prices for sockets

Solas8

Hi can someone advise me what the difference would be in the price of having a 13amp 2 gang and a 13amp 3 gang DP socket fitted.

M cebee

seems to be an extra 10uk pounds for the triple mk socket(compared to mk double)-there'd be a box on top of that


http://www.mkelectric.com/Documents/English/EN%20MK%20Technical%20Specifications/Wiring%20Devices/T04%20LOGIC%20PLUS%20Tech.pdf

the triple socket is fused at 13 amps

as against 13amp rating per socket outlet for the double and single

so you wouldn't fit out your house with them-more of a one off item i'd say

DublinDilbert

It depends on what you mean by fitted? Is there power at the location already? What's the wall made out of? Too many variables to easily quote this one.

But triple sockets aren't standard, much cheaper to fit two doubles...

miller50841

To fit a twin socket flush in your wall usually around €100 maybe bit less this is wired and installed and working.

€50 a light for downlighters prices do vary so try around

Solas8

miller50841 wrote: »

To fit a twin socket flush in your wall usually around €100 maybe bit less this is wired and installed and working.

€50 a light for downlighters prices do vary so try around

My Polish architect designed the house with triple sockets and the builder pricedfor triples but among many other discrepancies he only put in doubles. I needto review the whole bill, thus my question.

Have you ever heard of a builder charging 32thousand euro for extras? Minehas!!! He has left me almost penniless.

M cebee

prob just as well he didn't fit them anyhow
They could be a nightmare in a kitchen /utility with overheating and blowing fuses

M cebee

I'd say prob 30euro extra per point for mk
i can't find any cheaper brand
maybe that's part of the reason they weren't fitted?

miller50841

Sounds excessive for extras alright hope you didnt pay over till everything is checked

leeomurchu

Sounds like it's on the high side for extras but I've seen higher bills for extras. I assume you did a snag list and have this on it. strange that a 3 gang socket would specified I don't think I've ever installed one in (15 years)

It'd be a special order if they were too be put in so they could use that too up the price. Did the spark have a copy of the electrical drawings when he priced the job or was it priced off number of points?

Out of curiosity do you actually have a need for 3 gang sockets seems excessive

SweetCaliber

Better of using a double and a single or two doubles, sockets cost 3 euro in woodies and the backs cost similar, depending on where the socket is going you would be looking at around 70 to 100 euro to get it fitted, depending on the electrician and the location of the socket, a.k.a on the wall, in the wall, studded wall or concrete wall etc..

Outkast_IRE

Solas8 wrote: »

My Polish architect designed the house with triple sockets and the builder pricedfor triples but among many other discrepancies he only put in doubles. I needto review the whole bill, thus my question.

Have you ever heard of a builder charging 32thousand euro for extras? Minehas!!! He has left me almost penniless.

Did you have a set spec when you started the build , did you use a quantity surveyor at any stage to help price it ?

2011

Clearly less triple sockets could be put on a single circuit than double sockets. So installing triple sockets may mean that there is a requirement for more circuits.
This would mean more cabling, containment, MCBs and perhaps even a larger distribution board. Depending on the house this could lead to significantly higher costs (in some unusual cases).

I wired a very large house many years ago and the rooms were so large RSJs were installed in the ceiling because the joists would sag when the walls were so far apart.
The problem was that all of my cabling had to pass through several RSJs in some rooms. This meant drilling multiple holes through the RSJs for hours burning out drill bits, drills and apprentices
In this extreme case extra circuits were very expensive due to very long cable runs and the effort required to install them.

Bruthal

2011 wrote: »

Clearly less triple sockets could be put on a single circuit than double sockets. So installing triple sockets may mean that there is a requirement for more circuits.

Does it? It makes no difference if they are singles or doubles for the 10 pewr radial, and if these triple one`s have 13 amp fuses in them, then they would be equivalent to singles.

2011

robbie7730 wrote: »

Does it? It makes no difference if they are singles or doubles for the 10 pewr radial, and if these triple one`s have 13 amp fuses in them, then they would be equivalent to singles.

Well on page 307 of ET101:2008 it states:

"Recommended maximum number of points: 10 (see the definition of "point"). One point may serve a single or a double socket-outlet".


My reading of that would tell me that I would be going against the recommendation if I were to put 10 triple sockets on one circuit.

Bruthal

2011 wrote: »

Well on page 307 of ET101:2008 it states:

"Recommended maximum number of points: 10 (see the definition of "point"). One point may serve a single or a double socket-outlet".


My reading of that would tell me that I would be going against the recommendation if I were to put 10 triple sockets on one circuit.

I don`t see how if the triple sockets have a 13 amp fuse in them. Not that many would want all triple sockets on any circuits.

2011

robbie7730 wrote: »

I don`t see how if the triple sockets have a 13 amp fuse in them.

I quoted directly form the regulations in my last post and it does not make exceptions for triple sockets protected by a 13A fuse.

Not that many would want all triple sockets on any circuits.

True.

Bruthal

2011 wrote: »

I quoted directly form the regulations in my last post and it does not make exceptions for triple sockets protected by a 13A fuse.

It does not make exceptions, or fails to mention?

A 3 gang socket with a 13 amp fuse covering all 3, is equivalent to a single, regardless of what any rules fail to mention.

Don`t mind me though. Common sense is often my downfall.

2011

robbie7730 wrote: »

It does not make exceptions, or fails to mention?

You could argue that one until the cows come home, but either way it is irrelevant. The regulations are what they are.

If you think that this particular recommendation in ET101:2008 is lacking in detail that is a separate discussion that may well have merit but would be best taken up with the ETCI.

My personal view is that a maximum of 10 double sockets on a circuit is inline with the recommendation I quoted and 10 triple sockets on a circuit would be against the same recommendation.

Bruthal

2011 wrote: »

You could argue that one until the cows come home, but either way it is irrelevant. The regulations are what they are.

If you think that this particular recommendation in ET101:2008 is lacking in detail that is a separate discussion that may well have merit but would be best taken up with the ETCI.

My personal view is that a maximum of 10 double sockets on a circuit is inline with the recommendation I quoted and 10 triple sockets on a circuit would be against the same recommendation.

How many 3 gang fused sockets do the regs allow per circuit then? Will you have to assume, or does it say?

How many 4 gang? 5 gang?

leeomurchu

Out of curiosity and to possibly nullify the argument is that 3 gang socket shown in the pic protected with a 13 amp fuse or is it just the third socket that's protected by that fuse therefore making it two points as in a double socket and a seperate fused single socket?

It's an interesting point though, you'd imagine it would be classed as 1 point if protected by a 13amp fuse similar to how a fused spur would be one point. I can't see the reasoning though for fitting a 13A fuse to protect the entire socket it would make more sense if it was just for the third socket.

M cebee

all 3 i'd say
me-i'd call the triple a single point
i wouldn't use them anyhow except for a one off

Bruthal

leeomurchu wrote: »

Out of curiosity and to possibly nullify the argument is that 3 gang socket shown in the pic protected with a 13 amp fuse or is it just the third socket that's protected by that fuse therefore making it two points as in a double socket and a seperate fused single socket?

It's an interesting point though, you'd imagine it would be classed as 1 point if protected by a 13amp fuse similar to how a fused spur would be one point. I

Its a fuse to cover all 3 I think.

The reasoning could be that these are more likely designed for the back of tv`s etc, and so a 13 amp fuse would be plenty for that use, but prevent use in kitchens for 3 appliances where the 3 gang socket could have potential for heavier loads plugged in, causing overheating of the socket unit.

No argument from myself anyway about anything said here. They are likely not mentioned in regs not because you cant put 10 on a circuit, but because they are not the norm.

A fused 3 gang socket would be a single point. No regs can argue with that. What they could argue with is, 3 gang ones can be got that are not fused. In my opinion, the fuse would be a good idea.

can't see the reasoning though for fitting a 13A fuse to protect the entire socket it would make more sense if it was just for the third socket.

If the fuse was to protect part of the socket, then it would be better covering 2 of the 3 gang, not 1. Covering 1 would just be the same as an un-fused 3 gang, as it is now 13 amps possible from each outlet, just as it would be with an unfused one.

If 2 of the 3 were fused by that fuse, then it would be like a 2 gang. But for the back of tv`s, the fusing of the entire outlet is not bad imo.

Bruthal

M cebee wrote: »

all 3 i'd say
me-i'd call the triple a single point
i wouldn't use them anyhow except for a one off

Yea, handy for the back of a tv setup, and thats all really.

leeomurchu

Yeah true but a complete waste I mean I don't know anybody who doesn't have one of those multi leads with surge protection built into them at the back of their tv.

My thinking behind one outlet being fused would be that it could be fused at lower than 13A perhaps at 5A for certain electronic items.

Ah sure either way I'll be sticking with the 2 gangs you want more outlets get a multi lead or extra socket

Solair

This is a good example of why architects shouldn't get involved in the finer details of wiring, or should at least check the local specs in the country they're working in first!! Especially when it's the likes of Ireland, the UK, Malta and Cyprus which use fittings that are radically different to Euro-standard stuff.

I'm not sure why anyone would specify triple sockets all over the house. They are a very unusual fitting and only made by one or two manufacturers. Whoever was implementing this plan i.e. the builder / electrician should have flagged this problem before proceeding to charge you !

If the builder's fitted triple wall boxes, all I could suggest doing is replacing them with a double and closing up the space with cement and plaster, or fitting a double and a single and blanking off the single, which wouldn't really look wonderful.

The other option would be to run a CAT6 cable to the spare box and then you'd have home networking to a lot of points in your house ...

Perhaps your architect was just unfamiliar with Irish/British fittings.

I know Poland seems to use the same fittings as France i.e. CEE 7/5 sockets with a grounding pin and in France, it's quite common in newer buildings to find triple sockets or even quadruple sockets especially in kitchens / behind TVs / home offices etc and then skimp down to singles in hallways etc.

In kitchens however, you're likely to find it could be a pair of quadruple sockets on a single 20A circuit for the counter top area.

In France the way it works is you can have a maximum of 8 sockets on a circuit if it's protected by a 16A fuse / 20A breaker on 2.5mm2 cable.
Or, 5 sockets if it's a 10A circuit using 1.5mm2 cable. (Old spec, and kind of stupid as the sockets are rated 16A so you end up with regular trips/fuse blows)

In their system:
2 gang = 1 point
3 gang = 2 points
4 gang = 2 points.

but, they allow fewer sockets on the circuit than we do.

I suspect your architects spec was perhaps derived from something more like that?

Bruthal

It seems doubles have been installed, but priced for 3 gang. That seems to be the problem, overcharging.

2011

robbie7730 wrote: »

How many 3 gang fused sockets do the regs allow per circuit then? Will you have to assume, or does it say?

I think you are missing a few important points:

1) This is a recommendation, not a regulation. Following recommendations helps to maintain good design practice. Sometimes there are valid reasons to decide not to follow a recommendation, and sometimes there are not.
Perhaps the reason that this is a recommendation and not a regulation is for the reasons that you have outlined.
　
2) It is possible to go against a recommendation in ET101 and still comply with the Regulations.
　
3) The recommendation is no more than 10 double sockets per socket circuit.
My interpretation of this is:

This would provide the end user with effectively a maximum 20 sockets (as part of the fixed wiring) on a single circuit.

Therefore I would be happy to install the following on a single socket circuit:
10 x double sockets (providing 20 sockets)
6 x triple sockets (providing 18 sockets)
5 x quadruple sockets (providing 20 sockets)
etc…..

4) Following your logic it shoud be be possible to connect any number of socket outlets to a single point on a socket circuit once it is protected by a 13A fuse.
My personal view is that anymore than 10 double sockets on a single socket circuit is bad design and bad practice. At work my target is normally a maximum of 6.
　
5) Don't shoot the messenger! I did not write ET101. If you think that the ETCI have missed something or would like clarification contact them.
　


Personally I do not like the idea of triple socket outlets.
I like the idea even less if all 3 are protected by a single 13A fuse.

Bruthal

2011 wrote: »

I think you are missing a few important points:

Am i?

I say a 3 gang fused socket would be like a single point, you disagree.

2011

robbie7730 wrote: »

Am i?

Yes.

I say a 3 gang fused socket would be like a single point, you disagree.

I disagree because on page 307 of ET101:2008 it states:

"Recommended maximum number of points: 10 (see the definition of "point"). One point may serve a single or a double socket-outlet".


But I would agree with you if it said:

"Recommended maximum number of points: 10 (see the definition of "point"). One point may serve a single, a double socket-outlet or a 3 gang fused socket-outlet".

leeomurchu

ok fairly clear where this is goin lads so maybe let sleeping dogs lie and all that.

We all have to follow the rules as the inspector would read them which I guess could be either way given your differing opinions.

safe to say it won't be to often anybody comes across a 3 gang socket I've never seen one and would more than likely bet I'll never see one.

2011

leeomurchu wrote: »

We all have to follow the rules as the inspector would read them which I guess could be either way given your differing opinions.

I don't think that an inspector can fail you for this as it is not a regulation.

safe to say it won't be to often anybody comes across a 3 gang socket I've never seen one and would more than likely bet I'll never see one.

They are proudly displayed on the wall of Eurosales in Sandyford.

leeomurchu

2011 wrote: »

They are proudly displayed on the wall of Eurosales in Sandyford.

Soon to be turned out to pasture at a modern history museum

Some folks just love their sockets.

Recently I installed 5 Dbl skts in a bed room 4x4 M (canabis plantation possibly)

Bruthal

2011 wrote: »

Yes.



I disagree because on page 307 of ET101:2008 it states:

"Recommended maximum number of points: 10 (see the definition of "point"). One point may serve a single or a double socket-outlet".


But I would agree with you if it said:

"Recommended maximum number of points: 10 (see the definition of "point"). One point may serve a single, a double socket-outlet or a 3 gang fused socket-outlet".

I had an opinion that a fused 3 gang socket is electrically equivalent to a single socket. Thats all. You brought the rules and regs into it, stating what they dont mention.

If the regs next week specifically mention that a fused 3 gang socket is to be treated as 2 points, I will still believe it is electrically a single point, because thats what it is. After all, clearly a double socket can be loaded heavier than a fused 3 gang.

I would wire it as if its 2 points, but that does not change the technicality of what it actually is. So it is you missing my point about what my opinion on what the item is, as I was not voicing an opinion on what the et101 fail to mention it is.

And that`s my last post on this item.:)

Solair

There's no logical reason why a triple fused socket would be treated as anything more than a 13amp load, that's all it can provide.

The UK regulations seem to assume that it could be wired to an unfused spur from a ring circuit, in which case, it could overload the spur wiring as you would end up with a run of 2.5mm2 cable that was effectively a radial circuit protected only with a 32A MCB or fuse.

That being said, there's nothing to stop someone plugging an unfused double adaptor and some heavy loads into a unfused spur socket and causing a fire.

Irish wiring favours radials anyway but where rings are used, I thought spurs had either been banned entirely or were required to be fused with a 13amp FCU on the ring itself?

The Irish regs defining a triple socket (with a fuse) as a double makes absolutely no sense to me at all and strikes me like as if they didn't actually realise the fuse applied to the full load of the socket.

One might assume that a triple socket might have a pair of sockets fused and a single unfused i.e. making it like a double socket, but it clearly isn't.

Bruthal

Solair wrote: »

Irish wiring favours radials anyway but where rings are used, I thought spurs had either been banned entirely or were required to be fused with a 13amp FCU on the ring itself?

I never wired rings in houses myself, but I think the problem is when a spur is wired from a ring in 2.5, the 2.5 is now under rated for a 32 amp breaker.

I couldnt see much problem once the spur is actually wired into the ring circuit.

A FCU would be used if the spur switch is to be wired as a spur remote from the ring main.

leeomurchu

robbie7730 wrote: »

I never wired rings in houses myself,

you've never wired a ring cct in a house :eek: are you an electrician long that used to be common place for the kitchen, still is for a lot regardless of the rules never saw the sense in doing away with it.

Bruthal

leeomurchu wrote: »

you've never wired a ring cct in a house :eek: are you an electrician long

Started in the 80`s.

that used to be common place for the kitchen, still is for a lot regardless of the rules never saw the sense in doing away with it.

I was never a fan of them.

M cebee

i was thinking they may be designed for ring spurs in the uk alright
they are of no use or benefit here that i can think of
dont like the fusing arrangement myself

leeomurchu

robbie7730 wrote: »

I was never a fan of them.

How come, never really put much thought into myself?

M cebee

i was glad to see rings done away in kitchens
i still use the ring for ccts except kitchen utility

theres a few. known ssues with rings
theres a greater chance of problems occuring in a domestic installation

leeomurchu

M cebee wrote: »

theres a greater chance of problems occuring in a domestic installation

I don't see how that'd be the case as faults are usually associated with appliances and if they're wired correctly there shouldn't be an issue with the wiring.

I can see the point in that if there's not a ring wired in the kitchen you won't lose power to everything should something short but on the other hand it'd trip the rcd.

I don't really see a good or bad point to be honest just wondering why some don't like them?

Bruthal

leeomurchu wrote: »

How come, never really put much thought into myself?

If an open circuit occurs, it will go un-noticed. Now the 2 radials in effect, are 2.5 circuits on a 32 amp breaker, and a very small earth for the 32 amp circuit, although an open earth on a radial will leave no earth at all, and go un-noticed. But the RCD will still offer protection in the event of shocks being received.

Potential for the 2 ends to be mixed up in DB boards, so fed from 2 different MCBs.

