How are single socket spurs adequately protected on a 32A ring?

On 18/12/2010 12:48, dennis@home wrote:

Sounds like a load twaddle to me. Care to cite the edition of BS7671?
--
Cheers,

John.

/=================================================================\
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"dennis@home" wrote in message
The comment I said was that people with sense don't put 2.5mm T&E cable into 32A circuits and that applies to rings and spurs and anything else. You may regard it as wrong in which case I will still say its wrong. I am not alone, there are many members of the IEE that also hold this view. I don't really care what the regs say as I regard them as wrong and encouraging dangerous practices just to save a miniscule amount of cash. What I propose does not breech the regs and is an improvement on them which is something you cannot deny.
******************************************
I think that is rubbish saying people with sense don't put 2.5mm2 cable into 32A circuits. It suggests that you do not understand the reasoning behind the regs, which from a quick scan of the other posts looks well explained. If overload protection is covered by another means then a 32A mcb will in most circumstances provide adequate fault protection to 2.5mm2 cable. In fact there are situations where the use of 4mm2 cable INCREASES the risk under fault conditions. The reason is that the cpc conductor in 4mm2 cable is only 1.5mm2, so under fault conditions the touch voltage will be higher than with 2.5mm2 cable.
Regards Bruce
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Oh I understand the idea, I just don't agree with it.

Yes its well explained why they think its OK, it doesn't mean everyone agrees with it.
It relies on the fuse in the plug to give overload protection to the spur. While this is fine in principle it isn't a good idea. The plug fuse is a user serviceable part and is going to be abused, we know it is abused. It also not tested. Virtually no PAT testing is done and even then they seldom actually check the fuse is OK. Electricians doing PIRs don't even care about the plug fuse despite it being *essential* to protect the circuit they have just tested and approved. The majority of householders don't even know its essential.
It is far more sensible to rate the breaker so that the cable is protected whatever the householder does rather than saying well he would still be alive if he hadn't done something to the fuse in the plug. Its like supplying a power press where the user has to fit parts to make it safe.

That sounds more like a case to make the CPC bigger not to rely on the consumer provided plug fuse to protect the circuit.
BTW AFAIK 32A radials are not the preferred radial, certainly not by me.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 18/12/2010 13:34, dennis@home wrote:

But dennis you disagree with most things as a matter of principle - that alone add little weight to an argument.

That's not true, since there is no requirement for any fuse in the spur - the spur could quite legitimately have an unfused flex outlet on the end of it, and everything would remain well protected. The overload protection of the spur being enforced by controlling the size of the load - not by fusing, and the fault protection being maintained at the origin of the circuit by the 32A MCB.

Is it equally easy to uprate your vacuum cleaner to 5kW for this non sequiter to have any relevance?
Yes your could probably bodge a 4 way trailing lead and stick two 3kW fan heaters on it, but as has been observed in testing the lead will fail long before the fixed wiring is at risk.

You seem to think that plug fuses are designed to protect against overload, this is not the case. They are there for the fault protection of the flex connected to them. The common exception to this is with multiway extension leads, but this is not of relevance to the fixed wiring.
If we extend your argument to its logical conclusion, every table lamp ought to have a 4mm^2 flex so that it matches the trip threshold of the circuit breaker.

Which is exactly what the current circuit designs that permit 2.5mm^2 cable on 32A breakers do. The breaker provides fault protection at all times. Overload protection some of the time.

It highlights why rings tend to perform better than radials with regard to earth faults. It also helps explain why when high integrity earthing is use on a radial circuit, it is done by turning the protective conductor into a *ring*

A 32A radial in 4mm^2 T&E is a standard circuit. Just as is a 20A one in 2.5mm^2 cable. The 32A version is however far more useful as a general purpose socket circuit.
--
Cheers,

John.

/=================================================================\
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

So you think its permitted to wire in a four way without any plug or FCU?

You have no way to know this. It is not difficult to find 2.5 mm flex and then there is no reason why it should suffer any more than the fixed wiring. There are even heat resistant flexes about that will suffer no damage at all while the main cable melts. The idea that something else will fail first is not reasonable unless that something else is designed to fail first.

Oh don't start.. the whole argument is about the plug fuse protecting the spur from overload and you know that. If the 32A breaker provided protection to stop the spur being overloaded there wouldn't be any argument as it would be designed as I want it to be.

But you just said the plug fuse doesn't protect the spur from overload so now you think its OK to have part time protection. Don't design anything I have to use if that is OK to you.

That's fine I haven't said you can't have a ring, just that the cables shouldn't rely on it being a ring or to have spurs that need plug fuses to prevent overload.

It is if you don't use 2.5 mm spurs anywhere. If you do then you may as well use a ring as its no safer. The 20A circuit doesn't rely on the plug fuse to prevent overloading the cables like the others do.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 18/12/2010 16:31, dennis@home wrote:

No, an unfused spur can have a maximum of one single or one double socket. I assume however you are referring to a 4 way trailing lead, which is not designed to be "wired in" at all.

Actually I do.
Seen many extension leads with 4.0mm^2 flex?
Link?

2.5mm^2 flex has a lower current carrying capacity than the fixed wiring, and also is less likely to benefit from contact with masonry or other building materials that will aid dissipation.
Commercial 4 way extension leads are almost exclusively wired with 1.5mm^2 flex however.

Clutching at straws dennis. If you are clued up enough to assemble an extension lead with heavy gauge high temperature flex, you are also unlikely to go replacing a fuse with a nail and plugging multiple fan heaters into it. Assuming however for the sake of argument you do manage to stick a sustained 40A load into a single socket, then its a pretty safe bet the plug and or socket will give out before its supply cable.

2.5mm^2 T&E with maximum current carrying capacity of 27A Vs cheap thermoplastic 4 way socket (with dennis' patented nail in place of the fuse) and 1.5mm^2 flex with a 15A max rating...
your call.

That seems to be *your* argument, however its based on an incorrect assumption.
The plug fuse is not there to protect the spur from anything; overload, or fault current. Its there to provide fault protection to the appliance flex, that is all.

I expect that most people want is a system designed to work and perform safely in the real world. What we have evidently does so very well as evidenced by our extremely low rate of accident and injury result from fixed wiring.
If you want to do it differently, by all means do so, you don't need our permission. However don't seek to justify this by making false claims about proven engineered designs.

That's correct. It doesn't.

No, the design requires full time protection.

Well since I am only advocating the use of standard designs as implemented up and down the country, with a long proven track record of safety, its not going to be a choice you get to make other than perhaps in your own home should you choose to rewire it.
However look on the bright side, many of the things I have designed are intended to kill you, so you should be grateful for the remote possibility that one might fail.

Which misses the fundamental point of the design in the first place. i.e. that you can supply significant amount of power over a wide area, using a cable that is easy to work with.

Which would make no difference to performance since the load on each is limited by the specification of only one single or double socket per spur....

A 4mm^2 radial for general purpose sockets will in many circumstances perform less well than a ring since it tends to have a higher earth loop impedance. Its also more difficult to wire and in many cases saves no copper. Hence why its fairly rare to see in practice.

None of the standard circuits rely on plug fuses to prevent overloading.
--
Cheers,

John.

/=================================================================\
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote in message

Earlier you stated "there is no requirement for any fuse in the spur - the spur could quite legitimately have an unfused flex outlet on the end of it" if so I can put a trailing socket on it.

Actually you don't as you can't define the flex type or how it is cooled.

I don't need 4 mm the spur is 2.5 mm so the flex would only need to operate better than that.

To what?

Clutching at straws John? I can easily put 40A into a double spur without needing a faulty fuse as ordinary 13A fuses will run at 20A continuous.

But according to you it fails to do that. A 32A breaker can't protect 2.5mm T&E from overloads so what do you think does?

Just remember that the regs are the bare minimum that the IEE thinks are safe enough at the cost they have decided upon. The OSG provides guidence for those that can't or won't do the maths to prove what they do is OK. You obviously don't understand the design compromises or what protects what in the circuits. I recommend you don't continue with this debate until you get a clue..

The fact that there is two sockets on a spur does not limit the current below the cable rating. It is quite obvious that it doesn't, you can even see it quoted in trade magazines like switchedON issue 18 if you bother to loo;. It is easy to get 40A continuously without blowing the plug fuses from a double socket.

Yes they do, you are wrong and refuse to accept that you are wrong. You cling to straws and keep changing the argument just to avoid admitting it. You are also a hypocrite as you accuse other of doing the same, even when they don't. You only have to look at this post to prove that this is true of you.
If the circuits were protected by breakers upstream we wouldn't have this debate and if you really have designed stuff you know that its illogical to protect the cable at the wrong end using something the householder controls.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 19/12/2010 00:19, dennis@home wrote:

Which part of one single or one double do you not understand?
A flex outlet on the end of a spur would typically feed a single fixed appliance.
If you want to hardwire an extension lead into a flex outlet (not something I would recommended), then you are back to the normal limits of no more than two sockets.
[snip]

The breaker is required to *always* provide fault protection at the origin of the circuit.
The circuit also needs overload protection, and this can, and often is, also provided by the circuit breaker at the origin. However there is no requirement that this is always the case. Some circumstances allow for the overload protection to be provided elsewhere and by other means.
A spur from ring circuit is an example of this. The overload potential is limited by the number of outlets supplied.
A 3A flex on a pendent downlead on a 6 or 10A lighting circuit is another. The overload protection is limited by the devices you can connect.
A 32A MCB feeding two cable runs in 2.5mm^2 T&E - one supplying an immersion heater, and the other supplying (for example) a wall mounted radiant heater in a bathroom) is another. The overload limitation is set by the appliances connected.

For most practical purposes it does. You also need to understand what happens when you draw 40A through a bit of 2.5mm^2 T&E. The answer is nothing initially - it does not immediately go bang or catch fire. You need a sustained overload to cause damage, and that is very much harder to achieve.
Even dumb people seem to be able to understand that loading multiple high load devices onto an adaptor or multiway extension lead is a bad idea. Why can't you?
Now for the avoidance of doubt, Am I saying that multi way extension leads are all fine and dandy? No I am not. There are certainly quality issues that may need addressing if nothing else. The fuse in the leads plug is designed to protect the flex to the leads sockets and there are cases where it is questionable if it is doing this well enough.
Do I think this is something that requires modification to the fixed wiring practices to correct? No I don't - the fault rests with the appliance, so fix that.
A trailing lead is after all an appliance, if it has the possibility of introducing a load in excess of that the plug and socket were designed for, then it is something to address in the design of the lead. Down rating an entire circuit in an attempt to mitigate the problem makes about as much sense as limiting a car's top speed to 30mph, because there are poor quality counterfeit break disks available.

You may recall it was either Adam or I who first posted the link in question.
What did it show?
That the leads in question fail fairly spectacularly with a 20A load. As others have highlighted, many will struggle with 10A.

For a few minutes...
You have seen what happens to the trailing lead when you try it.
Just as well someone smart engineered our fixed wiring practices to cope with short term overloads isn't it.

What does a 20A circuit rely on to protect from overload?
A 20A MCB won't limit the current to below the cable's rating and make your perceived problem vanish, since it will quite happily supply 40A for an hour.

<panto_mode>
Oh no they don't
</panto_mode>
There are occasions where a BS1362 fuse will be used for overload protection, but you won't find them in plugs when doing so.
Examples include when used in fixed wiring to feed a fused spur feeding multiple sockets. In these cases they are (as usual) protecting the downstream cable since there is no limitation on the number of outlets with a fused spur.
--
Cheers,

John.

