The company I work for has just undergone a health and safety
assessment. One of the items to come up was the need to change two
double sockets in the small kitchen to ones that have integrated RCD
devices.

The kitchen is used for making tea, warming up the odd pasty in a
microwave or, when someone really pushes the boat out, toasting a slice
of bread. And there are only half a dozen or so staff.

1 There are actually three double sockets in the room. Not sure why only
two were mentioned. (Plus fridge and dishwasher - but they are hidden.)

2 There is a door leading out onto a small patio. So I guess you could
argue that devices used outdoors could be plugged in there. But this
would equally apply to the hall/entrance area.

3 The wiring isn't exactly old - maybe 12 years.

I have not checked whether the circuits are protected by RCDs, and, if
so, what rating. For the purposes of getting an answer, I would assume
that they are protected. (I can see the argument if the circuits were
not protected - but wouldn't it actually make more sense to fit whole
circuit protection?) So far as I am aware, the circuits are sound and we
do not get nuisance trips.

I imagine all sockets would include a 30 mA device.

And this is in England, in case that makes any difference.

So - what is the justification for providing this extra level of
protection?

I really can't see everyone testing the RCD every time they plug the
kettle in. Would fitting them really make any difference to safety?

Rod

"Rod" wrote in message
...
The company I work for has just undergone a health and safety assessment.
One of the items to come up was the need to change two double sockets in
the small kitchen to ones that have integrated RCD devices.

The kitchen is used for making tea, warming up the odd pasty in a
microwave or, when someone really pushes the boat out, toasting a slice of
bread. And there are only half a dozen or so staff.

1 There are actually three double sockets in the room. Not sure why only
two were mentioned. (Plus fridge and dishwasher - but they are hidden.)

2 There is a door leading out onto a small patio. So I guess you could
argue that devices used outdoors could be plugged in there. But this would
equally apply to the hall/entrance area.

3 The wiring isn't exactly old - maybe 12 years.

I have not checked whether the circuits are protected by RCDs, and, if so,
what rating. For the purposes of getting an answer, I would assume that
they are protected. (I can see the argument if the circuits were not
protected - but wouldn't it actually make more sense to fit whole circuit
protection?) So far as I am aware, the circuits are sound and we do not
get nuisance trips.

I imagine all sockets would include a 30 mA device.

And this is in England, in case that makes any difference.

So - what is the justification for providing this extra level of
protection?

I really can't see everyone testing the RCD every time they plug the
kettle in. Would fitting them really make any difference to safety?


If, in the event of a fault, the RCD in the socket is the first to trip it
should avoid the 'whole circuit' tripping. If the rest of the circuit
includes office computers and the like, this would make a lot of sense in
terms of the risk of lost work, corrupted files etc.

Is it a 'requirement' from the H&S inspection or a 'recommendation' ?

In article ,
Rod writes:
The company I work for has just undergone a health and safety
assessment. One of the items to come up was the need to change two
double sockets in the small kitchen to ones that have integrated RCD
devices.

The kitchen is used for making tea, warming up the odd pasty in a
microwave or, when someone really pushes the boat out, toasting a slice
of bread. And there are only half a dozen or so staff.

This is a good idea for the worktop items. You often find
ordinary kettles, toasters, and the like, and these can be
subject to much more frequent use than they were designed
for in a domestic environment, so the extra protection of
an RCD here is a good choice. (Strictly, such appliances
should be replaced with commercial ones which are up to
the usage, or PAT tested very frequently, or replaced on
a routine basis well before they normally fail.)

I would keep the fridge/freezer off that RCD though.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

On Sat, 26 May 2007 00:00:24 +0100, Rod
mused:

The company I work for has just undergone a health and safety
assessment. One of the items to come up was the need to change two
double sockets in the small kitchen to ones that have integrated RCD
devices.

The kitchen is used for making tea, warming up the odd pasty in a
microwave or, when someone really pushes the boat out, toasting a slice
of bread. And there are only half a dozen or so staff.

1 There are actually three double sockets in the room. Not sure why only
two were mentioned. (Plus fridge and dishwasher - but they are hidden.)

2 There is a door leading out onto a small patio. So I guess you could
argue that devices used outdoors could be plugged in there. But this
would equally apply to the hall/entrance area.

3 The wiring isn't exactly old - maybe 12 years.

Maybe ask the person that wrote the report?

