PlugSafe is a volunteer organisation working with other bodies to fight the threats to UK plug safety due to abuses, illegal counterfeits and a loophole in the standard itself. For information on the dangers caused by plug-in socket covers for BS 1363 sockets, visit FatallyFlawed PlugSafe is also concerned with dangerous plug adaptors & travel adaptors, chargers and universal sockets.
BS 1363 is a British Standard which specifies the common single-phase AC power plugs and sockets that are used in the United Kingdom. Distinctive characteristics of the system are shutters on the line and neutral socket holes, and a fuse in the plug. Free unlimited pdf search and download. 2014/00210 BS 1363 -4 BS 1363 -4 13? British Standard BS 7121. 220 Volts a/c, plugs are either standard British. This country travel guide to Kuwait is an outline and may. British Standard (BS). The Europlug is unusual as the standard specifies only a plug, there is no socket-outlet designed specifically for use with it. In some types of BS 1363 socket.
< Talk:BS 1363
Compatibility
Is there any good reason why a fused version of the Continental European 16 amp standard (with a flat earth pin rather than the German side-earth or French female earth connection) was not adopted ?This would have had several advantages over the 13 amp system
Embassies
Is it true that Britsh plugs/sockets are used in all British embassies?--Oxonian2006 02:02, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
Reason for Insulation on pins
I have recently heard, allegedly from a former designer at MK, that the reason that insulation was added to the phase (live) and Neutral pins was not to prevent children touching live pins when plugging / unplugging but as a result of a schoolboy prank.The story is that after decimalisation schoolboys discovered that a new penny exactly fitted between all three pins of a 13A plug. Try it, you will find that a penny is a snug fit when pressed between the pins thus shorting across all three. The boys would then plug in the plug with penny in place and blow the fuse in the main fusebox. This became such a problem that MK were asked to design a modification to prevent this. The length of the insulation is calculated such that if the said boys fitted a stack of pennies until it again shorted the pins the pins would not reach the live parts before the stack of pennies prevented further insertion.I do not know if this just an urban myth so any comments would be appreciated.Electronpusher 20:58, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Humour section
I've never seen any notable comedy act or other humour involving the risk of stepping on a plug. Drawing pins (thumbtacks) and banana skins, yes, but not plugs. I suggest removing the section, or moving it into 'design criticism', unless someone can find a citation. Mtford 02:55, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Blue 2 A and 3 A fuses
Although BS 1362 requires that 2 A fuses are marked in black and 3 A fuses are marked in red, it was quite possible at one time to find fuses of either of these ratings marked in blue. Was this ever actually permitted within the standard or would these fuses have been so old as to not be marked with it? I have seen some very old 1 A fuses marked in black without the BS number, and even one old 13 A fuse marked in brown in a similar way.EmleyMoor 23:21, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Bad Wording
'Because typical British circuits (especially ring circuits) can deliver much more power than an appliance flex (power cord) can safely handle, these plugs are required to carry a cartridge fuse. '
I think this is quite badly worded because pretty much any circuit in any country in the world can deliver far more power than a flex (or pretty much any domestic cable) can handle. The issue is rather that a ring mains will be typically have an overcurrent device rated at 32 amps where as a flex may be rated for say 5 amps, hence the possibility of a 20 amp fault on a 5 amp flex without tripping the MCB. Any objections / recommendations as far as changing the wording goes? --Pypex (talk) 00:18, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Ring Circuit / Ring Main
The article uses both these terms. The correct one is Ring Circuit. (A Ring Main is a street mains supply to homes and other buildings which is connected in a ring, and these way-predate Ring Circuits.) 81.187.162.109 (talk) 19:41, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
Colours
The article does not mention the (by design) fact that the BLue wire is located bottom left, whilst the BRown is located bottom right. 92.10.5.202 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:21, 5 November 2009 (UTC).
FatallyFlawed
The amount of column space given to the FatallyFlawed lobby group is inappropriate for an encyclopedic entry. A single sentence and a reference to their website would be fine, but not the extent of coverage and photos which are currently included. This seriously detracts from the article as a whole. 81.187.162.109 (talk) 13:22, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
Better photo of socket?
