Yes! in table 52.3. Unfortunately, the definitions section does not define what a power circuit might be!
IMO, a circuit that does not consume power is one that is not energised….
EDIT Poo, too slow.
Switches near hobs
- Thread starter DavidA1982
- Start date
Yes! in table 52.3. Unfortunately, the definitions section does not define what a power circuit might be!
IMO, a circuit that does not consume power is one that is not energised….
EDIT Poo, too slow.
Sponsored Links
Indeed. I think one can but presume that the intention was that a "power circuit" is anything which is not a "lighting circuit" - even though they forgot to tell us that!
As I've just written, that leaves us wondering whether or not a 1mm² circuit which supplies fan(s), shaver sockets or whatever, as well as lighting, is actually compliant!
Kind Regards, John
I also wonder about the definition for "Current-using Equipment"
This is defined as equipment that converts electrical energy into another form of energy, such as light, heat or motive power.
Well, that's everything covered, isn't it?
This is defined as equipment that converts electrical energy into another form of energy, such as light, heat or motive power.
Well, that's everything covered, isn't it?
Indeed, but I imagine that is the intention - i.e. to refer to any 'load' (in contrast to switchgear, wiring or wiring accessories).I also wonder about the definition for "Current-using Equipment" ... This is defined as equipment that converts electrical energy into another form of energy, such as light, heat or motive power. ... Well, that's everything covered, isn't it?
Kind Regards, John
Sponsored Links
I think your misconception is due to the terms you are using.
A 'cooker' has an oven and a hob so obviously is going to use more power than just a hob.
An 'oven' (or double oven) - the term you were using previously - does not have a hob and usually uses less power than a hob.
I may be wrong, but I think the OP actually did mean 'double oven' - and I got the impression from his initial comment that he was surprised that (since it was called 'energy efficient') an induction hob would have a higher ('maximum') power rating than a double oven (not cooker).
Kind Regards, John
Thanks both. You are right - I meant double oven, not cooker. And you are also right that my misconception arose because I didn't understand how these things consume power - it's been a very educational thread!
In any case I'm getting an electrician in to take a look, as a few people have said that I should not have 6mm cable on a 40A circuit.
Thanks for your help again - it makes the discussion with the electrician so much easier when I know what it is that I need to ask for.
In any case I'm getting an electrician in to take a look, as a few people have said that I should not have 6mm cable on a 40A circuit.
Thanks for your help again - it makes the discussion with the electrician so much easier when I know what it is that I need to ask for.
Glad you've found it helpful.
If the 6mm² cable is just on the surface and/or buried in plaster etc., then is should be OK with a 40A MCB - only if it is 'buried in insulation', or something like that, is there likely to be a problem; your electrician will be able to confirm. However, if there were a problem, you don't need a 40A MCB for your cooking appliances, so it could be reduced to 32A - under ideal conditions, even 4mm² cable is OK with that, so (extreme circumstances aside!) the 6mm² would be fine!
Kind Regards, John
Flawed to the point of being meaningless, and therefore impossible to comply with.
And what if it was supplied from a socket, or immersion heater circuit, via an FCU? Would it be a "power circuit"?
What about a light supplied via an FCU from a socket circuit? Very commonly done, but may you use 1mm²?
The regulations don't make sense, and one cannot be expected to comply with nonsense.
Wiring converts electrical energy into heat.
That's just being pedantic for the sake of it - you fully understand the distinction I was suggesting.
Kind Regards, John
Technical publications , and regulations, must not rely on anybody ever having to say "you know what they mean". If their definition of current using equipment would include cables then it is the definition which is wrong, not pointing out that the definition includes cables.
Well, it certainly wouldn't be a lighting circuit, so I suppose the answer has to be 'yes'.
If one uses the BS7671 definition of 'circuit' then it could be argued that it is a lighting circuit, and therefore that 1mm² cable is acceptable. However, that's the same interpretation of the regs that says that connecting something to an existing circuit via an FCU creates a 'new circuit' (hence notifiable), so I don't know.
AFAICS, even if different types of circuit were properly defined, it still would not make any sense. As you said, provided the CCC is adequate in relation to load and OPD, I don't see why there should be a minimum CSA for any particular type of circuit. However, even if they made a hash of executing it, those who invented the concept of Table 52.3 obviously felt differently.
Kind Regards, John
Really, Table 52.3 belong in the On Site Guide, not the "Regs"
Unfortunately, it's in the regs - and, as I've pointed out, there are ways of interpreting it which would probably make millions of installations non-compliant with those regs
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