/=================================================================\
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Which part of what you said don't you understand?

Are you confusing flex outlets with fused connection units? You know the ones with a fuse in them that you said are not required.

You shouldn't wire anything into a flex outlet on a ring main or a 32A radial as they lack fuses.

You are ignoring the facts. I and others have provided figures that show this is not the case. You can wire in a double socket and take 20A from each without blowing any fuses or breakers. Show me the calcs that show this doesn't overload any part of the cables.

At least in that case you are probably right. There were plugs available for you take power from light fittings but they aren't sold in many places these days. My parents had them and I dare say there may well be some still in use.

Are you sure that's in the OSG?

Its easy to do, it doesn't require any tampering with circuits, any tools and worst of all any knowledge of how to. In fact it the last item that is the problem, anyone can do it and not even know. The protection mechanisms are there to prevent this happening, if they worked that is.

You underestimate how dumb most people are. They probably don't know its a spur in the first place. They don't know how to convert kW into amps. They probably know that they shouldn't daisy chain extensions which is a shame as that wouldn't cause the problem in the first place.

The fact we are having this debate proves I do. It does make me wonder if the same is true of you though.

So you think that its fine for an appliance to be able to compromise the fixed wiring? an appliance that the electrician that did the fixed wiring has no control over. It always makes sense to put the protection of the fixed wiring in the fixed wiring and not in some device not under the control of the installer/designer. It is expected that the designer/installer should allow for misuse intentional or unintentional. What exactly is the point of any safety device if its used correctly? To cover mistakes in the operating manual?

The plug is an integral part of the design of ring mains. To fix it is a change to the design.

I have not suggested down rating the circuit so why confuse the issue? Its easy enough not to run spurs in 2.5 mm cable on 32A breakers.

So what? It doesn't require any faulty or fake bits to cause the overload.

You had better quote the post then because I didn't see any such thing from you or adam.

It showed that the fuse didn't limit the current to a level where the fixed wiring was not overloaded.

You had better ensure they outlaw 2.5 mm flex then, we don't want anyone being able to make an extension using it do we?

Absolutely nothing, you can easily get 20A down 2.5 mm flex without it even getting warm and it won't blow the plug fuse. You could run a high powered arc welder for days from it and the fuse wouldn't blow.

Are you claiming the cable won't take that current for an hour? If it can then you argument is invalid.

OK I will accept you statement and use it as proof that there the IEE didn't design in any spur overload protection at all. they just stuck their finger in the air and said well if they only plug in two appliances all will be fine, nobody will ever find a way to plug in more. I'm sure they will agree with your statement and what it means.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 19/12/2010 20:26, dennis@home wrote:

Well it makes sense to me and most others.

No, I meant a flex outlet - i.e. switched or unswitched, but no fuse.

Why would you need a fuse if you were connecting directly to a fixed appliance with no downstream cable to fault protect?

Depends on the circumstances. I gave you an example last time where further fusing would not be required.

For the few mins until the contacts in the socket fail or the plug gives up the ghost, or more likely, until the 1.5mm^2 flex fails where it is connected to the trailing leads socket or plug.
The likelihood of one seriously overloaded trailing lead being connected to a socket is relatively slim, although no doubt it happens from time to time. Chance of damage to fixed wiring is nil. The chances of two being connected to the same double socket would seem vanishingly small. Even then you have little to worry about (other than the overloaded trailing lead melting). As a fixed wiring issue this really is non problem. It may well spell doom for the poor socket, and will almost certainly kill the extension leads.

It may well overload the cable for a short time, however the design allows for that. Fault protection would not be compromised at all.

Ah, bless.

Banned decades ago...

Indeed there may, however for the kinds of things they were typically used for its probably a non issue. (a bigger problem is accidentally pulling the downlead out of the rose)

Say both fixed loads are 13A, Each is fine on a 2.5mm^2 T&E, so overload of the cable is not a possibility. The combined load is within In for the breaker, so that's fine. The only remaining question is fault protection, and since we already know that a spur has more than adequate fault protection from a B32 MCB then that is also fine so long as the maximum cable lengths are not exceeded.

So you maintain, but can you honestly see anyone finding enough appliances to consolidate onto a single socket to provide a sustained 40A load?

Perhaps you should enlighten...

True, not that it matters much.

Probably true, although most people have a reasonable idea the large heaters etc are high load devices.
Generally I find most people who claim little knowledge of electrical matters actually have the message about not overloading sockets reasonably well. In fact they usually ask the opposing question, such as "are all six of those things plugged into that extension lead ok?" when looking behind the computer or hifi etc, and one needs to explain that in this circumstance its fine since they are all very small loads.

And yet that is a practice that is more likely to hurt them in reality, as the ELI climes to unacceptable levels.

Your question presumes that an appliance can compromise the fixed wiring... Should one design an appliance that draws 5kW and fit it with a 13A plug, no obviously not. Will one 20A load on a socket compromise the fixed wiring, not a chance. Will two of them ever be combined at a single socket location in a domestic setting - two chances, slim and fat.

Which is how its done. You are the only one maintaining that plug fuses are designed to protect upstream wiring.

No, the fused plug is an integral part of facilitating 7.2kW circuits. It has nothing to do with their topology. Without the fuse then the circuit breaker would have to provide fault protection for the appliance flexes as well as for the fixed wiring, as is the case in the US and some parts of Europe. That in turn severely constrains the maximum power that can be delivered by the circuit

With new installations, then one generally does not use many spurs, although strategic use of them can save eating into your cable length budget in some cases.
Spurs are however allowed, standard practice, and widely used and they rarely seem to cause a problem (the one notable exception was with old T&E using a 1.00mm^2 CPC, on circuits with a 30A BS3036 rewireable fuse at the head end. There it was observed there was a genuine cause for concern since adequate fault protection could not be guaranteed. This did result in a change to the circuit specs to raise the CPC CSA to 1.5mm^2).

http://groups.google.com/group/uk.d-i-y/browse_frm/thread/19fa709d6c8b9d33/eba9320a8825e99d?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf-8&q=group:uk.d-i-y+rumm+.pdf#eba9320a8825e99d
No that is a figment of your imagination. The entire article did not mention fixed wiring even once.
They did say:
"As expected, it was the results of the overload and temperature rise test that gave the most concern. In all but one case, the supply lead plug on each sample showed varying states of overheating damage and enclosure deformation. The accessible surface of the fitted plug was measured for five of the seven samples. The lowest recorded temperature was 84.5C and the highest was 200C.This highest temperature softened the plug body leaving the line conductor pin in the mains socket-outlet after the test, as depicted in Figure 1. Significant damage was also observed for one other sample where the accessible surface of the plug reached 153.4C, as depicted in Figure 2."
No mention of fixed wiring related issues you will note. In conclusion, were there recommendations to alter the 17th edition of BS7671? No there was however:
"Nevertheless, the findings of the research reinforces the need to provide consumer advice about the dangers of overloading extension leads with further suggestions for keeping the area around the extension set free from dust and other combustible materials. We will also encourage users of extension leads to carry out regular visual checks to look for signs of overheating damage at the plug and socket-outlets and to do routine maintenance operations on the supply plug, flexible lead and four-gang socket-outlets."

All the COTS leads use 1.5mm anyway. Using 2.5mm Won't slow down the failure of the plug that much however. (the weak point in most plugs are the skimpy terminals on the wire end of the fuse, and limited contact area on the pin end).

And?
No, not at all. Quite the reverse. I was highlighting that its the combination of the magnitude *and* the duration that is significant.

Did you miss the bit about a limited number of outlets? Do you understand the role of diversity?

Amazing how well it has worked really isn't it.
--
Cheers,

John.

