Discuss Spur off ring breaker in the Electrical Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net

Welcome to ElectriciansForums.net - The American Electrical Advice Forum
Head straight to the main forums to chat by click here:   American Electrical Advice Forum

Reaction score
3
Hi, looking for some advice on what I have seen at my mums house when I took the cover off the consumer unit.

32A breaker, labelled kitchen socket ring, 3 wires coming out of it. All look like 2.5mm2, two of them are same shade of brown so I suspect they will be the ring, and another to an unlabeled T&E. I know some cowboys did the kitchen, they did get involved with the electrics. I suspect this will go to an extra socket that was wanted nearby, haven't checked yet.

It looks wrong, personally I would have just put it on its own 20a breaker. But when I thought about it, how different is this setup to spuring off the ring elsewhere? You are still going to junction 3 cables together at some point, what is the extra risk of doing it at the breaker? It will make ring testing slightly more awkward, but otherwise?
 
There is nothing wrong with a spur at the origin (at the circuit breaker/RCBO).

However, since you have already looked inside (with the power off!), how about a photo so we can admire the quality of the workmanship!
 
There is nothing wrong with a spur at the origin (at the circuit breaker/RCBO).

However, since you have already looked inside (with the power off!), how about a photo so we can admire the quality of the workmanship!
Wish I did take a photo, but I will be back there next week hopefully so will do it then.

Thanks for the advice!
 
There is nothing wrong with a spur at the origin (at the circuit breaker/RCBO).

However, since you have already looked inside (with the power off!), how about a photo so we can admire the quality of the workmanship!
I thought this scenario was always ok but a colleague debated with me and said spurring from a breaker means that It’s now a 2.5mm radial off a 32amp breaker.
 
But thats only the same for a single socket spurred off another socket on a RFC.
 
What needs to be ascertained is how many sockets are being fed from this spur.

Taking one from anywhere on the ring is fine, but can only be one point. (A point being the maximum of a double socket)

If it turns out to be more than one, then is there a spare 16 or 20A breaker?
 
I thought this scenario was always ok but a colleague debated with me and said spurring from a breaker means that It’s now a 2.5mm radial off a 32amp breaker.
Some circuits you can omit overload protection, or provide it further downstream. Design guide for rings is in appendix 15, but also have a read of 433, 434, and 435.
 
I thought this scenario was always ok but a colleague debated with me and said spurring from a breaker means that It’s now a 2.5mm radial off a 32amp breaker.

It isn't a radial circuit, it is a ring circuit with a spur.
It would only be a radial circuit if the ring was disconnected from the OCPD and just the single cable connected.
 
spurring from a breaker means that It’s now a 2.5mm radial off a 32amp breaker.

The crux is that to qualify as a safe and compliant unfused spur, as mentioned above it must only serve one point, which is what prevents the cable being overloaded. It doesn't matter whether it comes from the MCB or some other point in the ring.

A 2.5mm² radial connected to a 32A MCB serving multiple points would indeed be non-compliant, as would an unfused spur from a ring serving multiple points, regardless of where it is connected.
 
This thread reminds me of one that i read on here a while back debating if two seperate 2.5mm cables spurred off an MCB, that each fed a single socket, was permissible or not. Even though it doesn't seem right, with questions about about over filling the terminal etc and that only a maximum of one unfused spur per socket on an RFC, the problem regarding only one unfused spur related to the maximum current carrying capacity permitted for said said cable. Any thoughts?
 
I have always rationalised this mentally as whilst 2.5mm is only rated for 27A, if it's feeding only a double socket then I assume the overload protection argument is afforded downstream of origin by the two plug top fuses - being a maximum of 2 x 13A = 26A.
 
two seperate 2.5mm cables spurred off an MCB, that each fed a single socket,
This is what I would call a pathological configuration that is specifically designed to be difficult to analyse in the terms set out in the regs.

An unfused spur on an RFC bypasses the convention Ib<In<Iz due to the downstream protection afforded by the load being a single BS1363 point (although, not full protection for cable with Iz=20A which are permissible on an RFC.) The defined format of the RFC and its spurs have been proven safe and effective in practice over 75 years of use.

The two-point centre-fed radial then tries to exploit the same idea in a situation that is not an RFC nor a defined standard circuit in BS7671. Therefore, while it should be no more or less safe electrically than two unfused spurs (although there are aspects of anticipated load to consider according to application) there are better ways of feeding two points that don't depend on that exemption adopted into the RFC.
 
This is what I would call a pathological configuration that is specifically designed to be difficult to analyse in the terms set out in the regs.

An unfused spur on an RFC bypasses the convention Ib<In<Iz due to the downstream protection afforded by the load being a single BS1363 point (although, not full protection for cable with Iz=20A which are permissible on an RFC.) The defined format of the RFC and its spurs have been proven safe and effective in practice over 75 years of use.

The two-point centre-fed radial then tries to exploit the same idea in a situation that is not an RFC nor a defined standard circuit in BS7671. Therefore, while it should be no more or less safe electrically than two unfused spurs (although there are aspects of anticipated load to consider according to application) there are better ways of feeding two points that don't depend on that exemption adopted into the RFC.
I agree that it's a poor design and have disconnected in the past the extra spur due to, more than one spur from the MCB seeming wrong due to it being non standard, but thinking about it afterwards i couldn't quite explain to myself why it was wrong, it. Only it being a poor design and non standard, but otherwise it wasn't unsafe. It reminds me telling a friend, when asked if it was wrong with doubling up the conducors on an undersized flex feeding a fixed item of equipment. I told him it was but then stumbled on explaining why it couldn't other than it being yee hawish and possibly the CPC being undersized. I suppose it's all food for thought.
 
I agree that it's a poor design and have disconnected in the past the extra spur due to, more than one spur from the MCB seeming wrong due to it being non standard, but thinking about it afterwards i couldn't quite explain to myself why it was wrong, it. Only it being a poor design and non standard, but otherwise it wasn't unsafe. It reminds me telling a friend, when asked if it was wrong with doubling up the conducors on an undersized flex feeding a fixed item of equipment. I told him it was but then stumbled on explaining why it couldn't other than it being yee hawish and possibly the CPC being undersized. I suppose it's all food for thought.
It's always good to remember that BS7671 is not a design guide; it's a set of rules and recommendations to inform a best-practice design decision and deviation is perfectly OK so long as it affords no less level of safety and stands up to scrutiny. It's the difference between an engineered solution and join-the-dots Ikea style.
 
I'm glad I sparked a debate on this, seeing different perspectives. Seeing that snippet from BS7671 cements it for me, probably ok after all.

That is so long as my assumption that it's just a single socket is correct. I'll be checking it properly at the weekend to see what the situation is.

Thanks for the advice all.
 

Reply to Spur off ring breaker in the Electrical Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net

OFFICIAL SPONSORS

Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Electrician Courses Green Electrical Goods PCB Way Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Pushfit Wire Connectors Electric Underfloor Heating Electrician Courses
These Official Forum Sponsors May Provide Discounts to Regular Forum Members - If you would like to sponsor us then CLICK HERE and post a thread with who you are, and we'll send you some stats etc

Electrical Forum

Welcome to the Electrical Forum at ElectriciansForums.net. The friendliest electrical forum online. General electrical questions and answers can be found in the electrical forum.
This website was designed, optimised and is hosted by Untold Media. Operating under the name Untold Media since 2001.
Back
Top
AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website. For the best site experience please disable your AdBlocker.

I've Disabled AdBlock