British Standard Bs 1363 Download Youtube

Bs 1363 Standard British And Uk Fused 3 Pin Re-wirable Power Plug With England Asta Certification, Find Complete Details about Bs 1363 Standard British And Uk Fused 3 Pin Re-wirable Power Plug With England Asta Certification,Uk Plug,British Plug,Bs 1363 Plug from Plugs & Sockets Supplier or Manufacturer-Yuyao Sline Electric Co., Ltd. Introducing engineering. (the BS standing for 'British Standard', and the xxxx being a number) or similar. Electrical goods, or their packaging or instruction manuals, would be a good place to search. I found in the instructions for a French-made electric kettle that its moulded-onto-the-wire mains plug conformed to BS 1363 and that.

• Bs 1363 Socket
• British Bs 1363 Plug

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

• 1) Identical live/neutral pin diameters/spacing would have offered some compatability with European plugs leading in time to a greater possibility of the system being adopted throughout Europe and perhaps eventually the 200-250v world
• 2) 16 amp capacity suitable for 3Kw loads even in 200-230 volt countries and providing more of a safety margin for 240-250 volt countries
• 3) Immediate compatability with 2 pin plugs
• 4) In the long term more safety for international travellers as people wouldnt be using (badly designed) adaptors or even attempting to force incompatable plugs into sockets (by breaking off earth pins etc)
• 5) Economies of mass production (appliances wouldnt need to be manufactured with diffrent plugs fitted for different markets)

The BS1363 plug was deliberately designed to be incompatible with anything else that was in use in the uk at the time. Unshuttered sockets did end up compatible with europlugs but this was almost certainly by accident rather than design (and the shuttering mechanisms chosen as shuttering came in reduced this problem).

The reason for the deliberate incompatibility was to enforce use of fused plugs with the newly introduced 30A ring circuits. Plugwash 19:21, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Unshuttered sockets did end up compatible with europlugs Technically theyre NOT compatible. A Europlug can be FORCED into a BS1362 socket but the incorrect pin spacing means the pins get slightly bent. Incidently many of the adaptors on the market are indeed unsafe. Often they lack an earth connection and/or are only rated for say 7.5 amps. 80.229.222.48 (talk) 20:33, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Only disadvantage I can see regarding the arrangment advocated above is that travellers to Britain would be plugging their (unfused) Schuko plugs (or worse still their 2.5 amp Europlugs) into 32 amp ring circuits. Grounding would also be an issue (although conciveably a 'dual standard' socket with earth clips AND an earth pin could have been developed) but it wouldnt be any worse than the current situation where both the 'side earth' and 'Female earth' plugs can be inserted into sockets without either earth clips or an earth pin. A fused version of an unpolorised plug isint really an option since the fuse could end up on the neutral side of the supply. 86.112.254.104 (talk) 10:47, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

I just spotted the reference above to 'unshuttered sockets' when referring to incompatibility with europlugs. There never was such a thing as an unshuttered BS 1363 socket, the original version is 'British Standard 1363 : 1947 FUSED PLUGS AND SHUTTERED SOCKET OUTLETS.' (See 'Origins' in main article) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deucharman (talk • contribs) 08:50, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Embassies

Is it true that Britsh plugs/sockets are used in all British embassies?--Oxonian2006 02:02, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Not sure but given that legally embassies are regarded as soverign extraterrotorial microenclaves (Im open to correction on the exact legal terminoligy) maybe a particularly pendantic legal interpretation decided that UK wiring regulations/standards should apply as well ???

It's an odd one, because if they use the British standard plug/socket system surely they would also require 230v @ 50Hz? And a collection of replacement fuses? In a country with 115v @ 60Hz and no British plugs on anything this could be a problem. Ziltro 17:57, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I have no special insight on this matter, but anyway, here are my 2 eurocents:

I think it's fair to assume that practical reasons will play the biggest role here. If British embassy staff move abroad, or if embassies seek to buy UK appliances, then it might be helpful to have British sockets available. On the other hand, in countries with a 110 Volt system, that may require expensive power converters, which is not very practical. And where countries that have the same 230 Volt electricity it's usually trivial to either make or buy adapters that will accept UK plugs or provide UK sockets. Speaking from personal experience, I've lived in Germany (which has the Schuko system) and in the UK and Ireland (which use the same BS 1363 system). When I moved from Germany to the UK, I cut the Schuko plugs off of all mains leads of all my appliances and fitted BS 1363 plugs on them. When I moved back to Germany, instead of doing the reverse, I bought a couple of BS 1363 extension cords and power strips, replaced their BS 1363 plugs with Schuko plugs and left my appliances' plugs as they were (BS 1363). So I'm now in Germany, and because of these adapters I made, I have a lot of BS 1363 sockets in my flat, and the majority of my appliances have BS 1363 plugs. I also have a few Schuko plugs and power strips however. The electricity is the same across Europe, so it's not an issue. It's more difficult to get bayonet cap light bulbs for my Irish desk lamp that I brought over here, because the UK/Eire use mostly use bayonet cap bulbs and Germany mostly use screw-in bulbs (screw cap bulbs are becoming more common in Eire/the UK, though, prolly b/c of cheap wholesale imported screw fitting lamps). I'm not affiliated with any embassy, but I imagine they might do things similarly. Of course the easiest solution is not to bring any appliances when you're moving, but it's not always nice to leave stuff you like behind. 86.56.48.12 20:52, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

In many 110-120 volt countries the mains supply is actually split with larger appliances running on 220-240 volts. So in theory it would be possible to wire the embassy for BS1363 sockets outputting 220-240 volts. There would be two potential flaws in such an arrangment though. Firstly most 110-120 volt countries also use a 60Hz mains frequency. Secondly In a 'Split phase' mains supply both legs of the supply are live to the tune of half the total supply voltage. Thus both 'live' and 'neutral' pins would actually be 'live' @ 110-120 volts 80.229.222.48 (talk) 16:03, 18 January 2008 (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)

Sounds like an urban myth, especially given the mention of an IEC standard in the above section on pin insulation and the fact that virtually every other country using similar voltages has also introduced a system to prevent pins being touched (either the pin insulation system or the cavity system). Plugwash 21:13, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

I suspect that, rather than being an urban myth, the anecdote could be true as an example and used as proof of concept. However, the concept of preventing a slim conductor (maybe a paperclip/coin/wire that became lodged between the prongs) from shorting by using a 'snug fit' as a safety measure would mean that the everyday limits between no-contact and contact would be so close as to make the plug termperamental when inserting and hyper-sensitive to breaking contact if even marginally loosened. I have found that 1363 plugs tend to continue operating when sitting up to a third of the way out of the socket.--Loogie 12:47, 19 May 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)

I've removed it. --RFBailey 20:06, 9 November 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)

No, it's actually a pretty accurate statement. Taking the U.S. as an example, our typical branch circuits are rated at 15 amps and our lightest-weight flex is SPT-1 (18 gauge); this will carry seven or eight amps routinely. The current minimum for extension cords is SPT-2 16 gauge wire and that will take ten to thirteen amps continuously. In other words, the ampacity of the lightest flex is at least somewhat-closely matched to the over-current rating of the branch circuit; you'd have a hard time melting the flex before tripping the branch circuit breaker.

By comparison, the British circuit can deliver much more current and the flexes can be much lighter gauge, hence the fuses at the plugs.

Atlant (talk) 01:44, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

My original generalised statement was intended as being more along the lines of 110/230v and a short circuit impedance of say 0.5 ohms, hence pretty much any circuit will nuke a flex and that is why I took issue with British circuits being portrayed somehow special. It doesn't really make sense that I then went on to extol the virtues of fuses. I think considering your point about US circuits being rated reasonably closely to there flex then it would only really need changing if say European circuits are also rated at 32 amps, and then they continue to use there silly 2 pin unfused plugs with lightweight flex. I know 32 amps is a harmonised overcurrent value, but as to the in's and outs of pan-european mains circuits I have no idea. --Pypex (talk) 02:26, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Nowadays it's not such an issue because modern breakers clean faults so fast. Indeed under short circuit conditions a B32 MCB will often go before a 13A plug fuse will! However back when rings were designed we were dealing with rewirable fuses which had much much worse tripping caracteristics. There are large numbers of fuse boxes with rewirable fuses still in service in the UK.

While the sizes of breakers that are availible is indeed harmonised afaict what breakers are acceptable under what conditions is not. I belive some european countries allow 32A socket circuits with thier own plug types but i'm not sure of the details and i'm pretty sure they didn't allow it in the days of fuses. Plugwash (talk) 03:25, 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)

Actually, the correct term as used in BS7671 is 'Ring Final Circuit'... but I'll give you Ring Circuit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.6.35.235 (talk) 23:24, 16 May 2010 (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).