Does anyone have a photo of a socket with a switch? In particular neither the main image used here nor in the AC power plugs and sockets article have switches (well in this article it could just be overcropped). I'm not sure how things are in the UK but in Malaysia I don't know if I've ever seen a socket without a switch be it a wall switch or a multisocket box or heck even an extension cord. The only example which appears to have a switch is File:Socket danger detail.jpg. The only socket with a switch in AC power plugs and sockets is ironically the NZ/Australian one and while wall sockets here do, I don't think I've ever seen a multisocket box with switches (which I find rather annoying) Nil Einne (talk) 18:15, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Variants - Folding Plugs
I have undone the revision by Qwyrxian (→Variants: Removing OR, POV, and Youtube links) as it removed the YouTube links which are cited to verify the information. I do not understand why Qwyrxian has interpreted factual comment as POV. Deucharman (talk) 09:23, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
┌─────────────────────────┘ I think you're getting rather too attached to the 'British standard' part of the article. This article is, for better or worse, about not just the standard in question but also compatible designs (and indeed incompatible things like plastic socket covers). Whether or not that's appropriate in the long run remains to be seen, but there's no point denying it right now. Anyway, this article is really quite low quality at present and large parts of it need completely reworked; I'm going to try to do that myself, but I can't guarantee when I'll get around to it. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 11:16, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Shuttering
Is MK mentioned in the section Shuttering the MK Electric? Regards Draco flavus (talk) 08:07, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
I've removed this section as it was incredibly unbalanced and had been tagged as such since December. It was also significantly the same, and had all the same problems, as was discussed in the #FatallyFlawed section above from February 2010.
Please do not add this section again without consensus here. Thryduulf (talk) 06:55, 18 May 2011 (UTC)You are clearly commenting, and acting, on a subject which you do not understand.
Shuttering is at the core of what makes BS 1363 special and has ensured that the UK has the safest plugs/sockets in the world. The original title of BS 1363 was 'British Standard 1363 : 1947 FUSED PLUGS AND SHUTTERED SOCKET OUTLETS' There is no evidence to suggest that socket covers are necessary in the UK, and much evidence as to why they are undesirable and place children at unnecesary risk, hence the importance of the additional information in the section.
To simply remove the entire section is vandalism and unbalances the the entire BS 1363 entry, thus I have once again undone the edit.
Perhaps it would be more helpful if those who object to anything specific in the section would say what that is, rather than just throwing their rattle out of the pram.--Deucharman (talk) 09:23, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
But you have removed an entire section about the most distinctive feature of BS 1363 sockets! Would it not be more appropriate to query anything which worries you or others? Are you querying the facts? The references? If either, then which ones? Meanwhile, lets keep the article useful and not hack-out major parts with a loose assertion of 'unbalanced'!--Deucharman (talk) 10:18, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
Specifically please, what is it you do not like?--Deucharman (talk) 11:20, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
I note that Bobrayner continues to vandalize the section on shuttering, despite one other editor and two (albeit anonymous) contributors apart from myself reverting his nonsense. He shows a complete lack of understanding of the subject, especially when he claims that socket covers made specifically for BS 1363 sockets are nothing to do with BS 1363. I quote him 'Why should a tiny group's crusade against X be added to an article on subject Y?' the answer is simple, the two are inescapably linked because the main point of BS 1363 is to ensure that British citizens, especially small children, are protected from dangerous sockets. As mentioned above, the first requirement for the new socket, as defined in the 1944 Government report which called for a new design, was “To ensure the safety of young children it is of considerable importance that the contacts of the socket-outlet should be protected by shutters or other like means, or by the inherent design of the socket outlet.” That remains one of the main achievements of BS 1363, and it is worth noting that in the US, where there is a history of around 7 children per day requiring hospital treatment for socket related injury, shuttered sockets are in the process of being introduced, 60 years after their adoption in the UK. The use of socket covers with BS 1363 sockets invariable compromises their safety, and it is ridiculous to pretend otherwise. One must assume that Bobrayner is connected in some way with those who wish to continue endangering British children by selling unnecessary and dangerous socket covers (and make no mistake, there are none which conform to the dimensional requirements of BS 1363). It is notable that someone using the name bobrayner has been one of the ringleaders of a cyberbullying operation elswhere on the web against someone from FatallyFlawed. If for no other reason than that, he is unfit to contribute to this subject.Deucharman (talk) 20:19, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
There are many people concerned about issues affecting socket safety. Some of them belong to FatallyFlawed, many more are quite independent but tend to use FatallyFlawed as a reference point. This is particularly true of electricians who have been warning against the use of socket covers since their introduction (way before FatallyFlawed was formed). It is not uncommon to find links to FatallyFlawed on Electricians websites, as well as many others. It is hardly surprising that others would wish to revert the vandalising of this article.Deucharman (talk) 16:41, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
The point was made (by Thumperward earlier on this page) that this article encompasses a number of related issues, socket covers made specifically for use with BS 1363 sockets are somewhat more germane than some other subjects mentioned. I note that the only positive contribution which you have made to this article was last year when you added a reference to the 'Soviet' equivalent of BS 546, and that is definitely not something directly related to this article! There is no way that the facts included in the article can be described as an 'extended diatribe'. Apart from three photos which pretty much speak for themselves the text includes references to the views of the UK government, the safety organisations RoSPA, CAPT and the ESC, the only official study on the proposed European regulation of socket covers etc, and the report by the Consumers Association, Which? There is one short sentence on FatallyFlawed, that cannot possibly be described as unbalanced.
