Hi,

This is a bit of an electrical design question. I'm rewiring my house,
and want to provide a decent amount of sockets for appliances in the
living room, for now and for the foreseeable future. This room is
about 12 metres square, i.e. not that big. It's also roughly square in
shape.

Currently there are 2x 2 gang sockets, which is woefully inadequate.
My current standard appliance list (which I think your average house
has or will have) is this:

tv
vcr
dvd player
sky
games machine
4x for stereo
2x lamps

Which sums to 11 sockets. Sticking 6 2x gang sockets on the walls
seems excessive, but maybe thats me being outmoded in the ring
circuits I frequent?

But seriously, what is the solution?

Thanks in advance,


Jeff.

(Jeff Sheard) wrote in news:69ac012c.0502161417.cc60170
@posting.google.com:


Which sums to 11 sockets. Sticking 6 2x gang sockets on the walls
seems excessive, but maybe thats me being outmoded in the ring
circuits I frequent?

But seriously, what is the solution?

Going from all the frustration sockets give me, I would say a minimum of 8
doubles, two in each corner on adjacent walls.

May need a bit of Xmas treeing,but at least there'll be one shortish
unobstructed run to wherever you need to go - unless someone knows better
;-)

(you're welcome to do a field trial by installing in my hovel)

mike

"Jeff Sheard" wrote in message
m...
Hi,

This is a bit of an electrical design question. I'm rewiring my house,
and want to provide a decent amount of sockets for appliances in the
living room, for now and for the foreseeable future. This room is
about 12 metres square, i.e. not that big. It's also roughly square in
shape.

Currently there are 2x 2 gang sockets, which is woefully inadequate.
My current standard appliance list (which I think your average house
has or will have) is this:

tv
vcr
dvd player
sky
games machine
4x for stereo
2x lamps

Which sums to 11 sockets. Sticking 6 2x gang sockets on the walls
seems excessive, but maybe thats me being outmoded in the ring
circuits I frequent?

But seriously, what is the solution?

I put two twin socket outlets in each corner and still find I need
splitters.

Colin Bignell

Jeff Sheard wrote:

tv
vcr
dvd player
sky
games machine
4x for stereo
2x lamps

Which sums to 11 sockets. Sticking 6 2x gang sockets on the walls
seems excessive, but maybe thats me being outmoded in the ring
circuits I frequent?

But seriously, what is the solution?

10 to 12 doubles sounds about right.... (two in each corner, plus
additional one half way along each wall)

(I just put 8 in each of the two bedrooms I just built!)

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On 16 Feb 2005, John Rumm wrote

Jeff Sheard wrote:

tv
vcr
dvd player
sky
games machine
4x for stereo
2x lamps

Which sums to 11 sockets. Sticking 6 2x gang sockets on the walls
seems excessive, but maybe thats me being outmoded in the ring
circuits I frequent?

But seriously, what is the solution?

10 to 12 doubles sounds about right.... (two in each corner, plus
additional one half way along each wall)

In system terms, what are the practical advantages to having each
appliance plugged into a separate socket (as opposed to putting, say,
the 4 stereo plugs into a trailing socket)?

I'm more interested in the safety/functionality trade-off than in
"theoretical flows as measured by an oscilloscope", as cable control
is, I think, a lot easier with 41 than 44.

--
Cheers,
Harvey

Jeff Sheard wrote:

Hi,

This is a bit of an electrical design question. I'm rewiring my house,
and want to provide a decent amount of sockets for appliances in the
living room, for now and for the foreseeable future. This room is
about 12 metres square, i.e. not that big. It's also roughly square in
shape.

Currently there are 2x 2 gang sockets, which is woefully inadequate.
My current standard appliance list (which I think your average house
has or will have) is this:

tv
vcr
dvd player
sky
games machine
4x for stereo
2x lamps

Which sums to 11 sockets. Sticking 6 2x gang sockets on the walls
seems excessive, but maybe thats me being outmoded in the ring
circuits I frequent?

But seriously, what is the solution?

The solution is to do what everyine else does and get a mini
distribution board for all the electronics, and plug it in to one 13A
socket.


Thanks in advance,


Jeff.