What priority have they given the note? I can only see it being a
recomendation.

I have not checked whether the circuits are protected by RCDs, and, if
so, what rating. For the purposes of getting an answer, I would assume
that they are protected. (I can see the argument if the circuits were
not protected - but wouldn't it actually make more sense to fit whole
circuit protection?) So far as I am aware, the circuits are sound and we
do not get nuisance trips.

I imagine all sockets would include a 30 mA device.

Assumption is the mother of all **** ups.

I wouldn't be surprised if there were no RCD protection, many
commercial installations only have RCD's on actual outdoor sockets,
everything else on MCB's only.

And this is in England, in case that makes any difference.

So - what is the justification for providing this extra level of
protection?

I really can't see everyone testing the RCD every time they plug the
kettle in. Would fitting them really make any difference to safety?

Why would testing them everytime the ketle is plugged in make it any
more or less safer?
--
Regards,
Stuart.

In article ,
OG wrote:
If, in the event of a fault, the RCD in the socket is the first to trip it
should avoid the 'whole circuit' tripping.

That's a big 'if'. ;-)

--
*I have a degree in liberal arts -- do you want fries with that

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 26 May, 00:00, Rod wrote:
The company I work for has just undergone a health and safety
assessment. One of the items to come up was the need to change two
double sockets in the small kitchen to ones that have integrated RCD
devices.

Is this yet another example of a health and safety officer justifying
his/her job by putting something on paper? How many incidents (if any)
have occurred since the kitchen was put into use?


The kitchen is used for making tea, warming up the odd pasty in a
microwave or, when someone really pushes the boat out, toasting a slice
of bread. And there are only half a dozen or so staff.

Kettle - personal risk low unless staff are in the habit of holding it
whilst wating for it to boil or pouring whilst switche on
Same situation with microwave but toasters seem to suffer idiots
poking about inside with knife or fork so there may be justification
unless you would like to see Darwinism in action! The major problem is
then the ensuing paperwork.



1 There are actually three double sockets in the room. Not sure why only
two were mentioned. (Plus fridge and dishwasher - but they are hidden.)

2 There is a door leading out onto a small patio. So I guess you could
argue that devices used outdoors could be plugged in there. But this
would equally apply to the hall/entrance area.

Wait till the next inspection - it will provide another report
paragraph.


3 The wiring isn't exactly old - maybe 12 years.

So 15th edition then. Is metalwork everywhere infested with green/
yellow bonding wires? Bonding became the vogue when cable
manufacturers voiced there presence on the wiring regulations
committee - miles of cable to a captive marketg


I have not checked whether the circuits are protected by RCDs, and, if
so, what rating. For the purposes of getting an answer, I would assume
that they are protected. (I can see the argument if the circuits were
not protected - but wouldn't it actually make more sense to fit whole
circuit protection?) So far as I am aware, the circuits are sound and we
do not get nuisance trips.

If you do have an RCD at the consumer unit seving the kitchen circuits
you must never have had a problem with faulty appliances or earth
leakage.


I imagine all sockets would include a 30 mA device.

Maybe, maybe not. More than likely not if you haven't had tripping at
any time


And this is in England, in case that makes any difference.

So - what is the justification for providing this extra level of
protection?

I really can't see everyone testing the RCD every time they plug the
kettle in. Would fitting them really make any difference to safety?

Why should you? repeated operation would be unreasonable and introduce
unneccessary wear and tear. Three or four times a year is more than
adequate and in any case only tests the mechanism of the RCD not the
protection given.
If you simply provide an RCD at the consumer unit and it protects
other sockets there may be loss of data in the event computer supplies
are fed from it.

Swapping to 30mA RCD protected sockets would avoid a lot of other
problems if you decide to go down the route but beware - if there is
an RCD at the supply end ot the cable and it is a 30mA unit it will
not discriminate and all that will happen is you will trip both
simultaneously. If this is the case you could instead provide a 32A
RCBO feeding a 4mm T&E raidial dedicated to serving only the two
sockets involved.

On 26 May 2007 06:48:38 -0700, cynic mused:

3 The wiring isn't exactly old - maybe 12 years.

So 15th edition then.

When did 16th edition start again?
--
Regards,
Stuart.