I have looked at the entire shuttering section, and realised that since you messed around with the pictures last year it has been somewhat disorganised, so I have taken the opportunity to reorganise it, and the socket cover issues and extension lead issues have each been grouped as subsidiaries of 'Shuttering'. Deucharman (talk) 16:41, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Repeatedly removing the entire section on shuttering whilst falsely describing it as 'deeply unbalanced' cannot really be described as good-faith! Deucharman (talk) 16:41, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Your repeated desire to censor any references to the shortcomings of socket covers in relation to BS 1363 must raise questions about your allegiances, but if you assure me that you have no such connections and simply do not understand the issues then I will accept that. Deucharman (talk) 16:41, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
I am delighted to accept that you are not the person (of a similar user name) who is engaging in the cyberbullying of one of my colleagues elsewhere on the web. Deucharman (talk) 16:41, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
I have addressed (in italics) your points above. Deucharman (talk) 16:41, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Dubious
There's this highly dubious statement under BS_1363#Folding_Plugs:
I have looked at the documents on the WIPO site and I cannot see how whoever wrote that sentence came to this conclusion. The statement may be just FUD -- and unsourced/original research to boot. 31.16.117.157 (talk) 04:36, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Counterfeit Plugs and Fuses
The subject of counterfeit plugs and fuses is a well established issue affecting BS 1363 and BS 1362 products.
The seriousness of the problem can be gauged from the references supplied in the counterfeiting section of the main article, as the British Electrotechnical and Allied Manufacturers Association says 'Counterfeit electrical products can cause injury, fire and KILL!'
Would Bobrayner and Wtshymanski please refrain from removing this section without discussion and with no supporting arguments. Deucharman (talk) 00:25, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
Wtshymanski, first I would like to make it clear that I am an electrical engineer ( a Fellow of the IET) with absolutely no commercial interest in this subject. Judging from your contributions to Wikepedia you may reside in North America, possibly Canada, wherever you are you appear to not understand the legislative position regarding plugs and sockets in the UK. Ready player one audiobook torrent. You may wish to consider 'Editing from a neutral point of view (NPOV) means representing fairly, proportionately, and as far as possible without bias, all significant views that have been published by reliable sources'. You may now wish to read the first reference in the section which you have just removed: (The Plugs and Sockets, etc. (Safety) Regulations 1994 were introduced to provide a regulatory regime to address issues regarding consumer safety.) which states (on page 3): 'BACKGROUNDThe Plugs and Sockets, etc. (Safety) Regulations 1994 (the “Regulations”) wereintroduced to provide a regulatory regime to address issues regarding consumersafety. There were concerns that consumer safety was compromised by thesubstantial quantity of counterfeit and unsafe electrical plugs and sockets beingplaced on the UK market and also by the provision of electrical equipment without anappropriate means to connect it to the mains supply in the consumer’s home.'I trust that you would agree that a reference from the UK government constitutes a reliable source?
BS 1363 is not just a UK technical standard, these regulations give it the force of law in the UK. As the exert above makes clear, concern about countefeit plugs and sockets lay behind that legislation. If this article is about BS 1363 then the specific issue of counterfeiting cannot be ignored. The issue has very little to do with the counterfeiting of what you refer to as 'trademarks', it is about the counterfeiting of the marks which must be affixed to both plugs and fuses indicating that the devices have been approved in accordance with UK law. Deucharman (talk) 06:56, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
Home » Evolution eKeys Use the links on this page to download the latest version of Evolution eKeys drivers. All drivers available for download have been scanned by antivirus program. Evolution ekeys 37 driver s. ANDROID Software Avg Bitdefender BullGuard Eset G Data Kaspersky Norton. Pro Evolution Soccer 2016 Pro Evolution Soccer 2017 Pro Evolution Soccer 2018 PRO EVOLUTION SOCCER 2019. Sniper: Ghost Warrior 3. The Sims 4 Seasons. Evolution eKeys and Keystation 37 Driver Related Resources. Evolution Driver Update Utility. Evolution Driver Downloads. USB Driver Downloads. Popular Evolution USB Driver Downloads for Windows. Browse all Evolution USB drivers. This tool will download and update the correct M-AUDIO eKeys 49 driver versions automatically, protecting you against installing the wrong eKeys 49 drivers. About The Author: Jay Geater is the President and CEO of Solvusoft Corporation, a global software.