Harvey Van Sickle wrote:

On 16 Feb 2005, John Rumm wrote


Jeff Sheard wrote:


tv
vcr
dvd player
sky
games machine
4x for stereo
2x lamps

Which sums to 11 sockets. Sticking 6 2x gang sockets on the walls
seems excessive, but maybe thats me being outmoded in the ring
circuits I frequent?

But seriously, what is the solution?

10 to 12 doubles sounds about right.... (two in each corner, plus
additional one half way along each wall)


In system terms, what are the practical advantages to having each
appliance plugged into a separate socket (as opposed to putting, say,
the 4 stereo plugs into a trailing socket)?

None whatsoever. I used toi buodl computer racks - we used banks of rack
munted IEC and 13A sockets, and one flying lead from them to a socket
in the floor.

Provided the total rack draw was under 13A, its all fine.


I'm more interested in the safety/functionality trade-off than in
"theoretical flows as measured by an oscilloscope", as cable control
is, I think, a lot easier with 41 than 44.

Are you bothering with Part P ?

I guess you can't answer that ;-(

Nick

Jeff Sheard wrote:
Which sums to 11 sockets. Sticking 6 2x gang sockets on the walls
seems excessive, but maybe thats me being outmoded in the ring
circuits I frequent?

The IEE On-Site Guide Table 8B recommends 6 to 10 double sockets in a
lounge and 3 in a Dining room

CRB

Harvey Van Sickle wrote:


In system terms, what are the practical advantages to having each
appliance plugged into a separate socket (as opposed to putting, say,
the 4 stereo plugs into a trailing socket)?

If you're clueful enough to wonder, there's no advantage ;-)

That is: Nanny would like you to know that daisychaining one 4-way
adaptor into another into another into another is bad for you (each link
adds some contact resistance, since many cheap 4-ways form their
contacts with little more than bendy tinplate), and some numpty
somewhere will plug a 3kW fanheater into the last one of such a chain.

So Nanny knows that in the limit, it's better to festoon the wall with
lots of double sockets (at Regulation not-too-close-to-the-floor height,
natch, thereby increasing the trip hazard...)

But if you avoid doing anything silly, consolidating multiple low-load
appliances into a single feed through a 4-way, 6-way, or whatever is
perfectly sound, can look better, and makes it more convenient to turn
off multiple appliances which would otherwise draw 'standby' or
wall-wart-loss currents uselessly.

Harvey Van Sickle wrote:

In system terms, what are the practical advantages to having each
appliance plugged into a separate socket (as opposed to putting, say,
the 4 stereo plugs into a trailing socket)?

None in particular from an electrical point of view (not for low power
devices anyway).

In fact there may be occations with todays highly interconnected AV
setups in living rooms, where commoning a number of devices back to the
same power point can help keep hum under control.

I'm more interested in the safety/functionality trade-off than in
"theoretical flows as measured by an oscilloscope", as cable control
is, I think, a lot easier with 41 than 44.

The advantage of lots of sockets verses "just about enough" is more ease
of cable routing, reducing trip hazards, and having somewhere to plug
the vacuum cleaner in etc.

You can take it to extreams however... a couple of doubles in each
corner does not look the excessive, however enough to satisfy the
socket requirements for a big AV or HiFi setup will start to look silly
because you typically want them all bunched together.

Personally I use multiway sockets fixed to (for example) the HiFi rack
so that only one power lead comes off it even though it uses eight.


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

crb wrote:

The IEE On-Site Guide Table 8B recommends 6 to 10 double sockets in a
lounge and 3 in a Dining room

It also says 6 - 10 for a kitchen
4 - 6 for bedroom (more if intended for a "young person"
4 for a bed sit
2 for a hall
1 for stairs/landing
1 for loft
6 for study / home office
2 for garrage
2 for utility room


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

In article , nightjar
writes

I put two twin socket outlets in each corner and still find I need
splitters.

Wire two low-current devices into one plug - for example, Freeview box
and video recorder. It helps if they have detachable mains cords.

I think this is quite safe if done neatly and the fuse in the plug is
the correct rating (for example, a Freeview box and video will each have
a 3A fuse. You'll still only need a 3A fuse with both wired into one
plug as each only takes a very low current.)

Also safer than plug-in adapters and those nasty 4-way socket strips you
see for 99p in DIY stores and pound shops.

--
..sigmonster on vacation

"Mike Tomlinson" wrote in message
...
In article , nightjar
writes

I put two twin socket outlets in each corner and still find I need
splitters.

