contactor with a pole for each circuit to be done this way.

Why a contactor, rather than just an appropriate switch?

No problem with the shared neutral as it's all off the one MCB/RCBO for each circuit. The switch selects either always on, or switched.

Perhaps not a 'problem', but a potential source of confusion when some unsuspecting electrician appeared on the scene in the future to do any testing. ... talking of which, if anything like this were done, good documentation (and prominent labels, drawing attention to the need to look at the documentation) would be essential.

For practicality of cabling, you'll almost certainly need to loop the neutral through the box behind the switch - and the attached sockets will become spurs from the ring at the switching point (if you use a ring rather than radial). However, as said earlier, I suspect you won't find 2.5mm 3core&earth flat. But there are other cables available. You may also struggle to find appropriate switches - they will need to be something like 30A rating unless you restrict the whole circuit to 20A, and even then you may struggle to find a 20A SPCO switch.

Indeed.

I wouldn't be keen on having to remove the socket and alter the wiring. I can see that introducing problems/faults if done frequently.

Sure, if it were done 'frequently'. However, as I keep saying, I would imagine that any changes would be 'once in a blue moon', if ever.

Also not sure how you'd fare with rings and the wiring regs once you deviate from the "standard" setup - but you could always use radial circuits.

I think the potential problem would arise if people with knowledge of the regs but a lack of basic understanding tried to apply the regs. In engineering terms, assuming the switches were adequately rated (and to BS 1363 - which could be a problem) and the cable CCC at least 20A, for any given set of settings of the switches, one would simply have two 'standard' rings, sharing a neutral, fed from the same MCB/RCBO - for which I can't see any prohibition in the regs.

Personally, I think you'll find it more hassle than it's worth and soon wonder why you bothered.

That, of course, has been my suggestion all along.

Kind Regards, John