Could it be argued that 463.1.3 requires a separate switch for items like an oven, hob, refrigerator or washing machine etc. where the appliance has no means of external isolation/control except those on itself? Or are functional controls on the appliances adequate and sufficient?
Z.
I am going to ask the obvious question, that is a serious consideration for new regulations: "how often is "emergency switching off" actually required in a domestic kitchen?". How many have ever had to do this? How many "floods" are not caused by plumbing failures? How many dishwashers catch fire? This idea was tried in a number of large housing projects that ended up with grid switches with loads of 2.5 and 4mm cables which were very difficult to wire and screw closed. They tend to develop loose connections. I doubt that anyone ever used the switches and as they were not labelled so they were "switch everything off" panels anyway. The question really is why add this (significant) cost to all jobs in future, and even some people giving this a C2 if missing. The next idea will be to put a small CU in the kitchen in a convenient place, so that there is a "master switch" that is accessible.
I think all this is a design issue, not a regulation issue. If the customer wants it OK., otherwise make everyone pay for it, no chance.
A fused connection unit above a kitchen work surface with the built in appliance immediately below or to one side, is acceptable to my mind. Within reach is good as well. Your idea of a plug and socket has installation problems.
If the socket is behind the appliance or hidden in a base unit it is inaccessible. Not good.
If the socket is above the work surface a large hold would be needed to get the moulded on 13 Amp plug up from below, thus maintaining the manufacturer's guarantee status.
It is comforting for some people to be able to turn off via a remote easily accessible obvious switch, appliances that are not needed at night or when the family goes away on holiday, for safety reasons.
I like the spirit of the 1981 Reg. 476-20 of the 15th Edition. This requires every fixed or stationery household cooking appliance to be controlled by a switch separate from the appliance and placed within 2m of the appliance(s).
Z.
I must admit that , ring or radial, I prefer that all appliances in a kitchen are readily/easily isolated by say DP switch above the worktop etc or say to one side if a tall thingy. In accessible is a big no from me and that includes in a cupboard where not always easy to search for or get to and if a socket in a cupboard potentially surrounded by plates and pans I hate that. So everything to be relatively simple to disconnect on its own (or very small group) . That is my tenpennorth of preference. I do not think that pulling out an appliance to unplug it if leaking/ on fire is a good idea, neither running to find the consumer unit with the risk of inadvertently removing lighting too, that would be my idea of insanity - PS no I`m not keen on multigridswitches either
The people I've spoken with, who've had kitchens gutted by their washing machine or tumble dryer say they couldn't have reached over the appliance to switch it off anyway.
I see the idea behind it, and certainly would support some form of additional control on energy-saving grounds, but to try and pin this on a fire safety issue and require a means of control above the counter (whether directly above, or to the side) isn't, in my mind, the right way to go.
Yes Graham, a file13 item. It sounds a good idea until one actually analyses it, with a fire you get out, it's infinitely safer than mucking about, particularly as a real fire is very unpredictable. All it takes is a buildup of unburnt gas escaping just as you learn over and you will be a very serious casualty, or dead! An extinguisher if you have one, from a distance is a better idea, because the fire once started is not even driven by electricity, so turning off is useless. Does no one realise this? A 5kg extinguisher is much cheaper than this idea and MUCH more likely to be useful.
Yes Graham, a file13 item. It sounds a good idea until one actually analyses it, with a fire you get out, it's infinitely safer than mucking about, particularly as a real fire is very unpredictable. All it takes is a buildup of unburnt gas escaping just as you learn over and you will be a very serious casualty, or dead! An extinguisher if you have one, from a distance is a better idea, because the fire once started is not even driven by electricity, so turning off is useless. Does no one realise this? A 5kg extinguisher is much cheaper than this idea and MUCH more likely to be useful.
The contents of a fire extinguisher will not be able to access the internal parts a smoking electrical appliance such as a washing machine, dish washer or tumble drier. They are all sealed boxes. If the fire is that large then get out, shut the door behind you and call 999.
Loooooooooooooooookk.......
And see this..................... FIRE
Z.
The contents of a fire extinguisher will not be able to access the internal parts a smoking electrical appliance such as a washing machine, dish washer or tumble drier.
And once it catches fire, removing the source of electricity often won't help either.
In tumble dryers, even when smoking, often removing the power doesn't help, because by that time the lint is smouldering ...
If the fire is that large then get out, shut the door behind you and call 999.
Perhaps even if it's just smoke, do the same (regardless of whether you've removed the power).
We're about to take you to the IET registration website. Don't worry though, you'll be sent straight back to the community after completing the registration.
Continue to the IET registration site