Wire two low-current devices into one plug

I prefer not to. It reduces flexibility.

....
Also safer than plug-in adapters and those nasty 4-way socket strips you
see for 99p in DIY stores and pound shops.

The splitter strips I buy cost considerably more than that.

Colin Bignell

Thanks for all the advice.

I've got a good idea now about what's sensible and what isn't. 6 or 7
doubles will suit the size of the room. It doesn't sound as excessive
now as it did when I was looking at the current installation of only 5
single sockets in total!


Jeff.

wrote:
Thanks for all the advice.

I've got a good idea now about what's sensible and what isn't. 6 or 7
doubles will suit the size of the room. It doesn't sound as excessive
now as it did when I was looking at the current installation of only 5
single sockets in total!


Jeff.

Single sockets are one of my personal hates. Why would you ever put in a
single socket, with the exception of areas that cant accommodate a
double obviously?

Single sockets are one of my personal hates. Why would you ever put in a
single socket, with the exception of areas that cant accommodate a
double obviously?

1. They look better in hallways for the vacuum cleaner.
2. They are useful for single use spurs, such as fridges/dishwashers/washing
machines, where you don't want the hassle of using an FCU.

Christian.

On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 06:57:31 +0000, Mike Tomlinson
strung together this:

Wire two low-current devices into one plug -

Don't do this, it's rough and wrong.

Also safer than plug-in adapters

Anything is, don't anyone use those.

and those nasty 4-way socket strips you
see for 99p in DIY stores and pound shops.

Buy some decent ones then.
--

SJW
Please reply to group or use 'usenet' in email subject

John Rumm wrote:

crb wrote:

The IEE On-Site Guide Table 8B recommends 6 to 10 double sockets in
a
lounge and 3 in a Dining room

It also says 6 - 10 for a kitchen
4 - 6 for bedroom (more if intended for a "young person"
4 for a bed sit
2 for a hall
1 for stairs/landing
1 for loft
6 for study / home office
2 for garrage
2 for utility room


Time to ask The Question.

If there were plugs and sockets that took up half or a third the space
of today's, and were fully compatible with 13A plugs/skts, meaning you
could plug either kind of plug into any and all sockets, and they were
to all the usual BS etc, would you choose to use them? Why?


NT

wrote:

If there were plugs and sockets that took up half or a third the space
of today's, and were fully compatible with 13A plugs/skts, meaning you
could plug either kind of plug into any and all sockets, and they were
to all the usual BS etc, would you choose to use them? Why?

Probably not, firstly because I don't find the current ones that
objectionable, secondly, you can see any attempt at size reduction will
be thwarted by the first wall wart to come along.

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

John Rumm wrote:
wrote:

If there were plugs and sockets that took up half or a third the
space
of today's, and were fully compatible with 13A plugs/skts, meaning
you
could plug either kind of plug into any and all sockets, and they
were
to all the usual BS etc, would you choose to use them? Why?

Probably not, firstly because I don't find the current ones that
objectionable,

fairy nuff.


secondly, you can see any attempt at size reduction will
be thwarted by the first wall wart to come along.

I dont understand that. Wall warts would have no effect on the use of
smaller plugs as well as the present standard.

The way I see the size question is we dont to see want a long row of
sockets on teh wall, but we do want more sockets to use nowadays.
Fitting 6 sockets in the space of 1 double would solve that, and since
both systems would be fully compatible, it would not affect the use of
present plugs in those sockets, they would be usde as now at the same
density as now. And the new plugs would fit the present old sockets
too, so there would be no compatibility problem.


NT

wrote:


secondly, you can see any attempt at size reduction will
be thwarted by the first wall wart to come along.


I dont understand that. Wall warts would have no effect on the use of
smaller plugs as well as the present standard.

The way I see the size question is we dont to see want a long row of
sockets on teh wall, but we do want more sockets to use nowadays.
Fitting 6 sockets in the space of 1 double would solve that, and since
both systems would be fully compatible, it would not affect the use of
present plugs in those sockets, they would be usde as now at the same
density as now. And the new plugs would fit the present old sockets
too, so there would be no compatibility problem.

If you are maintaining compatibility, then you will need the same pin
layout and spacing. So yes you could put them closer together
(especially if you oriented each rotated 180 degrees), you could make
the plugs skinny, triangular, and have the cord exit from the top (i.e.
US style) rather than the edge. You could squeeze four (maybe even as
many as eight) into the space of a current double socket. However if you
plug an exiting design wall wart into one you would probably obscure
four sockets in one hit.