Citation needed. Also remember that the neutral wire used to be black and the live wire used to be red. Was it an English speaker who chose the new colours (as I remember, they were a European standard)?—Dah31 (talk) 06:36, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, it clearly can't be true, which would be one reason it's not mentioned. 81.187.162.109 (talk) 18:42, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

The 'new colours', as they are often referred to in the UK, were chosen to avoid dangerous miswiring wherever possible throughout the EU. Black was live in Germany, so couldn't be used for neutral as it may have caused confusion there (but it can still be used for phase in 3-phase systems). Additionally, blue and brown have a high-contrast between the two so are less likely to be miswired in low-light situations than black and brown, for instance. Blue and Brown were seen as the safest combination. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.6.35.235 (talk) 23:33, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

In the US Black is live and White is neutral. When Red/Black was the UK standard it sometimes lead to (potentially dangerous) misunderstandings on (dual voltage) equipment which had crossed the Atlantic. 86.112.96.168 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:01, 14 June 2010 (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)

I agree completely (I came here to post pretty much exactly that). I'll go through and seriously trim it in a couple of days if nobody objects (or does it sooner) in the meanwhile. Thryduulf (talk) 01:48, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

No problem with the content but could the photos be made a little smaller ? They take up too much space in the article ? Linked thumbnails would be better. 86.112.96.168 (talk) 17:58, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

The content is inappropriate for an encyclopedic entry. A sentence or two referencing their website would be fine though, but the rest needs removing — this is not a lobby site. 81.187.162.109 (talk) 10:42, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Indeed. I've tagged the section in question. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 11:23, 19 August 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)

The socket pictured in the article looks like a power strip socket to me. In my experiance most power strips in the UK aren't switched (you CAN get switched ones if you want them but they are more expensive). On the positive side the fact the shuttering mecahnism is red (power strip sockets often seem to have red shutters for some reason) makes the shuttering far easier to see. Plugwash (talk) 01:12, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

I have replaced that picture with one of a standard switched socket. I have also added (under shuttering) a detail of the MK socket which requires all three pins to be inserted simultaneously. As a matter of interest, the original BS 1363 version (1947) was specifically for unswitched sockets. Switched sockets were allowed by a later version. Unswitched sockets are commonly available in the UK, but rarely fitted in new builds. Deucharman (talk) 15:44, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Interesting, a difference then. As I mentioned in Malaysia most power strips are switched. Perhaps this is because unsafe practices like forcing a Europlug into a socket is common :-P Nil Einne (talk) 12:01, 20 September 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)

Hi Deucharman, I have reverted your additions again. Please read the guidelines on WP:OR and WP:NPOV to get a general understanding of these key policies. Also, take a look at WP:RS as to why a self-published source, such as Youtube, is not considered a reliable source.

In general - the text added by you makes a number of assertions. For example, you state The award ignored the fact that the design contravenes at least two of BS 136s's requirements. This is considered to be opinion - (and it doesn't matter if it is right or wrong) - and unless you can produce a reliable reference from a third party, will be flagged as WP:OR and deleted. Statements such as which is claimed to be simpler and strong is not a neutral POV and is similarly unreferenced. Please address these concerns before re-adding this subject matter. --HighKing (talk) 11:22, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Having carefully considered HighKing's points it became apparent that it was not appropriate to mention any design whose status was unestablished. The fact that an award (actually several awards) was given to Min Kyu Choi for a design which does not meet the requirements of BS 1363 does not entitle it to be referred to as BS 1363 variant, it is not. The other variants discussed are all real designs which are available and in use. On this basis it is clear that the only folding plug which it is appropriate to mention in the context of BS 1363 is the SlimPlug, which does have limited approval (as part of a 2.5 amp rated C7 power lead) and is available on the UK market. Deucharman (talk) 12:23, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for that. To be clear, there is no problem mentioning an award-winning design for a folding plug in the right context, since it is referenced in a reliable source. It might be a good idea. Equally, there's a case to be made that Three pin plug might be a more appropriate article for much of the information about plugs (especially designs and awards), and the BS 1363 could be a smaller and cleaner article dealing with the standard. --HighKing (talk) 12:42, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

I have to disagree, if it is not permissable to draw attention to the fact that the award was given without reference to the illegality of the design then, as the design can not qualify as being BS 1363, the reference has no place in this article. To do otherwise implies that the award confers some sort of legitamcy, which it does not. I note that the original reference to the award was included in a new article called 'Folding Plug' which initially made no reference to the fact that there were other competing designs, one of which was approved for use. The separate article was then merged with BS 1363 in early June 2010. Deucharman (talk) 13:00, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

My objection was, in fact, to what Highking mentioned--to the sentences like 'the award ignored the fact...' etc. It read less like an encyclopedia and more like someone who lost crying about he was chated out of an award. Furthermore, the award itself was verifiable, while the other info was not. As to whether or not the award itself belongs in the article, I defer to the judgment of you all as experts. Oh, one final note--Youtube is never considered a reliable source, as anyone can upload anything, with no reliable source editting/verifying the info. On occasion, Youtube videos are used as external links, but only when we can verify that the uploader holds the copyright for the video uploaded (for example, on 'official' channels). Happy Editing! Qwyrxian (talk) 21:50, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

As Thumperward has re-introduced a reference to the non BS 1363 design by Min-Kyu Choi it seems reasonable to add a reference to ThinPlug. Although ThinPlug has not yet achieved BS 1363 approval it is also an award winning design, and the company provides evidence of its progress towards approval, I have provided links to the award and the company website. I have also made it clear that the Min-Kyu Choi design is not compliant and is not approved. In case anyone should wonder I have absolutely no connection to anyone involved in any business which is engaged in, or is attempting to engage in, BS 1363 products. Deucharman (talk) 09:58, 21 August 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)

Wow, thanks for assuming good faith!

You swiftly undid my cleanup with 'No valid reason provided for edit'; if you're not sure why others feel it's in appropriate to have a huge section about a single sub-issue which is effectively a podium for a small activist group, feel free to discuss it here... bobrayner (talk) 09:26, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Also: Please don't accuse people of vandalism just because they remove flawed content. That is unlikely to make people well-disposed to your changes. bobrayner (talk) 09:28, 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)

Blanket accusations of vandalism and stupidity are quite harmful. Please stop that.

I removed a large unbalanced rant about an issue which is not specific to BS1363 and which is not the most distinctive feature of BS1363, and which is totally dependent on content from one fringe group of activists (I'm giving fatallyflawed the benefit of the doubt and assuming that they're actually a group, and not just one internet ranter).

That it's technically possible for somebody to bodge a non-BS1363 socket cover until it's no longer an effective socket cover, when such socket covers aren't even part of the BS1363 standard, is not something which should take up half the BS1363 article - especially when we consider that the risk of misuse considerably less trivial with certain other standards which lack the protections of BS1363. If you want to put it in an article about socket covers, I could live with that - although the text would still need some cleanup. bobrayner (talk) 10:33, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

But you have removed the entire section on shuttering! All of it, the lot! If you knew anything of the subject you would not possibly claim that shuttering was the not the most distinctive feature of BS 1363. See the latter part of the 'Origins' section: 'A number of technical details were required of the new standard, first of which was that “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.”[3] This requirement for a new system of plugs and sockets led to the publishing in 1947 of 'British Standard 1363 : 1947 Fused-Plugs and Shuttered Socket-Outlets'.[4] Your reference to bodging a socket cover is very misleading, the section includes information on why available socket covers reduce safety, that their manufacturers bodged them is true, but all the innocent user has to do is insert one in a socket.

But again, that is just a part of what the section is about. It deals with the general issue of shuttering, and the loophole in BS 1363 which makes most extension sockets dangerous. You really cannot just wipe all of this out because you appear to not like someone drawing attention to the very real issues. Do you represent a socket company supplier by any chance?--Deucharman (talk) 10:48, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

I have reverted your reinsertion of the disputed material yet again, your actions are called edit warring and are strictly against the rules of Wikipedia. Please discuss this issue here and do not revert the article again.

Neither bobrayner nor I are against having any mention of shuttering on the article. A short, neutral mention is all that is required however. The removed section is disproportionately long and far from being netrual. Thryduulf (talk) 11:04, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Personally, I think the shuttering section is fine as it was. I support reinserting it. Orpheus (talk) 11:54, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

OK, on further reflection I see the point that Thryduulf and bobrayner are making, but I think taking the entire section out is too much. I've made some edits to get it to focus less on FatallyFlawed, but I think future work should concentrate on fixing the section rather than removing it. Orpheus (talk) 12:00, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Specifically please, what is it you do not like?--Deucharman (talk) 11:20, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

I'd be happy with a reduced section which had more neutral coverage on shuttering rather than concentrating on fatallyflawed's crusade against covers. However, I've already made some reverts so today is not a day for boldness... bobrayner (talk) 12:23, 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)

Please stop your personal attacks now. At best, you will merely discredit yourself further; at worst, you may be prevented from editing further (whilst also being discredited).

• It's a pretty big coincidence that two IP addresses appeared to make exactly the same kind of edit that you want to make, and saved you the trouble of editwarring on your account, but they left no hint as to their identity and, like you, didn't seem very keen on edit summaries.

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)

• This is an article about BS1363. If you want to contribute to an article about socket covers, feel free, but an extended diatribe against socket covers should not dominate this article.

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)

• You're really not helping by repeatedly accusing others of vandalism when they're actually making good-faith changes to improve an article.

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)

• If I took you seriously, I would be quite offended by the claim that I'm part of some cabal to electrocute children. That is malicious fiction.

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)

• Similarly, I'm not a ringleader of any 'cyberbullying operation' to make FatallyFlawed look silly (you have built your reputation singlehanded). That, too, is malicious fiction.

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)

Please try to get along better with other people. If you want to say whatever you like and frame it however you like, you already have the fatallyflawed website for that purpose. Wikipedia, however, involves collaborative editing and neutrality. bobrayner (talk) 21:03, 26 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:

An international patent application [International Patent Application PCT/EP2010/051387] for the Folding Plug describes various alternative configurations, but inspection of the application shows that an actual plug incorporating the safety requirements of BS 1363 would differ significantly from the design which won the award.

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)

Would the trademark holders please refrain from pumping up an issue to an undue level of coverage in a general purpose encyclopedia. There's no evidence cited that counterfeit plugs are any more of a threat to the lives of UK residents than, oh, say, counterfeit drugs, counterfeit structural bolts, or counterfeit medical degrees. None of those articles waste 2 kb on straw man arguments about counterfeit goods. --Wtshymanski (talk) 01:22, 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. 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)

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)

Similarly the section on outlet covers. Outlet covers! Many parts of this article are far too detailed, including far too much minutiae and natter, for a general-interest encyclopedia. Jeh (talk) 05:31, 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)

'Denying knowledge' is a strawman argument. Knowledge is one thing, an excess of trivia and natter is another. The section on counterfeiting could be reduced to approximately four sentences and a number of references and 'further reading' links and still be completely effective. As could the section on outlet covers. It is not the purpose of Wikipedia (or any encyclopedia) to contain all human knowledge, nor to replace, or eliminate the need to read, the specialty publications, specifications, and standards that are relevant to the topic of an article. That's what references and external links are for. As for my living in the United States, perhaps you should consider that sometimes an outside observer has a more neutral perspective? Jeh (talk) 08:21, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Besides, it appears to me that the latter two paragraphs in the 'counterfeiting' section, along with the accompanying photograph, are entirely original research. Jeh (talk) 08:31, 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).

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)

These two sentences from the original text:

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.

...appear to be copied directly from the PDF cited. The document also states

Please note that Crown Copyright applies, so copies may only be made inaccordance with the restrictions laid down by HMSO.

Jeh (talk) 09:28, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

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)

And this:

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.

...similarly is directly copied from the Voltimum document. These therefore must be substantially rephrased, or else simply appear as quotations in references to the referenced documents. Accordingly, given the WP:OR concerns of the rest of the section, I feel the whole thing should be deleted until a non-WP:COPYVIO rewrite is completed. Preferably one that's much shorter. Jeh (talk) 09:28, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

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)

Well-spotted. I hadn't realised there was a copyvio involved - we definitely can't have these lines in their current form, then. How about:

Concerns have been raised over the availability of counterfeit plugs and fuses in the UK (with citation (I'm hunting...)). In 2006, anti-counterfeiting raids confiscated over 430,000 counterfeit items, which did not conform to BS 1363 (citing the Voltimum document). Better? Yunshui (talk) 09:40, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Struggling to find refs for the first sentence, mostly forums and the like, nothing reliable. There's this: [1], from the BBC, which sort of fits... Yunshui (talk) 09:49, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Please see my comments above. Deucharman (talk) 12:03, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────┘ So, in an average week in the UK, and rounding to the nearest 100, how many people are killed or hospitalized as a result of counterfeit plugs? Zero, you say? Sounds like undue emphasis to me. Everything can be counterfeited, even - gasp- currency. Unless this problem is somehow notable in the real world, and not in the teakettle environment of electrical trade rags, it's not worth more than a passing reference here. It would be interesting to contrast the Canadian and UK approaches to certification of products; the number of seizures of counterfeit CSA logo plugs at dollar stores in Canada is probably only one or two per year, and I've yet to read anything claiming anyone has been injured (aside from CSA not getting its fee for using its logo). --Wtshymanski (talk) 13:23, 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)

I venture to speculate (without the slightest citable reference) that more people are killed or hospitalized each year by (mis?)use of legimate, trademark-blessed,licenced, standards-compliant products than by failure of counterfeits. There's only about, what, 30 electrocutions in the UK per year? Surely they aren't all due to fakes. --Wtshymanski (talk) 13:58, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Deucharman: Please review the talk page guidelines (WP:TALK). It is not generally done to insert comments into the middle of an existing 'post.' (For example, you should not insert any comment immediately after this paragraph.) That comes close to editing someone else's talk page text, which is forbidden except in very rare circumstances. An exception is given at WP:TALK under the heading 'Interruptions', but the post in question here hardly counts as 'long.' Aside from that exception all comments on existing comments on a talk page should go at the end of the section in which they appear, so that the timestamps go in chronological order from top to bottom, and a new talk page reader can come up to date by reading the section from top to bottom. If you absolutely insist on inserting comments within an existing 'post', at least have the courtesy to copy the attribution from the end of the post you're breaking up, to the point just above where your comment begins (as I've done above), so that attribution is maintained. (To repeat: you should, for example, not insert any comment immediately after this paragraph.)

Please also respect talk page formatting conventions in the use of indentation, by using an appropriate number of colons before the first word of each paragraph.

Now to your accusation of quoting out of context: I see what you are saying. The copyright notice I cited appears in two places, each time adjacent to the URL for the actual regulations. Nevertheless there is no other statement regarding copyright within the document, and that copyright notice is in the very same PDF as the text that appeared in the article. And there is nothing in that PDF that says that the Crown Copyright notice applies only to the 'actual regulations.' Perhaps there is a conflicting notice on a page from which the PDF can be found, but that is iffy at best. WP is extremely cautious about copyright issues.

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)

If indeed that is all that is required, then that would be sufficient; but that wasn't done, was it? WP is really very rigid about this.

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)

You really need to get clear on this: Any direct quote from non-free content that is made without adherence to WP:NFC is a copyright issue! Somebody copied that text verbatim and then posted it on WP without attribution. That amounts to a claim by that person that 'I wrote that text.' That's an ethical problem even if it isn't a legal one. Proper quotation marks (or other similar designations) and attributions should be made for any quoted text, even from material that is in the public domain. From WP:PD: 'Proper attribution to the author or source of a work, even if it is in the public domain, is still required to avoid plagiarism.' I hope that is sufficiently unambiguous.

Just by the way it is 'copyright' (as in the right to copy something), not 'copywrite'. 'Copywriters' are people who write 'copy'; the term is most often used for people who write text for print ads. Jeh (talk) 15:31, 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 ground earth pin? That would pre-empt at least one of the deathtrap scenarios for plug covers, which I'm sure are laying waste to a generation. --Wtshymanski (talk) 16:30, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

ISOD looks like it really is used, not just a WIkipedia-ism. Isn't 'shuttering' the UK-ism for what I would call 'concrete form work' ? Rephrased. --Wtshymanski (talk) 18:28, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

The BS1363 socket was deliberately designed to be incompatible with everything else to prevent the use of unfused plugs in a circuit designed arround fused plugs. The earth pin operated shutter among other things prevents the insertion of various two pin plugs (such as the europlugs and the 5A BS546 variants). Also I suspect an 'equal pressure on two pins' mechanism is more complex than earth pin operated shutters. Plugwash (talk) 21:09, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Pure speculation, but - I think the 'inserting the ground prong moves the shutters aside' design was just a lot simpler to make using the materials and techniques of the time. It's quite possible that the US 'insert both prongs at once' design just couldn't have been made then, or at least not at reasonable cost. Remember that a whole lot of today's very useful plastics didn't exist in 1944 or 1947, and I'll bet a couple of them are used in the current US safety receptacles. Jeh (talk) 21:12, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Where were the heirs to Henry Bessemer when you needed them? Somehow I doubt two-blades vs. 3-blades is a materials question. --Wtshymanski (talk) 13:58, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Then you clearly are not familiar with how sockets were constructed in the 1940s! As far as I know all of the early shutter systems were dependent on the earth pin, it is very much a question of suitable insulating materials. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deucharman (talk • contribs) 17:05, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Deucharman, your continued statements along the lines of 'if you disagree, you clearly are ignorant and therefore incompetent to edit this article' are not in keeping with WP:CIVIL. Jeh (talk) 17:39, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────┘ Presumably even in 1947 the enclosure of a BS1363 socket wasn't made of whalebone, teak, or ivory; Bakelite was well established by then, among any number of useful plastics. 'I don't know either' is an acceptable response on Wikipedia, though as rare as featured articles. --Wtshymanski (talk) 18:13, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

The earth pin operated shutter is basically a piece of tough sheet insulating material, no complex moulding required. The shutters now used in the sytems requiring equal pressure insetion of line and neutral pins (both UK and NA) are small mouldings of quite complex shape, they have to perform the mechanical barrier and insulating functions while at the same time having low friction bearing surfaces to achieve the required function. I believe that the plastics of the 1940s did not have those qualities. Deucharman (talk) 18:42, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

This is what I'm thinking. The earth pin shutter is essentially just pushed aside by the pin. The equal-pressure system requires implementing a mechanical AND gate, with considerably more, more complex, and higher-precision moving parts. And those parts have to maintain that precision and keep working after... how many thousands of insertions? Yes, a lot of plastics existed in 1947 but a lot of much better ones exist now, along with far better molding and other fabrication techniques. And for a design motivated partly by post-war rebuilding, you don't necessarily want the most complex thing you can imagine. Just btw, I've encountered a few of the new equal-pressure receptacles during travels in the UK and they are nothing but a PITA, even with modern materials... Jeh (talk) 20:23, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

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)

Well, 32K was a limit in the days of old browsers, now it's more of a guideline. More importantly, the article now isn't so repetitive and wordy, and we actually mention the distinctive features in the lead instead of prattling on about Singapore technical standards. (Amusingly, you have to read quite a lot of the article to discover what the plug is actually rated to carry. I was loathe to say '230' or '240' or '250' or '264' volts without a citation.) We've got Counterfeit consumer goods which has no electrical goods section; a well-researched, non-hysterical section outlining the possibility that some fakes are actually unsafe, as well as being trademark infringement, would be a worthwhile addition -- to that article. Someone with access to BS1362 could make an authoritative table out of the fuse colo(u)r codes. --Wtshymanski (talk) 13:58, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

I doubt that that rating is merely 240 or 264 volts or so. In the US a great many cord assemblies intended for use with 120V sockets are actually rated for 600 volts breakdown - look at the molded-in 'fine print.' That doesn't mean 'intended for use with 600 volts,' it's 'in case something goes wrong at the pole transformer, this thing won't breakdown until at least 600 volts.' I believe the minimum such rating for US cordsets is 400 volts. There must be an equivalent breakdown rating for BS1363. Jeh (talk) 17:47, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

That turns out not to be the case. Looking at Table 11 in my 'Canadian Electrical Code' I find that aside from Christmas-tree cord type PXT, most flexible cords are rated 300 volts - type S, SO, SOO, etc. are rated 600 V; there's also weird mine power cables rated to 25000 volts but you won't find those on a block heater cord or string trimmer. YOu would routinely find type S cable used on 600 volt cord-connected devices, so this is a working voltage not an ultimate breakdown voltage. I needed to say what the nominal UK system voltage is, not what dielectric withstand voltage a socket is tested at. And can anyone look up BS 1362 and confirm the interrupting rating is 6 kA (as suggested by some Web catalog pages for 'plug top fuses')? --Wtshymanski (talk) 18:13, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

(better) Picture needed

I liked the picture with the red shutters because I could actually SEE the shutters and the little ground earth pin tab that operated them. Could we please get a high-resolution picture looking down into the shutters with a strong light? Better yet, *two* sockets, one with shtters closed and the same model with the shutters open? --Wtshymanski (talk) 13:58, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Agree, the shutters are not clearly distinguishable in the current picture; one might as well be looking into unlit holes. And ideally the 'shutters open' pic would show the contacts, even if only as glints of light off of metal. Jeh (talk) 17:51, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

But I suppose to get the latter picture one would have to use one of the dreaded receptacle covers! Jeh (talk) 18:00, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

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)

We are authorities on the history of material science since 1947, and yet we are unaware of the world-wide use of blaanced power supplies for radio studios and similar places concerned with hum; even though we are electrical engineers who instruct other, lesser, editors. --Wtshymanski (talk) 19:00, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Oh oh. Could be trouble. One of these guys [2] remembers that BBC used a Dorman-Smith plug for technical power. BBC defintely calls it 'technical power' and even puts it in vans for mobile units - but not clear that it's balanced power, and no mention so far of what plugs they use. A bulletin for FIFA coverage complains about kettles and vacuum cleaners plugged into technical power plugs, so it may vary from time to time. Could be lots of plugs used by BBC technical power, so it's coming out. --Wtshymanski (talk) 19:56, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Far too much sarcasm Mr Wtshymanski, Deucharman was clearly correct that there was no basis for that citation, your assumptions were inexcusable. However, you are right that there is currently insufficient evidence on the use of Walsall Gauge at the BBC. We need to know more about that, and about what the BBC defines as technical power, I hope some ex-BBC folk will contribute. Mautby (talk) 15:33, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

That's not how WP works. It wouldn't matter if the current head of engineering for BBC showed up, because WP does not recognize subject matter experts... Unless of course they come bearing reliable sources. Now the term 'technical power' in audio and radio production context does almost always mean 'balanced power', and the term is all over a lot of BBC documents and documents that describe BBC practice, but so far I haven't found one that puts it together with both 'balanced' and any particular type of outlet. Personally I find nothing strange about the claim that the BBC uses balanced power in its studios and calls it 'technical power' as that is common worldwide. Jeh (talk) 21:40, 3 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)

You can definitely choose 3, 5 or 13 now... and even in 1970, a reputable retailer would supply you a 2, 3, 5, 7 or 10 A fuse if requested. (1 A fuses were rare at that time.) I do not think it was ever law that a 13 A fuse had to be fitted, but for convenience, it seems that some manufacturers stuck to 13 A. EmleyMoor (talk) 09:59, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Plugs with 3 or 5 amp fuses are on sale but the majority are indeed only sold with 13A fuses. Prior to mandatory prefitting of plugs on new appliances it was very common for 13A fuses to be used on devices which really ought to have had lower rated fuses. 192.65.220.74 (talk) 12:35, 1 December 2011 (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! (I am also very familiar with the North American system you describe; I have it in my US home.) Let me try to explain, most people in UK use table lamps and standard lamps which simply plug in to the regular sockets, but these can only be controlled using the switch on the socket or on the lamp. If you want central light switching and/or dimmers on the lamps (and do not mind paying for it) then you need to do something else. Clearly the NA system will not work with a ring main, and our lighting switches are designed to be small and attractive, but not be capable of switching 13A. So, we use a separate lighting circuit with a different type socket to ensure that regular appliances are not mistakenly plugged in. Of course, you can now do central light control using electronics and wireless control, but that is relatively recent. I have again reverted the change, portable is not a suitable description as the larger BS 546 series plugs are also commonly used for stage lighting, non-fixed but usually not reasonable to describe as portable. It avoids both the danger of inadvertently plugging a regular appliance into a dimmed circuit at floor level, and the inconvenience of a fused plug running close to its rating in lights which are flown at high level. Deucharman (talk) 17:39, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm missing something; why does it make a difference if a wall switch switches an overhead bulb or a socket? Do you not have spurs off rings? Could not a spur have a switch for an outlet? I don't know if it's actually prohbited but you would not expect to find a dimmer on an outlet in North American (residential) practice, only on permanently-wired lamps. (A quick look at the Canadian code shows only discussion of theatrical dimmers.) NOrth American wall switches must handle 15 amps at 120 V and I'm thinking 15 amp 240-volt switches aren't exactly exotic hardware. --Wtshymanski (talk) 17:50, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Deucharman, 'portable' is a completely suitable word there and 'non-fixed' means, to many people not familiar with the terminology, 'broken.' Your insistence on sticking to your exact wording smacks of article ownership. Please allow others' opinions to be taken into account. Jeh (talk) 17:55, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

We should avoid standards jargon and write in English wherever possible. Surely if it takes more then three stout men and a boy to move a lamp, it would be permanently wired, or wired with a much larger plug than a BS1363. That makes it a 'portable' lamp. --Wtshymanski (talk) 18:28, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

On this, and in some other areas, you are in danger of exercising a form of 'Cultural Imperialism', you really do have to allow that an article about an essentially British subject should not try to impose North American terminology!

Because most lighting in domestic premises is fixed, the term 'non-fixed' rather than 'movable' is the accepted usage in this context. Portable appliances are generally accepted to be less than 18Kg, so not a sufficiently general term to cover larger stage lighting. Deucharman (talk) 21:47, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

As far as the merits of wall switches controlling spurs, this article is about plugs and sockets and not allowable wiring practice, so it seems rather pointless to get hypothetical. Deucharman (talk) 21:45, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

You are adamantly insisting on what you admit is a peculiarly British term and you are accusing others of 'cultural imperialism'?!? A Wikipedia article, even one on a technical topic, should be written for the general audience, using the terminology most accessible to the widest audience. Sometimes the most accurate technical term does not meet that goal. Please see WP:TECHNICAL... Remember, WP is not written for electricians alone, nor for Brits alone, and certainly not for British electricians alone. That 'non-fixed' is a peculiarly British technical term for this concept is exactly why it should not be used, not at least without clarification for a wider audience. Heck, I'll bet if I asked 10 randomly-selected Brits on the street what 'non-fixed' meant in an electrical wiring context at least three of them would say 'broken, hasn't been repaired yet' or similar. Jeh (talk) 22:48, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

I've reworded that bit, avoiding the use of either 'not-fixed' or 'portable' completely... if you're plugging in a lamp I think you'll be aware that it is not wired directly into the structure! Also answering W's 'why?' question. I'm still going to take that little survey the next time I'm in the UK. Jeh (talk) 23:29, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Please do not try to twist my words. I did not say that non-fixed is a 'peculiarly British term' The problem is that you are fixated on the idea that 'fixed' means repaired, but although that is a common informal usage in North America it is NOT the definition of the adjective, it is at best an informal usage of the verb. See Merriam-Webster.Deucharman (talk) 07:19, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Ahem.

'What is important is how it is in the UK!' - Deucharman

Um, no, WP is supposed to be written for the widest audience possible. Just because BS 1363 is a British Standard doesn't mean we can ignore the rest of the English-speaking world.

'not-fixed... is the accepted usage in this context.' - Deucharman

'This context' meaning British electricians. No argument there, but WP articles on technical subjects are not written for people already familiar with the subject!

'Portable appliances are generally accepted to be less than 18Kg, ' - Deucharman

'Generally accepted' by whom? If you're assuming the general reader would be aware of this (wherever it came from), you're quite mistaken.

'an article about an essentially British subject ' - Deucharman

You say 'essentially', I say 'peculiarly'... You object when I point out that you are promoting, nay, insisting on, a 'peculiarly British' usage... after you've insisted repeatedly that this is all about the UK. Don't pick on that word as if it completely negates what I'm saying.

A subject that is 'essentially British' means it is all the more desirable to eliminate terminology that might be confusing to a wider-than-British audience. Believe it or not, people outside the UK will have occasion to read this.

Re. fixation: It's not that I think the average reader would read 'not-fixed' as 'broken' here. After all, 'broken' would make no sense in this context, and I think the average reader is probably able to intuit the correct meaning. But that should not be necessary! A word whose intended meaning might plausibly be unfamiliar to the reader, even if technically correct, is not necessarily the best word to include in an article aimed at a general audience... not if it requires readers to stop and think about what it means. That process impedes the smooth flow of information to the brain.

You said yourself that 'fixed' meaning 'repaired' is a common usage in some parts of the English-speaking world (dare I say among a majority of English-language readers?). So I do not understand why you do not see that that is reason to avoid its use, at least without clarification.

The argument that 'this is an essentially British subject' holds no water. The whole point of an encyclopedia is to provide an introduction to topics for readers not already familiar with them. That includes non-Brits.

Just to put even finer points on this, 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. Even those in the UK. And that while American readers might stumble momentarily over 'non-fixed,' British readers wouldn't have anywhere near that much of a problem with 'portable.'

I will again suggest that you read WP:TECHNICAL. Also WP:OWN.

Whether you agree with the above or not, I believe the current wording both sidesteps this issue and also better describes the use and purpose of the non-BS1363 connectors. Jeh (talk) 08:22, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────┘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)

'Next to meaningless'?? Here's the text from the previous version you quoted. I have used strikeout for the points not covered by the current text and used bold where new points have been added. I have not decorated text where changes have occurred but the meaning is still there under different wording.

Most non-fixed domestic equipment isappliances are 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.

Other plug types used in the same areathe UK and some other countries 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). BS 546 is also used in applications where a non-fused plug is wanted.

Bs 1363 Socket

It just isn't that different. But let's take the differences one by one:

• I would actually argue that this first change need not be highlighted at all, but since 'non-fixed' is such an issue here... 'non-fixed domestic equipment' is overly formal and wordy and furthermore overly restrictive, in that a heck of a lot of non-domestic equipment (like computers in offices) uses BS 1363 plugs also. I could see changing to 'mains-powered electrical devices'. But as for insisting on 'non-fixed', why would a 'fixed' device have a plug at all? They're completely out of scope here as they would be hardwired; therefore there is no need to say 'non-fixed' to exclude them. In any case the change to the much more accessible word 'appliances' does not make this sentence meaningless. It still says 'most electric stuff uses a BS 1363 plug', you're just quibbling over a more suitable word for 'stuff.'
• The example of hardwired electric cookers is a poor example as no plug and receptacle are used there at all. Removing this example does not make the description of the exception for 'high current devices' meaningless.
• Not having the term 'non-fixed' before 'lighting' does not result in meaninglessness. Again, if it's 'fixed', it wouldn't have any sort of plug and therefore is out of scope here. But... if you insist, we could re-insert 'non-fixed' before the word 'lighting' but I will then insist on adding '(i.e. not permanently installed)' after it.
  • Not a subject of the discussion here but... I'll also note that the bit regarding shavers needs to be recast to eliminate the run-on sentence and possible 'associativity' errors.
• Yes, W. changed the wording 'The same area'. Are IEC 60309 and BS 546 really used in this manner everywhere BS 1363 is, and for the same purposes? That is what the previous introductory clause is claiming. Should this article really be making such a sweeping statement about two standards that are not even its prime topic?
• Re. IEC 60309, mention of this is purely peripheral to the article topic. Once again, this article is not about 'all mains connectors used in the UK,' it's about BS 1363, and IEC 60309's uses are pretty far removed from most readers' everyday experience. The omission of IEC 60309 here does not render the material on BS 1363 meaningless. I suppose there's no real harm in putting it back, but if so its uses should be described a bit better, but most of its details really belong in a different article. 'Topic creep' is to be avoided in WP articles; a WP article is not supposed to cover everything that is remotely related to its primary topic. That's what 'See also' and 'External links' are for.
• Re. 'BS1363 plug is unsuitable', I see no meaninglessness here. All that has really changed is that 'BS 1363 plug is unsuitable' has been changed to 'non-fused plug is wanted'. But 'or where the BS 1363 plug is unsuitable for other reasons' could certainly be added at the end.

To wrap up: In characterizing these changes as making this section 'next to meaningless' you are vastly overstating your case. And the second set of lines you claimed were deleted are in fact there, with minimal changes, those mostly for brevity and simplicity. (Are you sure you were looking at the current version?)

If you'd like to refute that, perhaps you could describe exactly how you think each change highlighted above contributed to this section's claimed current state of 'near-meaninglessness'? Do you think anyone would come away from that section thinking that BS 1363 was not the most common mains connector? If that's not it, then what?

Aside: I wonder - how many people will even find this information on alternate plug standards? If you're looking for info on alternatives to BS 1363, you wouldn't necessarily start with the article on BS 1363. There are also articles on BS 546 and IEC 60309; but is there a more 'high level' article on general electrical mains distribution and wiring practice in the UK? I can't find it. Probably there should be. Jeh (talk) 02:06, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Jeh, you need to apply logic to this. “Non-fixed” is the opposite of” fixed”, the point being to distinguish succinctly that which is fixed from that which is not. The word “appliances” is clearly not the equivalent of “non-fixed domestic equipment”. You are correct that it is restrictive to include “domestic”, the better phrase would be “non-fixed appliances”. The prefix “non“ has the great advantage of defining an opposite very clearly and simply, often avoiding the use of multiple other words. For instance, we say “Non-European countries” rather than “African, American, Asian and Australasian countries”, and it is very difficult to find a simple alternative to ”non-toxic” and “non-flammable”. There is also no simple alternative to non-fixed, a large heavy item resting on the floor is non-fixed, but certainly not portable, a lamp powered from a socket, and which needs to be hung from a ceiling hook, is non-fixed and easily transportable, but you would not describe it as portable in any meaningful sense.

I propose the following to restore the sense of both of the original passages:

“In the UK most non-fixed domestic appliances are connected using 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 connectors on dedicated circuits, sometimes with dimmers); 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.” In addition, IEC 60309 is used in some industrial and outdoor applications, and BS 546 in old installations and specialised applications where either the BS 1363 plug is unsuitable (eg 13A is insufficient or an unfused plug is required) or where mateability with the standard variety is not desired.”

The final paragraph of “Adoption” thus becomes redundant, there is no need to keep the reference to the “Soviet” (sic) standard, it is not relevant in this article. Mautby (talk) 18:34, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

If it's a permanently wired device, then it doesn't have a plug - so don't list it under 'things that use a plug except...'. Non-fixed is a stunningly opaque bit of standards-ese and I don't think anyone talks that way ('Hey, Marge...move that non-fixed appliance out of the way so I can see the telly', etc.). What, pray tell, is the different between a 'non-fixed' appliance and a portable appliance? What would be a 'fixed domestic appliance'? It's still true if you say 'most appliances' because you have many more nose-hair dryers and electric hamster wheels than you have pottery kilns, in the average home; the extra qualification is redundant. If you can move it without a crane...it's portable, isn't it? Wayy too long, make it shorter and not so wordy. Here's a stock of periods to you in case you're short (........) - the above suggested rewrite needs some breakup into sentences, not long lists of bullet points. A sentence in Wikipedia must be readable out loud without taking a breath in the middle. Get rid of eg, you know someone is going to change it to ie and this is the English Wikipedia, not the abbrev. Latin Wikipedia. --Wtshymanski (talk) 19:17, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Mautby, please try responding to my points instead of throwing rocks ('nyah, you're not using logic and I am'). By failing to successfully defend your charge of 'near meaninglessness' you have failed to make a case for changing the current text at all. Jeh (talk) 21:00, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Mautby, I think you have it just right, but these guys who warn others about 'ownership' seem to have decided that this article is theirs to do what they want with, and they appear hell-bent on a dumbing down exercise. It exposes one of the fundamental problems with WP, so I for one will simply let them get on with their juvenile games and withdraw from the excercise. You may not be as familiar with Americans as I am (I live there for half of each year), but believe me, they are not usually this obnoxious, please do not judge them all by this ignorant pair. Deucharman (talk) 21:48, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Beg pardon? 'Obnoxious' means 'asking for justification of claims,' now? Mautby claimed the current text is 'near meaningless', I showed point by point why the differences between it and the version Mautby prefers are minimal and certainly not leading to any sort of meaninglessness. Mautby has not replied on point. Now you introduce the 'dumbing down' accusation. Ok, you have the diffs clearly shown above - perhaps you can describe exactly how these changes result in 'dumbing down'? (As opposed to 'aimed at a general audience'; please do keep in mind WP:TECHNICAL.) Until then, neither of you have any presented any backing for your claims, you just throw around words like 'meaningless' and 'dumbed down'... First you tried the accusation of 'cultural imperialism', and now this. Sorry but I don't think I'm the one being obnoxious. Jeh (talk) 22:39, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

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)

I don't know, but.... each outlet with its own cable back to the fuse board seems a lot more plausible when you consider the number of outlets commonly installed in the pre-war years. The current rules are for at least one outlet per room wall; back then it was more like an outlet per room, at most. And a ring circuit wouldn't necessarily save copper over a US-style branch circuit, but it definitely would over a number of 'home runned' outlets. Jeh (talk) 20:09, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

A cite would be nice, perhaps the Internet Archive has digitized some 1930's UK DIY guide - I must search. (There's at least one pre-1923 guide to wiring a house for lighting off a central battery system and lighting plant...too old, no receptacles in the walls because there weren't any appliances to plug in yet.) Canadian code requires an outlet for every 1.8 metres of clear wall space (less doors, floor-length windows, permanent cupboards, etc..) which generally works out to at least one outlet per wall. The 1.8 metres comes from product standards for cord lengths; no need for extension cords for table lamps up against the wall, etc. --Wtshymanski (talk) 20:20, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

See Ring circuit, it has some good reference sources. Deucharman (talk) 21:13, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

I'll check it out. Looks like the pre-war standard was one plug per branch fuse according to page 8 of an article e[ IEE Wiring Matters Spring 2006 www.iee.org] - which explains the big savings with the ring final circuit. Looks like the article is correct to say this now. That Plugs and Sockets Act must keep the legislators busy; it would be interesting to contrast the strategy of putting plugs on the agenda of Commons vs. the alternative of delegating technical details to competent authorities. --Wtshymanski (talk) 02:29, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

It is not a 'Plugs and Sockets Act'! The regulations are classed as a Statutory Instrument which does not get discussed in the house. Deucharman (talk) 06:49, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────┘Oh good. I had this nightmare version of trying to explain pin dimensions and current capacity to a room full of lawyers and hereditary peers. This sounds more like the way we do it in Canada, where the legislate says 'You shall follow the rules' but the actual technical rules are written by less expensive bodies. --Wtshymanski (talk) 17:32, 4 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)

Ouch. What's 1200 pounds in dollars? More that most would be willing to spend on researching a Wikipedia article, I expect. --Wtshymanski (talk) 14:13, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

XE.com says GBP 1200 is approximately USD 1930. Thryduulf (talk) 16:00, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

In other words, Mautby appears to be claiming that unless you spend $1930 (or £1200, whichever), you will be unable to make an 'intelligent contribution', or indeed, 'appreciate the context'. Better get your wallets out, Wikipedia... Yunshui (talk) 20:40, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Using a library works equally well. Mautby (talk) 21:43, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Touché. Yunshui (talk) 21:56, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

'Flex'

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)

'Flexible cord' is the appropriate and correct term which should be meaningfull to all, 'cord' used alone is an American region-specific term and therfore unsuitable except in a specifically American context, just as 'flex' alone is meaningful to Brits but not Americans. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.235.31.243 (talk) 08:48, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. However you introduced a few spelling errors - corrected. Also I think the revert of the 'other safety features' sections makes it too wordy - despite the list format, it once again reads like 'natter.' In any case, WP:EMBED states that prose is preferred over embedded lists in prose articles. I also wonder about the use of the word 'cable'. Jeh (talk) 09:38, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

I'd recognize both terms, but then I'm addicted to British cop shows in which one bobby says to another things like 'Bring your torch over here...I think this tart in the boot has a flex round her neck.' --Wtshymanski (talk) 16:27, 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 ?

Maybe we should be saying impedance then, but at a fixed frequency it doesn't really matter, and all loads have an inductive component so it also depends on how pedantic people want to be. Heater coil impedance has as much to do with ΔT between coil and air as anything else.

I'm still of the opinion that people need to go and re-evaluate there understanding of ohms law on this whole issue but frankly I can't be bothered to push the point anymore.--Pypex 00:50, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay, somebody throw an impedance bridge on a Calrod heater and see if it has inductance. It probably does, but I can't believe that the inductive reactance matters very much. And for other heater designs (for example, nichrome strip heaters), I think you'd be hard pressed to find any measurable inductance at all!

At 50 (and even 60!) Hz, I think you're safe analyzing resistance heaters as purely resistive loads ([[Fan (implement) fan motors aside, of course).

Atlant 14:31, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Plugs and sockets for electrical appliances not hardwired to mains electricity originated in Britain in the 1880s and were initially two-pin designs. These were usually sold as a mating pair, but gradually de facto and then official standards arose to enable the interchange of compatible devices. British standards have proliferated throughout large parts of the former British Empire.

BS 546, Two-pole and earthing-pin plugs, socket-outlets and socket-outlet adaptors for AC (50-60 Hz) circuits up to 250 V is a British Standard for three pin AC power plugs and sockets. Originally published in April 1934, it was updated by a 1950 edition which is still current,^[1] with eight amendments up to 1999. BS 546 is also the precursor of current Indian and South African plug standards. The 5 A version has been designated as Type D and the 15 A as Type M in the IEC 60083 plugs and sockets standard. BS 546 plugs and sockets are still permitted in the UK, provided the socket has shutters.

BS 1363, 13 A plugs socket-outlets adaptors and connection units is a British Standard which specifies the most common type of single-phase AC power plugs and sockets that are used in the United Kingdom. Distinctive characteristics of the system are shutters on the neutral and line (see Concepts and Terminology below) socket holes, and a fuse in the plug. It has been adopted in many former British colonies and protectorates. BS 1363 was introduced in 1947 as one of the new standards for electrical wiring in the United Kingdom used for post-war reconstruction. The plug and socket replaced the BS 546 plug and socket, which are still found in old installations or in special applications. BS 1363 plugs have been designated as Type G in the IEC 60083 plugs and sockets standard.

• 5British two-pin plugs and sockets
• 6British three-pin (round) plugs and sockets
  • 6.1BS 546
• 7BS 1363 three-pin (rectangular) plugs and sockets
  • 7.1History
  • 7.2BS 1363-1 Rewirable and non-rewirable 13 A fused plugs
  • 7.3BS 1363-2 13 A switched and unswitched socket-outlets
  • 7.4BS 1363-3 Adaptors
  • 7.7BS 1363 variations
• 10Obsolete non-BS types
• 11International usage of BS types
  • 11.1Standards derived from BS 546
  • 11.4Standards derived from BS 1363

Concepts and terminology[edit]

The International Electrotechnical Commission publishes IEC 60050, the International Electrotechnical Vocabulary, which is also available as IEV Online.

