BS 1363 13A Socket Continuous Max Load

The change of CUs was almost certainly due to another or two silly actions by various bodies. It's funny the plastic ones in shops do not seem to catch fire, and the supposed rate of plastic ones has now fallen to almost none, although a lot are still in use.  Direct evidence was never the forte of certain bodies, just tick boxes.

Broadgage, the energy wasted by having unreliable boilers would be thousands of times the amount used for reliability testing, whilst reliability is designed in, it is necessary to check that no “silly” mistakes have been made. I remember a case where I was involved, 5V 100A power supplies were used in a piece of equipment containing a lot of memory, and it used the full 200A for about 17ms and then only 40A for the next 3ms, ad infinitum. Many makes of these “standard” supplies failed quickly (an hour was good), yet one make was quite happy. After a long and difficult investigation, we found the problem, the switch-mode circuit tried to conduct the same half-bridge driver transistor twice in sequence when the core was nearly saturated and it basically drove a short circuit to the power rail causing very high current and instant failure. If you look at datasheets you will see that all the circuits for this switching function now have a section that stops this from happening, and thus they are then bombproof. A good example of why reliability testing is very important. You should see what happens to military equipment, however with the way things are now, perhaps used to be tested would be better! Those light tanks are a case in point, they should never have got to the end of the contract before they were seen to be undrivable due to crew failure!

The change of CUs was almost certainly due to another or two silly actions by various bodies. It's funny the plastic ones in shops do not seem to catch fire, and the supposed rate of plastic ones has now fallen to almost none, although a lot are still in use.  Direct evidence was never the forte of certain bodies, just tick boxes.

Broadgage, the energy wasted by having unreliable boilers would be thousands of times the amount used for reliability testing, whilst reliability is designed in, it is necessary to check that no “silly” mistakes have been made. I remember a case where I was involved, 5V 100A power supplies were used in a piece of equipment containing a lot of memory, and it used the full 200A for about 17ms and then only 40A for the next 3ms, ad infinitum. Many makes of these “standard” supplies failed quickly (an hour was good), yet one make was quite happy. After a long and difficult investigation, we found the problem, the switch-mode circuit tried to conduct the same half-bridge driver transistor twice in sequence when the core was nearly saturated and it basically drove a short circuit to the power rail causing very high current and instant failure. If you look at datasheets you will see that all the circuits for this switching function now have a section that stops this from happening, and thus they are then bombproof. A good example of why reliability testing is very important. You should see what happens to military equipment, however with the way things are now, perhaps used to be tested would be better! Those light tanks are a case in point, they should never have got to the end of the contract before they were seen to be undrivable due to crew failure!