--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

"Jeff Sheard" wrote
| This is a bit of an electrical design question. I'm rewiring
| my house, and want to provide a decent amount of sockets
| for appliances in the living room, for now and for the
| foreseeable future. This room is about 12 metres square,
| i.e. not that big. It's also roughly square in shape. ...
| 2x lamps

You might want to put 5A round-pin sockets in for the lamps, wired to the
wall switches on the lighting circuit. Means you don't have to walk round
the room in the dark switching the table lamps on/off.

I'd work on roughly a (double) socket 2-3' each side of a corner and then
fill in the gaps so no more than about 6' without a socket. Although some
people find them visually intrusive, it can be handy to have some sockets
high enough that they are not hidden behind sideboards etc, for portable
appliances.

Owain

wrote in message
oups.com...
Time to ask The Question.

If there were plugs and sockets that took up half or a third the space
of today's, and were fully compatible with 13A plugs/skts, meaning you
could plug either kind of plug into any and all sockets, and they were
to all the usual BS etc, would you choose to use them? Why?


Why not just use the superior continental plug/sockets ?
Not sure how they stand under part P but they cannot actually be banned here
as they are the approved IEC socket, not our oversized Swedish-reject
monstrosity.

Mike wrote:


Why not just use the superior continental plug/sockets ?
Not sure how they stand under part P but they cannot actually be banned here
as they are the approved IEC socket, not our oversized Swedish-reject
monstrosity.

UK domestic (and light-commercial) wiring practice relies heavily on
fuses in each plug to protect the flex: where Yurrip and the You Ess go
for a larger number of radials with 16A or 20A breakers, the large
majority of our premisesesis wired with 30A/32A rings. So we cannae swap
to unfused plugtops without a massive program of rewiring, or weird
ideas like fuses in each socket - which again would be Different from
Continental practice.

'Snot as if the Continentals are all uniformly standardised, either...

On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 22:10:16 UTC, "Owain"
wrote:

"Jeff Sheard" wrote
| This is a bit of an electrical design question. I'm rewiring
| my house, and want to provide a decent amount of sockets
| for appliances in the living room, for now and for the
| foreseeable future. This room is about 12 metres square,
| i.e. not that big. It's also roughly square in shape. ...
| 2x lamps

You might want to put 5A round-pin sockets in for the lamps, wired to the
wall switches on the lighting circuit. Means you don't have to walk round
the room in the dark switching the table lamps on/off.

Just bought a halogen reading lamp. Guess what - it has a wall wart!
Glad I didn't put in 5A sockets...

Our living room has 11 double socket outlets, and is on its own ring...

--
Bob Eager
begin a new life...dump Windows!

John Rumm wrote:

wrote:

If there were plugs and sockets that took up half or a third the space
of today's, and were fully compatible with 13A plugs/skts, meaning you
could plug either kind of plug into any and all sockets, and they were
to all the usual BS etc, would you choose to use them? Why?


Probably not, firstly because I don't find the current ones that
objectionable, secondly, you can see any attempt at size reduction will
be thwarted by the first wall wart to come along.

O actually have a 6 way dis board that uses tiny plugs on my hif fi
separets rig.

Of course they don't have warts.

In article ,
nightjar wrote:
I put two twin socket outlets in each corner and still find I need
splitters.

Yup. I've got 11 doubles in a through lounge and none are in regular use.
Table lamps are on dedicated 2 amp outlets fed from dimmers, and the
Hi-Fi/TV on a dedicated radial circuit with its own earth.
But I'm ok for hoovering 'plugs' :-)

--
*A fool and his money can throw one hell of a party.

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

John Rumm wrote:
wrote:

secondly, you can see any attempt at size reduction will
be thwarted by the first wall wart to come along.


I dont understand that. Wall warts would have no effect on the use
of
smaller plugs as well as the present standard.

The way I see the size question is we dont to see want a long row
of
sockets on teh wall, but we do want more sockets to use nowadays.
Fitting 6 sockets in the space of 1 double would solve that, and
since
both systems would be fully compatible, it would not affect the use
of
present plugs in those sockets, they would be usde as now at the
same
density as now. And the new plugs would fit the present old sockets
too, so there would be no compatibility problem.

If you are maintaining compatibility, then you will need the same pin

layout and spacing. So yes you could put them closer together
(especially if you oriented each rotated 180 degrees), you could make

the plugs skinny, triangular, and have the cord exit from the top
(i.e.
US style) rather than the edge.

thats all been addressed


You could squeeze four (maybe even as
many as eight) into the space of a current double socket.

yes, 6, a lot more useful, lower cost and looks better.


However if you
plug an exiting design wall wart into one you would probably obscure
four sockets in one hit.

Thats right, but its not a problem as you appear to think. Wall warts
plug in at the same space density as today, nothing is lost, 2 per
double socket. Todays plugs will also continue to be used, the new ones
do not obsolete the old.

But those appliances that will be on the newer plugs achieve much
higher density, 3x. In any house there will be a mixture of the 2 plug
types, and where old sockets are replaced with new, houses will
suddenly be able to plug around twice as many things into the sockets,
without needing to add any spurs.

This what Britain needs. It will:

- reduce the use of adaptors, improving safety and cost
- reduce the cost of mains plugs on some new appliances
- reduce the cost of house wiring a bit
- provide householders with twice as many sockets as now
- reduce material and energy use in manufacturing our present
inefficient mains plugs.

And there will be no compatibility problem.
Appliances with new plugs plug into the existing sockets.
The new sockets will all accept both types of plug.


The trouble is I'm too busy with other things to do much with this.


NT

Mike wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com.

Time to ask The Question.

If there were plugs and sockets that took up half or a third the
space
of today's, and were fully compatible with 13A plugs/skts, meaning
you
could plug either kind of plug into any and all sockets, and they
were
to all the usual BS etc, would you choose to use them? Why?


Why not just use the superior continental plug/sockets ?
Not sure how they stand under part P but they cannot actually be
banned here
as they are the approved IEC socket, not our oversized Swedish-reject
monstrosity.


Many reasons make this a no-goer.

1. the plugs dont plug into existing sockets, thus consumers would not
want new goods with these plugs, thus mfrs would not use them

2. the plugs have no fuses, making them doubly incompatible with
present system

3. the plugs do not meet our safety standards in several respects, so
getting approval would ilkely not be possible.

4. for anyone to use them it would require wiring in a house full of
new style sockets, and who would bother.


NT

wrote in message
oups.com...
Mike wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com.

Time to ask The Question.

If there were plugs and sockets that took up half or a third the
space
of today's, and were fully compatible with 13A plugs/skts, meaning
you
could plug either kind of plug into any and all sockets, and they
were
to all the usual BS etc, would you choose to use them? Why?


Why not just use the superior continental plug/sockets ?
Not sure how they stand under part P but they cannot actually be
banned here
as they are the approved IEC socket, not our oversized Swedish-reject
monstrosity.


Many reasons make this a no-goer.

1. the plugs dont plug into existing sockets, thus consumers would not
want new goods with these plugs, thus mfrs would not use them

There are convertors available


3. the plugs do not meet our safety standards in several respects, so
getting approval would ilkely not be possible.

NO ! All IEC plugs automatically have approval. No signatory government
can legislate against them or otherwise preclude their use. If you wish to
use them you can.


4. for anyone to use them it would require wiring in a house full of
new style sockets, and who would bother.

Changing over to these was discussed for several years in mid 90s but for
some reason came to nowt.

wrote:

You could squeeze four (maybe even as
many as eight) into the space of a current double socket.


yes, 6, a lot more useful, lower cost and looks better.

Lower cost perhaps, not sure that a huge bundle of 6 flexes protruding
from a wall outlet will necessarily look better.

This what Britain needs. It will:

- reduce the use of adaptors, improving safety and cost

Yes, but indirectly... rewiring houses for modern usage would reduce the
use of adaptors etc. This would be true regardless of the socket type.

- reduce the cost of mains plugs on some new appliances

Can't think why... also who cares, they are negligable cost as they are.

- reduce the cost of house wiring a bit

Again not significant. 80% or more of the cost of wiring is going to be
labour. You are still going to need to fit alomst as many face plates as
before so as to position outlets close to where they will be needed.

- provide householders with twice as many sockets as now

As would a rewire, which would probably be required to safely support
the doubling number of sockets in many cases...

- reduce material and energy use in manufacturing our present
inefficient mains plugs.

Yup, give you that one.. just. ;-)

And there will be no compatibility problem.
Appliances with new plugs plug into the existing sockets.
The new sockets will all accept both types of plug.


The trouble is I'm too busy with other things to do much with this.

The trouble is, I would guess, most folks don't feel strongly enough
about it one way or the other to bother with changing what we have which
in objective terms, works well, and is safe.

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

John Rumm wrote:
wrote:

You could squeeze four (maybe even as
many as eight) into the space of a current double socket.


yes, 6, a lot more useful, lower cost and looks better.

Lower cost perhaps, not sure that a huge bundle of 6 flexes
protruding
from a wall outlet will necessarily look better.

2 faceplates instead of 4 is what will look better.
Also 4 or 6 appliances in the socket is tidier because the 4 or 6 way
plugin socket strip is eliminated.


This what Britain needs. It will:

- reduce the use of adaptors, improving safety and cost

Yes, but indirectly... rewiring houses for modern usage would reduce
the
use of adaptors etc. This would be true regardless of the socket
type.

it would, but
a) people dont want a long row of sockets everywhere.
b) it takes several decades to achieve nationwide. Bear in mind there
are still installs in use going back as far as the 50s.

OTOH replacing a socket, which any diy competent could do, is a quick
cheap safer solution.


- reduce the cost of mains plugs on some new appliances

Can't think why...

smaller, less material.

also who cares, they are negligable cost as they are.

All manufacturers of new appliances. Plugs retail 50p each, wholesale
35p, ex works 25p each. Multiply that by just 3 plugs per person per
year, thats 180 million plugs/yr =3D 45million GBP per year. Lower cost
plugs could save these manufacturers a total of around 20-25 million
per year.

Now add the same number of plugs again for commercial use and we get
savings of 45 million/year. And thats just for the plugs, theres
sockets and socket installing labour to add on, see below.


- reduce the cost of house wiring a bit

Again not significant.

yes it is...

80% or more of the cost of wiring is going to be
labour.

Firstly this reduces labour by halving the no of socket fittings
required.


You are still going to need to fit alomst as many face plates as
before so as to position outlets close to where they will be needed.

An install nowadays routinely uses pairs of double sockets per
location. Installing half the no of faceplates reduces both labour and
material costs.

Lets look at materials:

Double socket, cheapest =A31, decent =A32
pattress 80p
present requirement for 4 appliances: =A33.60-=A35.60

new 2/6 way socket, initially no cheaper, but prices will come down to
around =A31.50 when produced in volume.
pattress 80p.
Requirement for average 4 appliances: =A32.30

How many times does this saving occur per house? Rough guess: x12.
Thats =A327.60 per house.

How often are our 30 million houses rewired? Guess 30 years average, so
saving per year to the new installation industry is:
=A327.60 x 30 million / 30 =3D =A327,000,000 per year.

And I havent even touched on saved labour yet, which is a bigger
saving.


- provide householders with twice as many sockets as now

As would a rewire, which would probably be required to safely support

the doubling number of sockets in many cases...

Theres no reason rewiring is needed to use these new sockets. total
current draw is not increased by their use, what is gained is to
eliminate the use of numerous trailing sockets and adaptors. We only
use those because the sockets in todays houses are insufficient.


- reduce material and energy use in manufacturing our present
inefficient mains plugs.

Yup, give you that one.. just. ;-)

By numerous tons every year. Plus cost of distribution, which is
similarly reduced for smaller lighter plugs.


And there will be no compatibility problem.
Appliances with new plugs plug into the existing sockets.
The new sockets will all accept both types of plug.


The trouble is I'm too busy with other things to do much with this.

The trouble is, I would guess, most folks don't feel strongly enough
about it one way or the other to bother with changing what we have
which
in objective terms, works well, and is safe.

Most not caring is true but not a problem. It is the people that stand
to save millions per yaer that will get up off their ass about it. And
the consumer will benefit along the way.

As far as our present system working well, it does have one problem,
and this would solve it. The proliferation of socket strips and
adaptors is a needless consequence of the insufficient number of fitted
sockets and the large size of them.


NT

Mike wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com.

Time to ask The Question.