Generally the plug is the movable connector attached to an electrically operated device's mains cable, and the socket is fixed on equipment or a building structure and connected to an energised electrical circuit. The plug has protruding pins (referred to as male) that fit into matching apertures (called female) in the sockets. A plug is defined in IEC 60050 as an accessory having pins designed to engage with the contacts of a socket-outlet, also incorporating means for the electrical connection and mechanical retention of flexible cables or cords, a plug does not contain components which modify the electrical output from the electrical input (except where a switch or fuse is provided as a means of disconnecting the output from input). There is an erroneous tendency to refer to power conversion devices with incorporated plug pins as plugs, but IEC 60050 refers to these as 'direct plug-in equipment' defined as equipment in which the mains plug forms an integral part of the equipment enclosure so that the equipment is supported by the mains socket-outlet. In this article, the term 'plug' is used in the sense defined by IEC 60050. Sockets are designed to prevent exposure of bare energised contacts.

To reduce the risk of users accidentally touching energized conductors and thereby experiencing electric shock, plug and socket systems often incorporate safety features in addition to the recessed contacts of the energized socket. These include plugs with insulated sleeves, sockets with blocking shutters, and sockets designed to accept only compatible plugs inserted in the correct orientation.

The term plug is in general and technical use in all forms of English, common alternatives being power plug,^[2]electric plug,^[3] and plug top.^[4] The normal technical term for an AC power socket is socket-outlet,^[5] but in non-technical common use a number of other terms are used. The general term is socket, but there are numerous common alternatives, including power point,^[6]plug socket,^[7]wall socket,^[8] and wall plug.^[9]Modern British sockets for domestic use are normally manufactured as single or double units with an integral face plate and are designed to fit standard mounting boxes.

Electrical sockets for single phase domestic, commercial and light industrial purposes generally provide three electrical connections to the supply conductors. These are termed neutral, line and earth. Both neutral and line carry current and are defined as live parts.^[10] Neutral is usually at or very near to earth potential, being earthed either at the substation or at the service entrance (neutral-to-earth bonding is not permitted in the distribution board/consumer unit).^{[citation needed]} Line (commonly, but technically incorrectly, called live) carries the full supply voltage relative to the neutral. The protective earth^[11] connection allows the exposed metal parts of the appliance to be connected to earth, providing protection to the user should those exposed parts inadvertently come into contact with any live parts within the appliance. Historically, two-pin sockets without earth were used in Britain, but their use is now restricted to sockets specifically designated for shavers and toothbrushes.

An adaptor (in the context of plugs and sockets) is defined in IEC 60050 as a portable accessory constructed as an integral unit incorporating both a plug portion and one or more socket-outlet portions. (There is an alternative spelling, adapter, but adaptor is the form usually used in standards and official documents.)

Common characteristics[edit]

There are certain characteristics common to British mains plugs and sockets intended for domestic use. The brass pins appear relatively solid and large compared to others. British Standards for plugs (with the exception of BS 4573) have always specified side entry flex (entry in other types is usually parallel to the axes of the pins). Since 1934, the contacts of a socket have been specified in terms of the pins of the plug, rather than by specifying the contact dimensions.^[12] The pins of both round pin and rectangular pin plugs are arranged in a triangular fashion, the earth pin being the larger and longer pin at the apex. Earthed sockets are designed to be incompatible with two-pin plugs. Both BS 546^[13] and BS 1363^[14] sockets, when viewed from the front with the earth uppermost, have the line aperture at the lower right.

British plugs and sockets regulatory system[edit]

A Statutory Instrument, the Plugs and Sockets etc. (Safety) Regulations 1987^[15] was introduced to specifically regulate plugs and sockets in the United Kingdom. This was revised by the Plugs and Sockets etc. (Safety) Regulations 1994.^[16] The guidance notes to the 1994 regulations^[17] state:

The Plugs and Sockets, etc. (Safety) Regulations 1994 (the “Regulations”) 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 and also by the provision of electrical equipment without an appropriate means to connect it to the mains supply in the consumer’s home.

The regulations include a requirement that all plug types must be tested and certified by a nominated approval body (normally BSI, ASTA-Intertek or NEMKO). They also require that all mains appliances for domestic use in the UK be supplied with approved BS 1363 plugs, but there is an exception for plugs fitted to shavers and toothbrushes which are normally a UK shaver plug (BS 4573) but may also be a Europlug (BS EN 50075). The regulations also contain a provision for the approval of non-BS 1363 conforming plugs when 'the plugs are constructed using an alternative method of construction which provides an equivalent level of safety in respect of any risk of death or personal injury to plugs which conform to BS 1363 and is such that plugs of that type may reasonably be expected to be safe in use.' Certifying bodies have used this provision by developing their own standards for novel devices, thus allowing the introduction of innovative developments; an example is the plastic ISOD (insulated shutter opening device) which was originally approved against either an ASTA Standard^[18] or the BSI PAS 003 before becoming incorporated into BS 1363-1:1995.

There is no European Union regulation of domestic mains plugs and sockets; the Low Voltage Directive specifically excludes domestic plugs and sockets.^[19]EU countries each have their own regulations and national standards and CE marking is neither applicable nor permitted on plugs and sockets. Despite this CE Marking is sometimes fraudulently used, especially on universal sockets.^[20]

Early history[edit]

When electricity was first introduced into houses, it was primarily used for lighting. As electricity became a common method of operating labour-saving appliances, a safe means of connection to the electric system other than using a light socket was needed. According to British author John Mellanby^[21] the first plug and socket in England was introduced by T. T. Smith in 1883, and there were two-pin designs by 1885, one of which appears in the (British) General Electric Company Ltd. catalogue of 1889. Gustav Binswanger, a German Jewish immigrant^[22] who founded the (British) General Electric Company Ltd,^[23] obtained a patent (GB189516898) in 1895 for a plug and socket using a concentric (co-axial) contact system.

The earthed consumer plug has several claimants to its invention. A 1911 book^[24] dealing with the electrical products of A. P. Lundberg & Sons of London describes the Tripin earthed plug available in 2.5 A and 5 A models. The pin configuration of the Tripin appears virtually identical to modern BS 546 plugs. In her 1914 book Electric cooking, heating, cleaning, etc^[25] Maud Lucas Lancaster mentions an earthed iron-clad plug and socket by the English firm of A. Reyrolle & Company. The 1911 General Electric Company Ltd. (GEC) Catalogue included several earthed sockets intended for industrial use.

British two-pin plugs and sockets[edit]

The earliest domestic plug and socket is believed to be that patented by T.T. Smith in 1883.^[26] This was shortly followed by patents from W.B. Sayers and G. Hookham; these early designs had rectangular plugs with contact plates on either side. In 1885, two-pin plug designs appeared and in 1889 there were two-pin plugs and sockets in the GEC catalogue.^[27] The 1893 GEC Catalogue included 3 sizes of what was described as Double plug Sockets with capacities described not in amps, but as 1 to 5 lights, 5 to 10 lights and 10 to 20 lights. These were clearly recognisable as two-pin plugs and sockets, but with no indication as to pin size or spacing, they were sold as pairs. The same catalogue included lampholder plugs for both BC and ES lampholders (capacity unspecified), and also a type of two-pole concentric plug and socket (similar to a very large version of the concentric connectors used for laptop PC power connections) in the 1 to 5 lights and 5 to 10 lights capacities. Crompton and Company introduced the first two-pin socket with protective shutters in 1893, and the Edison Swan Company was also manufacturing two-pin plug and sockets in the 1890s.^[26]

By the time the 1911 GEC Catalogue was published two-pin plugs and sockets were being offered with specifications in amps, but still with no indication as to pin size or spacing. The Midget Gauge was rated at 3 A, the Standard Gauge rated at 5 A, and the Union Gauge rated at 10 A. Also offered were two-way and three-way 'T pieces' or multi-way adaptors for the 3 A and 5 A plugs, two-way only for the 10 A. Versions of the concentric plug and socket were now offered rated at 5 A and 10 A. At the same time Lundberg were offering the 2.5 A Dot; 5 A Universal and 15 A Magnum, and Tucker were offering a range of5 A, 10 A and 20 A plugs and sockets.^[26]

BS 73 Wall plugs and sockets (five ampere two-pin without earthing connection) was first published in 1915, and revised in 1919 with the addition of 15 A and 30 A sizes. By the 1927 revision of BS 73 four sizes of two-pin plugs and sockets were standardized: 2 A, 5 A, 15 A and 30 A. This was later superseded by BS 372:1930 part 1 Two-pin Side-entry Wall Plugs And Sockets for Domestic Purposes. Following the introduction of BS 4573 in 1970 there were no longer any UK domestic uses for two-pin sockets except for shavers, so BS 372 was renamed 'Two-pin Side-entry Wall Plugs And Sockets For Special Circuits' and subsequently withdrawn.