Wtshymanski, I completely concur with the comments made by Deucharman. I suggest that you view this video made by ERA Technology, one of the most respected consulting firms in the UK. They tested one of the commonest types of counterfeit plug, fitted with a counterfeit fuse, under short circuit conditions. As you will see, the result was dramatic. Please stop engaging in edit wars on a subject of which you are clearly very ignorant. Mautby (talk) 07:41, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
Jeh, your user information indicates that you are American, your comment indicates that, like Wtshymanski, you have no understanding of the issues affecting BS 1363 in the UK. If you do not wish to learn about UK plugs and sockets that would be completely understandable, but it would be polite not to seek to deny knowledge to others. Deucharman (talk) 06:56, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
As an uninvolved editor, may I propose the following as a compromise:
The Plugs and Sockets, etc. (Safety) Regulations 1994 were introduced to provide a regulatory regime to address issues regarding consumer safety. There were concerns that consumer safety was compromised by the substantial quantity of counterfeit and unsafe electrical plugs and sockets being placed on the UK market. Despite this, counterfeit plugs, usually moulded on to leads, are available from various sources.
Move the PDF link to the External Links section of the article, and replace this paragraph with something along the lines of: Concerns have been raised over the sale of counterfeit plugs in the UK, which do not conform to BS 1363 with appropriate citation (I'm sure we can find one).
Between April and August 2006, anti counterfeiting raids supported by BEAMA Installation (representing the manufacturers whose products are targeted) and electrical safety experts ASTA BEAB (who provide testing and assessment of suspect goods) seized over 210,000 electrical wiring accessories all purporting to be products from a dozen electrical wiring accessory brand leaders. (Voltimum - Wiring Accessories & Counterfeiting)
Change the Voltimum link to an inline citation, provided that it supports the statement (I can't view it from this PC).
Counterfeit plug and fuse, compared with, on right, a real BS 1363 plug
The picture shows a plug that was part of a laptop lead purchased on ebay. The most obvious difference is that the earth pin is partially insulated by means of sleeve, BS 1363 12.16 specifically forbids sleeved earth pins. In the plug shown the earth pin is 13% shorter than the minimum permitted, 1.2% thicker and 1.4% wider. The power pins are 1.1% longer, 3.7% thicker and 1.7% narrower.
The plug shown was fitted with a fuse marked 13A and BS1362, but it is clearly not a genuine BS1362 fuse. The end caps of the fuse are not bonded or crimped to the body or the fuse wire, they were simply pushed over the bent ends of the fuse wire. The contacts of the fuse holder were so widely splayed (as seen in the picture) that the fuse rattled when in place. As the lead was equipped with a socket rated at 2.5A then a 13A fuse should not have been fitted.
Lose this whole section - it's unsourced and too close to original research, plus it's a little bit NOTMANUAL.
Further resources on counterfeiting issues are available from Counterfeit Kills and BS 1363 Counterfeits
Move these to the External Links section.
What do people think? Yunshui (talk) 09:14, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
The Plugs and Sockets, etc. (Safety) Regulations 1994 were introduced to provide a regulatory regime to address issues regarding consumer safety. There were concerns that consumer safety was compromised by the substantial quantity of counterfeit and unsafe electrical plugs and sockets being placed on the UK market.
Please note that Crown Copyright applies, so copies may only be made inaccordance with the restrictions laid down by HMSO.