On Sat, 26 May 2007 20:36:03 +0100, Owain
mused:

Lurch wrote:
On 26 May 2007 06:48:38 -0700, cynic mused:
3 The wiring isn't exactly old - maybe 12 years.
So 15th edition then.
When did 16th edition start again?

1991 (red cover) my edition is dated. Applies to installations scheduled
for completion after 31 Dec 1993.

15th Ed "Regulations for Electrical Installations" 1981 (Red cover),
last reprinted with amendements 1987.

That'll do, all I wanted to point out is right there.
--
Regards,
Stuart.

On 26 May, 15:12, Lurch wrote:
On 26 May 2007 06:48:38 -0700, cynic mused:

3 The wiring isn't exactly old - maybe 12 years.

So 15th edition then.

When did 16th edition start again?
--
Regards,
Stuart.

Bugger! doesn't time fly?

Lurch wrote:

Maybe ask the person that wrote the report?

Indeed, that is being done.

I imagine all sockets would include a 30 mA device.

Assumption is the mother of all **** ups.

I wouldn't be surprised if there were no RCD protection, many
commercial installations only have RCD's on actual outdoor sockets,
everything else on MCB's only.

I did mean, I imagine that all *new* RCD protected sockets would be
rated at 30 mA.

If there is no RCD protection on the main circuits, wouldn't that be a
more appropriate way to enhance safety?

I really can't see everyone testing the RCD every time they plug the
kettle in. Would fitting them really make any difference to safety?

Why would testing them everytime the ketle is plugged in make it any
more or less safer?

Simply that is what is written on the RCD sockets - "Test before use"!
So, if people don't do that then they are clearly not complying with the
requirements in full.

Thanks for the response.

--
Rod

cynic wrote:
Is this yet another example of a health and safety officer justifying
his/her job by putting something on paper? How many incidents (if any)
have occurred since the kitchen was put into use?

Zero. In fact, in all those years, the accident book has got just two
extremely minor entries.

If you do have an RCD at the consumer unit seving the kitchen circuits
you must never have had a problem with faulty appliances or earth
leakage.

Quite possible - we are pretty civilised and don't tend to do 'silly'
things!

I really can't see everyone testing the RCD every time they plug the
kettle in. Would fitting them really make any difference to safety?

Why should you? repeated operation would be unreasonable and introduce
unneccessary wear and tear. Three or four times a year is more than
adequate and in any case only tests the mechanism of the RCD not the
protection given.
If you simply provide an RCD at the consumer unit and it protects
other sockets there may be loss of data in the event computer supplies
are fed from it.

The only trips I have known have been on lighting circuits when bulbs fail.

Swapping to 30mA RCD protected sockets would avoid a lot of other
problems if you decide to go down the route but beware - if there is
an RCD at the supply end ot the cable and it is a 30mA unit it will
not discriminate and all that will happen is you will trip both
simultaneously. If this is the case you could instead provide a 32A
RCBO feeding a 4mm T&E raidial dedicated to serving only the two
sockets involved.

Bloomin' expensive approach.

Thanks,

--
Rod

On Sun, 27 May 2007 23:26:01 +0100, Rod
mused:

Lurch wrote:

Maybe ask the person that wrote the report?

Indeed, that is being done.

I imagine all sockets would include a 30 mA device.

Assumption is the mother of all **** ups.

I wouldn't be surprised if there were no RCD protection, many
commercial installations only have RCD's on actual outdoor sockets,
everything else on MCB's only.

I did mean, I imagine that all *new* RCD protected sockets would be
rated at 30 mA.

Still the same response for me, not all sockets need RCD protection so
always assume there isn't any.

If there is no RCD protection on the main circuits, wouldn't that be a
more appropriate way to enhance safety?

Depends, the same ring main could cover several other rooms so local
RCD protection would be better to isoalte small areas and appliances
rather than half a floor.

I really can't see everyone testing the RCD every time they plug the
kettle in. Would fitting them really make any difference to safety?

Why would testing them everytime the ketle is plugged in make it any
more or less safer?

Simply that is what is written on the RCD sockets - "Test before use"!
So, if people don't do that then they are clearly not complying with the
requirements in full.

I suppose, but I think that's more for when the RCD socket may be in
the back of a garage and used maybe once a week or so to plug the
lawnmower in. Weekly, or even Monthly pressing of the test button
would suffice. Do you test your RCD at home as it says on the front of
it, whcih is usually Monthly?
--
Regards,
Stuart.