This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

I`ve been thinking

OK the title might startle some who know me.

Ring Final rules.

What is the intention behind the rule "no more spurs than points on the ring".

I think most of us who have run rings would almost exclusively put every point on a ring and no spurs at all.

Spurs are then usually just additions.

One spur max per point.

One spur allowed at origin.

If I saw a ring with say 12 points on ring and one ring per point and say 1 point at origin that would be 12 on ring and 13 spurs that would not worry me.

In fact if I saw say 5 points at origin it would not worry me either.

If I saw 12 on ring each with one spur then 5 spurs at origin then 11 spurs on joints between points woul I worry?

No I would not although this "golden rule" would have been well and truly broken.

I think the rule intention was purely good housekeeping to keep us all on the straight and narrow.

In fact some on here have mentionded a ring in a loft with junction boxes dropped dow to spurs. Therefore all spurs and not on ring.

Note I did not pick the number of 12 points on ring for any reason, I could have picked 5 or 50 or 5000.
  • Yes Zoom it was a great idea at the time agreed.

    But many times I`ve seen washer/dryer etc plugged in to it not to mention 3 way adaptors.

    You can not legislate against people being people but hopefully guide them a little bit..

    Sockets in cupboards, damage with pots pans and the like not to mention scuffed flexes, all out of sight and bubbling away and waiting to bite.

  • Zoomup:







    ebee:

    I altered a kitchen wiring of a rewire I did a few years previously, single sockets  for washer and dishwasher  with dp switches above worktop, all labelled.  one heavy load each spur not washer and DW in one twin. This gives easy switching of W & DW and negates the simplyawfull practice of sockets in cupboards. I`d never encorouge two such loads in one twin.


    Same reasoning I always use a 45A DP switch for cooker, not one with onboard socket, that is a throwback to the days of not many sockets per dwelling and OK for kettle now and again but how often do washers/dryers get a home there? Aghh.






    Although a socket outlet mounted on a cooker panel may encourage misuse and the running of flexes over hot hobs, it is very handy for the customer to make us tea if we have the ring turned off.


    Z.


     




     

    The  cooker switch socket is the choice for plugging in a 110-volt portable tool transformer.


    It is the least likely circuit to trip when the transformer is powered up and causes the least issues if it does.


     Andy Betteridge.

  • Sparkingchip:




    Zoomup:







    ebee:

    I altered a kitchen wiring of a rewire I did a few years previously, single sockets  for washer and dishwasher  with dp switches above worktop, all labelled.  one heavy load each spur not washer and DW in one twin. This gives easy switching of W & DW and negates the simplyawfull practice of sockets in cupboards. I`d never encorouge two such loads in one twin.


    Same reasoning I always use a 45A DP switch for cooker, not one with onboard socket, that is a throwback to the days of not many sockets per dwelling and OK for kettle now and again but how often do washers/dryers get a home there? Aghh.






    Although a socket outlet mounted on a cooker panel may encourage misuse and the running of flexes over hot hobs, it is very handy for the customer to make us tea if we have the ring turned off.


    Z.


     




     

    The  cooker switch socket is the choice for plugging in a 110-volt portable tool transformer.


    It is the least likely circuit to trip when the transformer is powered up and causes the least issues if it does.


     Andy Betteridge.

     




    Yeh but, doesn't its short flex cause its grit covered base to scratch the kitchen black slate marble work surface  and get you bad looks from the lady of the house? (Plus a big repair bill).


    Z.

  • HA I thought the normal extra safe solution was to extend the 230V with any old  13A lead out of the window and  dwon the path to as near to the 110V cement mixer as possible, and then park the 230/110 TX in the puddle of cement slops beside it.

    I have also seen someone using a kango hammer  to demolish a brick archway, about 3m up. with the TX on the top of the wall as the lead on the kango would not allow it to be on the ground.

    It is at moments like this that 230V tooling on a fast RCD has a certain appeal after all .
  • Lol.


    Back in the 1970’s I was using 110-volt tools on site using rather long extension leads and several people told me I wrong having the transformer by the socket then 110-volt extension leads, I should do it the other way around “because of the voltage drop “.


    I only scrapped that transformer earlier this year, it had only been used occasionally in my garage for quite a few years as the bottom was missing the off the case after years of being dragged around and it was standing on the exposed resin block that enclosed the actual transformer.


    I have taken a few computers out with it over the years, hence using the cooker or some other circuit without computers or the like supplied from them.


    I took the computers down in the offices of  Beazer Mercia, one of the house builders taken over by Persimmon, after being assured that it was safe to plug that transformer into a particular socket, I did ask!


    Whilst people worry about overloading socket ring circuits perhaps they should give more consideration to the variety of appliances that will be connected to the same circuit and provide a separate circuit in the garage if it is likely to be used for appliances that may cause issues when connected, such as a cheap arcy sparky chop-saw from a DIY shed.


    Andy Betteridge