/=================================================================\
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
8< snip desperate ramblings of someone quoting lots of dangerous things that AFAIK are not in the OSG and have no calcs with them to show they comply with the regs.

http://groups.google.com/group/uk.d-i-y/browse_frm/thread/19fa709d6c8b9d33/eba9320a8825e99d?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf-8&q=group:uk.d-i-y+rumm+.pdf#eba9320a8825e99d
That link does not show a link to what I posted. It doesn't link to an iee publication to start with or to a posting with said link.

No it showed exactly what I said, the fuse doesn't limit the current enough, the breaker doesn't limit it enough and now you think the meltdown of the appliance is going to protect the fixed wiring.
8< as above.
This is pointless, you carry on as you like, I will continue to exceed the requirements of the regs where I do stuff. I will not put in a circuit where the current can continuously exceed the cables rating whether it is in the regs or not! Its you that is cost cutting and I hope it doesn't bite.
BTW ARW thinks the current is limited by the plug fuses just in case you still think nobody else does.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 20/12/2010 08:12, dennis@home wrote:

Yourself I take it...?

Let me quote what I said for you:
"There is evidence that some of the lower quality (i.e. probably cheaper) 4 way leads are not adequately protected by their 13A fuse - since this will usually permit a sustained load of 20A and not all of them are up to that. Read the report starting page 18:
http://www.esc.org.uk/pdfs/business-and-community/SwitchedOn-Issue-18.pdf "

I think you will find that links exactly to the issue of Switched On that you were referring to (which is not an IEE publication, but a ESC one). The intro I gave it should also give you a fairly good clue. Note that before you claim day is night, your actual words are there in this post for all to see.

More lies dennis...

Indeed. I am sure there are better things you could be doing with your valuable time. Why not send some of your ideas to the IET? I am sure they could do with a laugh as well.

I am sure he does and I agree with him - fuses limit current flow in downstream circuits. You will note I said above "There is evidence that some of the lower quality (i.e. probably cheaper) 4 way leads are not adequately protected by their 13A fuse".
Upstream circuits are either overload protected by their fuses/MCBs or there are circumstantial factors in place that prevent overload in the first place.
--
Cheers,

John.

/=================================================================\
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
John, could you consider giving it a rest and just killfiling dennis and getting on with your life, like most of the rest of us have?
--
Today is Prickle-Prickle, the 62nd day of The Aftermath in the YOLD 3176
I'd rather have a free press than a football tournament.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Huge wrote:

If it bothers you seeing people reply to dennis, why don't you kill each subthread that dennis replies to? Then it won't matter to you if anyone else engages him ...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I suppose I could killfile on the References line. Anyone else of any significance post from news.datemas.de?
--
Today is Prickle-Prickle, the 62nd day of The Aftermath in the YOLD 3176
I'd rather have a free press than a football tournament.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 20/12/2010 14:56, Huge wrote:

(you could have killed the thread...)
Tis ok, I have stopped now. ;-)
He seems to be stuck looping now... having argued himself round and round in circles long enough, we are now back to the idea that the reason we are all wrong is because only he alone knows the one true answer. I am sure the IET are looking forward to handing the whole production of the 18th edition over to him.
--
Cheers,

John.

/=================================================================\
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

At least I have been consistent with what I said was wrong unlike you. You have changed what you said and what a lot of others said to suit what you want people to think you mean.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The only consistent thing you have done is twist and turn. You snip posts to hide your effors and rewite your words when you realise you have made a mistake.
--
Adam



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Where? If you count adding stuff then you can probably twist it to sound like that, otherwise you can't. After all 'tis you that keeps adding things in which I have responded to. The basics haven't changed as you haven't actually added anything significantly different. My argument is the same now as it was in the beginning.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Huge the liar strikes again. If you have killfiled me why do you keep poping up and posting your useless comments to my posts? I would consider it quite nice to have a moron like you killfile me, but you wont.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

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.