PLEASE NOTE, the above mention of copywrite is quoted out of context, that refers to the actual regulations (please read the page again, it is quite clear). The PDF cited is not an HMSO (government publishers) document, it is a BIS (responsible department) document, the BIS website clearly states: 'You may use and re-use the information featured on this website (not including BIS logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. We encourage users to establish hypertext links to this website.' So, all that is required is for the quote to be clearly identified as being from that document, and the following attribution made: 'Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v1.0' Deucharman (talk) 12:03, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
![]()
Between April and August 2006, anti counterfeiting raids supported by BEAMA Installation (representing the manufacturers whose products are targeted) and electrical safety experts ASTA BEAB (who provide testing and assessment of suspect goods) seized over 220, 000 items of fake switchgear and over 210,000 electrical wiring accessories all purporting to be products from a dozen electrical wiring accessory brand leaders.
It seems rather odd to suggest that a short quote from the News section of the Voltium website would be a copywrite issue, but I am investigating appropriate attribution. Deucharman (talk) 12:03, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
Please see my comments above. Deucharman (talk) 12:03, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
FWIW, I think Wtshymanski's recent rewrite is an excellent solution, and support its retention in the article. Yunshui (talk) 13:43, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
So, all that is required is for the quote to be clearly identified as being from that document, and the following attribution made: 'Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v1.0' Deucharman (talk) 12:03, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
British Standard Bs 1363 Download Full
It seems rather odd to suggest that a short quote from the News section of the Voltium website would be a copywrite issue, but I am investigating appropriate attribution. Deucharman (talk) 12:03, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
What's an ISOD? Why a plastic pin?
It would be interesting to contrast the new North American tamper-resistant receptacles with the BS 1363; the NEMA devices don't need a plastic pin on a plug, because they only require two blades (line and neutral) to be inserted concurently. Was there a reason to require the shutter on the
Shortening
I think W's recent edits have done much to improve the article. Note that it was previously around 30K bytes, which is recommended as an upper limit for articles. Now there is ample allowance to add details of the alloys used in the plug prongs, or the precise radii of their edges, or the finishing and polishing methods used.. Seriously, always remember that a WP article is supposed to provide a summary and introduction to a topic, it isn't supposed to replace a whole textbook! Nor is it supposed to be written as if the authors are being paid by the word.
By the way, the excised material on counterfeiting, raids, etc., could possibly go in an article about product counterfeiting—after, of course, either providing proper attribution or rewording it to make it the editor's own work. And the stuff on outlet covers, possibly in an article on safety practices of electrical line (mains) power. (The latter article does not seem to exist; maybe one needs to be created? We do have articles, for example, on RCD (GFCI) and AFCIs, but I find nothing that ties all of these concepts together in a summary article.) Both such articles could then be linked from here in the 'See also' section. Jeh (talk) 21:28, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
(better) Picture needed
I liked the picture with the red shutters because I could actually SEE the shutters and the little
Technical power![]()
'Daddy, what's technical power? ' 'I don't know, son, let's click on the blue link and find out.' Discuss. Was the BBC using a balanced power system or not? The sentence is unreferenced, let's take it out if we can't find a cite. (If we took out all the unreferenced parts the article would be even shorter). --Wtshymanski (talk) 14:08, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
Fuses in replacement plugs
Things have maybe changed since I last bought plugs (early 1980s). At that time, it was impossible to buy a plug that did not have a 13A fuse. If you wanted a lower amperage fuse, you had to buy it separately. At the time, there were still a lot of older sockets around in houses as the conversion to ring main in existing installations was slow. People didn’t inspect fuses. I know, from inspection (a lot of plugs have a hole in the pin side that allows a user to see the fuse colour), that a lot of lamps were using plugs with 13A fuses. I telephoned MK_electric to see why this was, and was told that plugs had to be sold with 13A fuses. And, no, I couldn’t exchange the pile of 13A fuses I had for 3A ones!
Jhlister (talk) 23:15, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Switched plugs
Why use a different socket for a switched outlet? It's quite frequent North American practice to have an outlet (often but not always one half of a duplex NEMA outlet) controlled by a wall switch, for use in places like bedrooms or living rooms. True, if you plug in your clock radio into the switched outlet, it won't keep time any more, but that's a mistake you make only once. It would seem to be terribly inconvenient to move a lamp from one room to the next and have to rewire it from one giant plug to another. --Wtshymanski (talk) 16:41, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
'What is important is how it is in the UK!' - Deucharman
'not-fixed.. is the accepted usage in this context.' - Deucharman
'Portable appliances are generally accepted to be less than 18Kg, ' - Deucharman
'an article about an essentially British subject ' - Deucharman
┌─────────────────────────┘It seems to me that Deucharman has proved his point. I do not believe that the majority of WP users, wherever they happen to live, are too ignorant to understand the use of the term “non-fixed”, although some commenters here do seem to have a problem with it.