If there were plugs and sockets that took up half or a third
the
space
of today's, and were fully compatible with 13A plugs/skts,
meaning
you
could plug either kind of plug into any and all sockets, and
they
were
to all the usual BS etc, would you choose to use them? Why?


Why not just use the superior continental plug/sockets ?
Not sure how they stand under part P but they cannot actually be
banned here
as they are the approved IEC socket, not our oversized
Swedish-reject
monstrosity.


Many reasons make this a no-goer.

1. the plugs dont plug into existing sockets, thus consumers would
not
want new goods with these plugs, thus mfrs would not use them

There are convertors available

People dont have the laest interest in buying an appliance with a
foreign plug plus a convertor, it completely misses every single
advantage in what I've proposed. Hence no-one is doing it.


3. the plugs do not meet our safety standards in several respects,
so
getting approval would ilkely not be possible.

NO ! All IEC plugs automatically have approval. No signatory
government
can legislate against them or otherwise preclude their use. If you
wish to
use them you can.

They meet BS1363 or BS548?


4. for anyone to use them it would require wiring in a house full
of
new style sockets, and who would bother.

Changing over to these was discussed for several years in mid 90s but
for
some reason came to nowt.

Would you want to? I did have such a system once, mixed 13A square and
5A round pin. It had its plusses but also its downsides. Using 2
incompatible types of plug/socket is not a plus.


NT

NT wrote
| OTOH replacing a socket, which any diy competent could do,

until 31st December last year ...

also who cares, they are negligable cost as they are.

As would a rewire, which would probably be required to safely support
the doubling number of sockets in many cases...
Theres no reason rewiring is needed to use these new sockets.

Unless they or the plugs are fused, rewiring would be needed to take British
32A ring circuits down to the 16A which is the rating of most European plugs
and appliance flexes. (And unfused plugs could *not* be compatible with 13A
sockets, for the obvious reason.) 16A radial circuits would, in most cases,
use much more cable and also require far more circuits, increasing MCB and
labour costs.

| As far as our present system working well, it does have
| one problem, and this would solve it. The proliferation
| of socket strips and adaptors is a needless consequence
| of the insufficient number of fitted sockets

It is the natural consequence of more and more electrical appliances. All
countries use socket strips, including countries like the USA which have
much smaller plugs (originally intended for christmas tree lights AIUI) and
wiring 'code' that specifies down to the inch how many sockets and circuits
are required.

| and the large size of them.

No.

Owain

wrote:

Lots of snippery:-

1) Get some cnut politician to outlaw square pin 13A plugs under trades
description legislation. The pins aren't square.

2) If you can get say 4 outlets onto a single plate, what makes you
think Bodgit & Sons Builders Ltd. will put _two_ new quad outlets where
previously they would have put a pair of twins? I see a further cost
saving...

3) Having written that, I concede that I don't like BS1363 plugs, have a
lot of dealing with 15A roundpin (and every so often some muppet claims
that they are "illegal"), I loath CEE form and would certainly not like
to rewire everything on a spur like Europe; and don't get me started on
IEC (kettle) connectors!

A really nicely thought out, but unfortunately unfused, connector is the
Neutric PowerCon. This is starting to be found on pro sound & lighting
equipment. 20A, small and it locks in place too!

On 20 Feb 2005, Owain wrote

NT wrote
OTOH replacing a socket, which any diy competent could do,

until 31st December last year ...

And still can, as long as it's not in a kitchen or bathroom.

--
Cheers,
Harvey

In article ,
Andrew Chesters wrote:
A really nicely thought out, but unfortunately unfused, connector is the
Neutric PowerCon. This is starting to be found on pro sound & lighting
equipment. 20A, small and it locks in place too!

Which probably outlaws it for domestic use?

--
*The most wasted day of all is one in which we have not laughed.*

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

In article ,
Andrew Chesters wrote:
and don't get me started on IEC (kettle) connectors!

Why? Small and cheap and ideal for high density low power use - like Hi-Fi
etc. The line connectors can be fiddly to fit but ok when you get the
knack.

--
*Virtual reality is its own reward*

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

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Andrew Chesters wrote:

and don't get me started on IEC (kettle) connectors!


Why? Small and cheap and ideal for high density low power use - like Hi-Fi
etc. The line connectors can be fiddly to fit but ok when you get the
knack.

Miserable to wire-up, compared to almost anything, and they get
pulled/fall out when you least expect it.