I just think it better to have more circuits with fewer sockets, rather than fewer circuits with more sockets.

They have their advantages, but in the average house, I have found no need for them.

M cebee

theres the risk of overcurrent with improper branches and open rings
plus possible mixups at mcbs with mr domestic diy
less risk of problems in domestic with radials

Bruthal

leeomurchu wrote: »

I can see the point in that if there's not a ring wired in the kitchen you won't lose power to everything should something short but on the other hand it'd trip the rcd.

It might be easier to isolate a fault if it was a difficult one to find, with several radials with a few sockets on each, rather than one ring with 20+ sockets. The RCD wouldnt trip with a L-N short. It will with L-E, or N-E of there is a load on the affected circuit, and in some rare cases, a load on a different circuit.

M cebee

im a big fan of ring ccts
in comm ind work its a safer bet

leeomurchu

I based the question on the wiring being correct and no faults. I just think people make a bigger issue out of ring ccts than is needed if wired correctly it's no more of a risk then the rest of the wiring in the house.

A fault is simply a matter of ticking the boxes if it's on a ring just disconnect as you go through the ring to find which leg the fault is on.

If all the work is carried out by a qualified competent electrician I can't see there being an issue but as ye said Mr. DIY is always at large

Anyway it's off topic so I'll end that question now

Bruthal

M cebee wrote: »

im a big fan of ring ccts
in comm ind work its a safer bet

Yea I have wired them in those scenarios alright.

Bruthal

leeomurchu wrote: »

I based the question on the wiring being correct and no faults. I just think people make a bigger issue out of ring ccts than is needed if wired correctly it's no more of a risk then the rest of the wiring in the house.

A fault is simply a matter of ticking the boxes if it's on a ring just disconnect as you go through the ring to find which leg the fault is on.

If all the work is carried out by a qualified competent electrician I can't see there being an issue but as ye said Mr. DIY is always at large

Anyway it's off topic so I'll end that question now

Well, I had to base my answer on the question being asked.

Solair

The biggest issue with rings in a house situation is that you can end up with all the appliances clustered at one point on the ring, especially in a kitchen.

Even though the theory is that power's flowing from both ends, it will take the shortest route, so if everything's near the MCB on one end of the ring, then that side can run hotter than planned.

It's a pretty crude system given that it allows you to use cable sizes that would be unacceptable in other circumstances.

The other potential problems are:

As mentioned splitting a ring accidentally in DIY work or due to a loose screw/terminal clamp in a socket - the circuit will continue to function but will be acting as two radials that are inadequately protected.

The other problem is that the system entirely depends on the correct usage of fused-plugs.

There's a risk in a few ways on this:

1) And this is common place - someone plugs a 2-pin continental CEE 7/16 plug into a 13amp socket. This will connect a thin flex to a circuit only protected by a 32A MCB and should there be a fault, there's a risk that the flex could burn-up.

If plugged into a UK cooker control socket it could be directly into a 45amp circuit without any protection!!!

There are also non-conforming unfused adaptors and even 13amp unfused plugs out there! I had an item of IT equipment arrive with a 3-pin BS1363 type plug which didn't have fuse, yet fitted a socket in Ireland without any fuss.

http://www.nickhill.co.uk/unfused_plugs_in_uk_delivered_from_china.html

2) There's a risk someone could replace a BS1363 socket for a BS546 unfused socket or a European outlet. I've seen this done in the UK by European ex-pats thinking they can just swap the sockets to use their appliances. A lot of people don't realise that the fuse is anything other than some kind of British form of obsessive compulsive disorder. i.e. fused plugs, shuttered sockets, lights on sockets, etc etc.

3) Someone can't find a fuse for a 13amp plug and shoves a screw or wraps the fuse in tin foil.

leeomurchu

jaysus boards is becoming very tit for tat these days

Bruthal

Solair wrote: »

The biggest issue with rings in a house situation is that you can end up with all the appliances clustered at one point on the ring, especially in a kitchen.

Even though the theory is that power's flowing from both ends, it will take the shortest route, so if everything's near the MCB on one end of the ring, then that side can run hotter than planned.

It will take both routes, the ratio being inversely proportional to each directions impedance. With a 32 amp MCB, it would be unlikely one leg would be overloaded unless there is an open circuit, or the other leg is massively longer than the other, to a degree not really likely in a house. A good point all the same.

It's a pretty crude system given that it allows you to use cable sizes that would be unacceptable in other circumstances.

I agree with the crude system description alright.