It really depends on the situation doesn't it? In 'living' rooms I
think higher sockets do make sense as there really aren't many cases
where floor level ones are any better and higher ones are simply
easier to reach for *everyone*.
Now I think about it even in my study (where I was going to say lower
sockets might make sense) I have added a lot of sockets at just above
desk height and they're the ones that get used all the time.
| Number one son, in a brand new ground floor flat (Very North
| Sctland) has most of his sockets mounted about 6 to 8 inches
| from the floor. No where near the 450 to 1200mm mentioned above.
People are generally talking about the English Building Regulations. I don't
know off-hand whether Scotland has comparable provisions in our B Regs for
the height of sockets.
A lot of people hold the plug between thumb and middle finger, leaving the
first finger to, possibly, hang over the top of the plug. That is not a
problem if the earth is there and may not be a problem with modern sheathed
pins on live and neutral. However, with an older plug, having unsheathed
pins, there is a (fairly remote) possibility of touching a live pin when
insterting the plug.
Of course, even before the current requirements to have the sockets half way
up the wall, there should always have been at least 150mm clearance under
the socket, to allow for the cable to bend easily.
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 14:15:11 -0000, nightjar wrote:
My father was involved in the implementation of the requirement for sleeved
pins and tells me that this was purely to satisfy government busybodies who
were convinced there was a danger despite the evidence presented to them by
the electrical accessories industry. The sockets are designed so that
contact is lost before the plug is far enough out for your fingers to slide
behind the plug.
I feel that the regulations are just too strict - maybe the required height
range is sensible, but there should be some flexibility to allow for
circumstances (computer desk with back that would block access to sockets
any higher than skirting level; tv on wall bracket high up - I want the
plug hidden behind it; display cabinets with internal lights - I'd prefer
the sockets above the units so that they can be unplugged without moving
the cabinet and cabinet is in alcove, preventing socket to either side). I
know that this is *very* detailed planning, but if I'm having a house built
and know how I'm going to use certain rooms, why shouldn't I have the
choice to do what is practical for me. If someone buys the house later and
wants the sockets elsewhere, they can move them. If someone in my family
became disabled, I'd move the sockets that were a problem for them.
They also had a socket with a very short contact length, so that there
was a near immediate disconnection. It was also intended to be
finger-proof against small children.
Give them 10-20 years and the extra contact springs went weak, leading
to a poor connection, high resistance and overheating. My parents had
one that had a damned good go at starting a fire
Die Gotterspammerung - Junkmail of the Gods
I believe that the requirement is only when they could reasonably be
expected to be used by disabled guests. I'm sure there would be nothing to
prevent you having a high socket for a specific reason (i.e. the TV
mounting), provided there are enough low ones for granny to plug in her
Somewhere around age 4, I managed to do this without any trouble...
This reminds me of an article I just read on The Register
It's the waffle at the beginning I'm referring to, not the meat
of the article (which is actually pretty non-existant).
The only issue I can think of is that for rewireable plugs (as opposed to
moulded ones), there is a
marginally higher risk of stuff falling into the plug, and if spilt liquid fell
on the cable, it
would run down into the plug.
Quality of british electrical accessories is a pet hate of mine,,,
First the location, You can mount sockets in the floor or ceiling
using a BS standard outlet, then any height on a wall and if a
building inspector objects, tell him(or her) that it is nothing to do
with them. The part P is Proposed not implemented and if it does
become law (Blairs nanny state again) you can lodge an objection then
an appeal and without doubt you will win.
The IEE regulations are the basis of the proposed building regulations
and have one purpose only and that MUST be interpereted into any
requirment by a local authority (Council Building Inspector)and that
purpose is "TO PREVENT DANGER".
No organisation can make you conform to any electrical regulation just
because it is a Regulation
The requirement is under Part M, not Part P. (Part M2, Section 8). It is
current. It is not worded particularly strictly:
8.3 A way of satisfying the requirements would be to provide switches and
socket outlets for lighting and other equipment in habitable rooms at
appropriate heights between 450mm and 1200mm from finished floor level.
On Mon, 3 Nov 2003 09:24:31 -0000, Christian McArdle wrote:
Actually, that isn't the requirement. That is just an approved way of
fulfilling the requirement, as are all the approved documents.
The actual requirement is even more vague:
"Reasonable provision shall be made for disabled people to gain access to
and to use the building."
Yep. I suggested to my building ispnector that I would build little
ramps up to the light switches just in case any gnarled old ladies
nedded to use the house, and remove them when they left.
He didn't seem to think it was that amusing.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.