It is quite ridiculous to suggest that “non-fixed” is jargon, or a “peculiarly British technical term”, it is NOT a term peculiar to electricians, nor Brits, it is simply correct English. Try googling “non-fixed” and you get 842,000 results, less than 10% of which are UK sites! Some examples: “non-fixed expenses”, “non-fixed interest rates”, “non-fixed contamination”, “non-fixed assets”, “non-fixed networks”, the list goes on and on.
I note that Deucharman accepts that the verb “fixed” can mean repaired, but we are talking about its use as an adjective, so the verb usage is actually irrelevant to the argument.
“I will further maintain that 'fixed' meaning 'wired so as to require tools for disconnection,' as opposed to 'attached to a structure,' is not a familiar usage to a majority of English-speaking Wikipedia readers.” (Jeh). I am not aware that anyone is trying to define the negative of the former interpretation as “non-fixed”, the term is used here to mean “not attached to the structure”, exactly the familiar usage you appear to accept.
Portable is hardly an appropriate word to describe a 40Kg follow spot, but it is non-fixed (it is also movable, but in a quite different sense). It seems to me to be highly improbable that anyone asked to move something weighing more than 40 pounds (18kg) would agree with the concept that it was still “portable”, most people would think that a portable device weighed far less than that!
The wording originally used by TimSmall when he edited the page 5 years ago is far more appropriate than the current version which has become next to meaningless. The version as it was on 31st August is more meaningful: “Most non-fixed domestic equipment is connected using the BS 1363 plugs, the main exceptions being equipment requiring more than 13 amps (e.g. larger electric cookers, which are hard-wired); remotely switched, non-fixed lighting (which use proprietary or BS 546 plugs); and low-power portable equipment, such as shavers, which may be used in several countries. Many bathrooms, particularly in hotels, have 2-pin standard 'shaver sockets', which usually accommodate both European and US 2-pin plugs.”But the following important lines have also been deleted, and the sense of these also needs to be restored:“Other plug types used in the same area include IEC 60309, only used in industrial and some outdoor applications, and BS 546, limited to old installations and specialised applications where either the BS 1363 plug is unsuitable or where mateability with the standard variety is not desired (for example, where lamps are controlled by a switch or dimmer).”It is all very well conducting a crusade to improve, but this should not be done at the expense of the accuracy of the article! Mautby (talk) 15:23, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
Most
Other plug types used in
Old wiring method
What the article says now is that in the pre-ring-circuit days, *each* outlet was wired back to the distribution board to its own fuse. That can't be right. Surely there were a bunch of outlets on each branch circuit, all wired back to one 5 amp or 15 amp fuse.
Is there a publication around that does a side-by-side comaprison of the ring final circuit vs. radial wiring, showing the copper saving? --Wtshymanski (talk) 18:41, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
Source information
Here is a reading list to assist those who wish to make an intelligent contribution, but do not actually have the information:
BS 1363-1:1995 £182.00 (Specification for rewirable and non-rewirable 13 A fused plugs.)
BS 1363-2:1995 £182.00 (Specification for 13 A switched and unswitched socket-outlets.)
BS 1363-3:1995 £196.00 (Specification for adaptors.)
BS 1363-4:1995 £150.00 (Specification for 13 A fused connection units switched and unswitched.)
BS 1363-5:2008 £196.00 (Specification for fused conversion plugs.)
BS 1362:1973 £130.00 (Specification for general purpose fuse links for domestic and similar purposes (primarily for use in plugs))
BS 546:1950 £150.00 (Specification. Two-pole and earthing-pin plugs, socket-outlets and socket-outlet adaptors.)
To appreciate the context you will also require the following:
BS 7671:2008+A1:2011 £80.00 (Requirements for electrical installations. IET Wiring Regulations. Seventeenth edition.) Mautby (talk) 06:59, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
'Flex'Bs 1363 Socket
Is this term universally understood enough to be used without explanation? I wouldn't have known what it meant except via context. Remember, WP articles are not supposed to be written with so much region-specific terminology that they're not immediately understandable to others. Jeh (talk) 02:34, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
Heater: resistive or inductive loads?
Is an electric heater really a purely resistive load ? Would there not be an inductive component as well due to the elements being (usually) coiled conductors ?
British Standard Bs 1363 Downloads
British Standard Bs Au7
Retrieved from 'https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:BS_1363/Archive_2&oldid=478648809'
Comments are closed.
|
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |