Why are ring finals split up/down not side/side?

[EFLImpudence]

(I'll leave my English master {who, amazingly, at the last count was still alive!} to comment on "necessitating a need" ).

I'll try and think of something.

The same 'need' would have arisen if the proposal/prospect had been to introduce 30A radial (with whatever cable was appropriate). I presume that, as you have been saying, because of the fusing factor issue (hence probably needing the imperial equivalent of 6mm cable), someone came up with the idea of a ring final to (probably) reduce the amount of copper required (at least for new-builds or total re-wires).

Ah, so, do you think that it was thought necessary to have a 30A circuit which would naturally have been a radial and then someone suggested making it a ring - to save copper - because, as you have said, two 15A radials would not have used more copper - in fact a little bit less with the middle bit not required. See next comment.

Who knows. However, per the above, the thinking may well have been that (at least for new builds) having two (or more) sockets on a 30A ring would use less copper than having two (or more) sockets each fed by a 15A circuit.

You appear to be thinking that a 15A radial would be limited to one socket. Why would that be?

Of course, most countries did not have a post-war rebuilding project on anything like the scale of Britain (hence far less 'copper saving' issues) - although one might have expected that Germany might have felt the need to do something similar.

Well, there you go. They didn't.

 

[JohnW2]

Ah, so, do you think that it was thought necessary to have a 30A circuit which would naturally have been a radial and then someone suggested making it a ring - to save copper - because, as you have said, two 15A radials would not have used more copper - in fact a little bit less with the middle bit not required.

Quite so - that is precisely what I was thinking

You appear to be thinking that a 15A radial would be limited to one socket. Why would that be?

Again, that is indeed what I was thinking - the reason being that such was the situation in my home and others I was aware of. As I said, when more than one 'socket' came to be required in a room, in my experience that was achieved by Christmas Trees of adaptors into one (usually 'single') socket (and/or some, possibly iffy, DIY!!). Maybe my personal experience was atypical.

Well, there you go. They didn't.

Again, who knows. Maybe the Germans had better sources of copper and/or not as great a requirement for 'number of sockets' than we did?

Kind Regards, John

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

Again, who knows. Maybe the Germans had better sources of copper and/or not as great a requirement for 'number of sockets' than we did?

Ignoring the historical reasons as to why the UK developed the ring circuit, has anyone any doubt that the UK system is by far the best system in the world?

I was wrong earlier about 7/029 being used for old 30 amp ring circuits, it seems 3/0.36 was adequate for ring circuits.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Ignoring the historical reasons as to why the UK developed the ring circuit, has anyone any doubt that the UK system is by far the best system in the world?

Yes.

Would you care to say why you think that is the case?

Is it merely that you think it is British therefore it must be the best?

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

Yes.

Would you care to say why you think that is the case?

It is by far the simplest and most economical way to have lots of sockets -its a very elegant solution. The ability to have lots of sockets at minimal cost, itself improves safety, in that flexible leads can be kept short. A fuse in the plug of an appliance will generally have the correct rating, rather than the mish mash of a mess found in other countries.

The big filing of the UK system is the large size and awkward clumsiness of the 13amp plug, painful if you step on one with bare feet.

 

[EFLImpudence]

I was wrong earlier about 7/029 being used for old 30 amp ring circuits, it seems 3/0.36 was adequate for ring circuits.

I think 7/0.036 was required with 30A BS3036 fuse:

 

[EddieM]

It is by far the simplest and most economical way to have lots of sockets -its a very elegant solution. The ability to have lots of sockets at minimal cost, itself improves safety, in that flexible leads can be kept short. A fuse in the plug of an appliance will generally have the correct rating, rather than the mish mash of a mess found in other countries.

The big filing of the UK system is the large size and awkward clumsiness of the 13amp plug, painful if you step on one with bare feet.

Its no biggie, in half a century I've never stepped on one, the UK plug n socket is a masterpiece IMHO.

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

Its no biggie, in half a century I've never stepped on one, the UK plug n socket is a masterpiece IMHO.

I have done it a few times, it really hurts

 

[EddieM]

I have done it a few times, it really hurts

Can't be as bad as Lego, that is excruciating.

 

[EFLImpudence]

It is by far the simplest and most economical way to have lots of sockets -its a very elegant solution. The ability to have lots of sockets at minimal cost, itself improves safety, in that flexible leads can be kept short.

I have lots of sockets so elegant solution not required.

A fuse in the plug of an appliance will generally have the correct rating,

The correct rating for what? That which wouldn't be needed were it not for its existence?

rather than the mish mash of a mess found in other countries.

Reasonable examples please?

The big failing of the UK system is the large size and awkward clumsiness of the 13amp plug,

There you go then.

 

[DetlefSchmitz]

Can't be as bad as Lego, that is excruciating.

The worst is inverted 14 pin DIL ICs.

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

The worst is inverted 14 pin DIL ICs.

Not nearly as bad as a 40 pin 8080 CPU..

 

[DetlefSchmitz]

Not nearly as bad as a 40 pin 8080 CPU..

You win.

 

[EFLImpudence]

I think that the ring final might have been an elegant solution when BS3036 fuses were used.

The fact is that since the introduction of MCBs, it is redundant.


That 433.1.204 imposes the same conditions for rings whether protected by a BS3036 30A fuse or a 32A MCB is inappropriate and unjustified.

 

[JohnW2]

The worst is inverted 14 pin DIL ICs.

Not nearly as bad as a 40 pin 8080 CPU..

I'm not so sure about that - the more pins there are, the less pressure each one applies to the skin, so the less likelihood is there of skin penetration - so 8 pin DILs might be the worst

Edit: I should have added - that is, of course, the reason why someone lying on a 'bed of nails' does not suffer any skin penetration. They just have to be careful to ensure that they never lay on just a few nails as they 'lay down'!

Kind Regards, John