Characteristics of BS 73:1927 (BS 372:1930 part 1) two-pin plugs

BS 4573 (UK shaver)[edit]

BS 4573 British Standard Specification for two-pin reversible plugs and shaver socket-outlets defines a plug for use with electric shavers, the pin dimensions are the same as those of the 5 A plug specified in the obsolete BS 372:1930 part 1 (as shown in the table above).^[28] Unlike the original, the plug has insulated sleeves on the pins. Electric toothbrushes in the UK are normally supplied with the same plug. The sockets for this plug are rated at (and limited to) 200 mA. BS 4573 has no explicit specification for the plug rating, but Sheet GB6 (BS 4573, dated 2002-06-03, written by BSI committee) of IEC 60083^[29] states that a rating of 0.2 A applies to all BS 4573 accessories.

The BS 4573 socket is for use in rooms other than bathrooms.^[30] For safety reasons it is now normally found incorporated into a shaver supply unit which includes an isolation transformer and meets various mechanical and electrical characteristics specified by the BS EN 61558-2-5 safety standard to protect against shock in wet areas.^[31] Shaver supply units also typically accept a variety of 230 V two-pin plug types including BS 4573, Europlug Type C, and Australian two-pin plugs. The isolation transformer often includes a 115 V output that supplies a two-pin US Type A socket. Shaver supply units must also be current-limited; BS EN 61558-2-5 specifies a minimum rating of 20 VA and maximum of 50 VA.^[32] BS 4573 and BS EN 61558-2-5 both require sockets to be marked with the shaver symbol defined in the IEC Standard 60417-5225, the words 'shavers only' are also often used but not required.

British three-pin (round) plugs and sockets[edit]

In the early 20th century, A. P. Lundberg & Sons of London manufactured the Tripin earthed plug available in 2.5 A and 5 A models. The Tripin is described in a 1911 book^[24] dealing with the electrical products of A. P. Lundberg & Sons and its pin configuration appears virtually identical to modern BS 546 plugs.

The first British standard for domestic three-pin plugs was BS 317 Hand-Shield and Side Entry Pattern Three-Pin Wall Plugs and Sockets (Two Pin and Earth Type) published in 1928. This was superseded in 1930 by BS 372 Side-Entry Wall Plugs and Sockets for Domestic Purposes Part II which states that there are only minor alterations from BS 317. In 1934, BS 372 Part II was in turn superseded by the first edition of BS 546 Two-Pole and Earthing-Pin Plugs and Socket Outlets. BS 546:1934 clause 2 specifies interchangeability with BS 372 Part II which includes the same four plug and socket sizes. (BS 372 Part I was a standard for two-pin non-earthed plugs which were never included in BS 546 and which were incompatible due to different pin spacings.)

Also in 1934 the 10th Edition of the IEE’s “Regulations for the Electrical Equipment of Buildings” introduced the requirement for all sockets to have an earth contact.^[27]

Prior to BS 546, British Standards for domestic plugs and sockets included dimensional specifications for the socket contact tubes. In BS 546 there are no dimensions for socket contacts, instead they are required to make good contact with the specified plug pins.

Before the introduction of BS 317, GH Scholes Ltd (Wylex) introduced (in 1926) an alternative three-pin plug.^[27] in three sizes, 5 A, 10 A and 15 A with a round earth pin and rectangular live pins, a fused 13 A version of this continued to be available after the introduction of BS 1363, illustrating that BS 546 was not used exclusively at any time.

Although still permitted by the UK wiring regulations, BS 546 sockets are no longer used for general purposes. Some of the varieties remain in use in other countries and in specialist applications such as stage lighting.

When BS 546 was in common use domestically in the UK the standard did not require sockets to be shuttered, although many were. The current revision of the standard allows optional shutters similar to those of BS 1363. Current UK wiring regulations require socket outlets installed in homes to be shuttered.

BS 546[edit]

There are four ratings of plug and socket in BS 546, (2 A, 5 A, 15 A and 30 A). Each has the same general appearance but they are different physical sizes to prevent interchangeability, they use pin spacing which is also different from the two pin plugs specified in BS 372, so earthed plugs will not fit into unearthed sockets, and vice versa. Plugs fitted with BS 646 fuses have been optional since the original BS 546:1934 with maximum fuse ratings of 2 A in the 2 A plug, and 5 A in the 5 A, 15 A and 30 A plugs. In practice most BS 546 plugs are unfused with fused versions being unusual and expensive.

The 15 ampere (A) sockets were generally given a dedicated 15 A circuit. Multiple 5 A sockets might be on a 15 A circuit, or each on a dedicated 5 A circuit. Lighting circuits fused at 5 A were generally used to feed the 2 A sockets. Adaptors were available from 15 A down to 5 A and from 5 A down to 2 A so in practice it was possible for an appliance with the smallest size of flex to be protected only by a 15 A fuse. This is a similar level of protection to that seen for portable appliances in other countries, but less than the protection offered by the BS 1363 fused plug.

The larger top pin is the earth connection, the left hand pin is neutral and the right hand pin is line when looking at a socket or at the rear of a plug.^[13]

2 ampere[edit]

This plug was used to connect low power appliances (and to adaptors from the larger socket types). It is sometimes still used to connect lamps to a lighting circuit.

5 ampere[edit]

This plug corresponds to Type D in the IEC table.^[33] In the UK it was used for moderate sized appliances, either on its own 5 A circuit or on a multi socket 15 A circuit, and also on many adaptors (both multi socket 5 A adaptors and adaptors that also had 15 A pins). This 5 A plug, along with its 2 A cousin, is sometimes used in the UK for centrally switched domestic lighting circuits, in order to distinguish them from normal power circuits; this is quite common in hotel rooms. This plug was also once used in theatrical installations for the same reasons as the 15 A model below.

15 ampere[edit]

This plug corresponds to Type M in the IEC table.^[34] It is the largest in domestic use and is commonly used in the UK for indoor dimmable theatre and architectural lighting installations.^[35][36]

30 ampere[edit]

The 30 A plug is the largest of the family. This was used for high power industrial equipment up to 7.2 kW, such as industrial kitchen appliances, or dimmer racks for stage lighting. Plugs and sockets were usually of an industrial waterproof design with a screw locking ring on the plug to hold it in the socket against waterproof seals, and sockets often had a screw cap chained to them to be used when no plug was inserted to keep them waterproof. Use of the BS 546 30 A plugs and sockets diminished through the 1970s as they were replaced with BS 4343 (which later became IEC 60309) industrial combo plugs and sockets.

Characteristics of BS 546 three-pin plugs[edit]

BS 546:1950 (current version confirmed October 2012) specifies pin dimensions only in decimal fractions of an inch, as shown below. The metric values are conversions provided here for convenience. Note, the original lengths of the line and neutral pins on the 15 and 5 amp versions were slightly longer at 0.812 inches (20.6 mm) and 0.625 inches (15.9 mm) respectively.

BS 1363 three-pin (rectangular) plugs and sockets[edit]

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. It has been adopted in many former British overseas territories. BS 1363 was introduced in 1947 as one of the new standards for electrical wiring in the United Kingdom used for post-war reconstruction. This plug corresponds to Type G in the IEC table.^[37] BS 1363 replaced the BS 546 plug and socket (which are still found in old installations or in special applications such as remotely switched lighting). Other exceptions to the use of BS 1363 plugs and sockets include equipment requiring more than 13 A, low-power portable equipment (such as shavers and toothbrushes) and mains-operated clocks.

History[edit]

In 1941 Lord Reith, then the minister of Works and Planning, established committees to investigate problems likely to affect the post-war rebuilding of Britain. One of these, the Electrical Installations Committee, was charged with the study of all aspects of electrical installations in buildings. Amongst its members was Dame Caroline Haslett, President of the Women's Engineering Society and an expert on safety in the home.^[38] Convened in 1942, the committee reported in 1944, producing one of a set of Post War Building Studies that guided reconstruction.^[39]

The plug and socket-outlet system defined in BS 1363 is a result of one of the report's recommendations. Britain had previously used a combination of 2 A, 5 A and 15 A round pin sockets. In an appendix to the main report (July 1944), the committee proposed that a completely new socket-outlet and fused plug should be adopted as the 'all-purpose' domestic standard. The main report listed 8 points to consider in deciding the design of the new standard. The first of these was stated as, “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.” Others included flush fitting, no need for a switch, requirements for terminals, bottom entry for the cable, and contact design.^[40] The appendix added 5 further 'points of technical detail' including requirements that plugs could not be inserted incorrectly, should be easy to withdraw, and should include a fuse.^[41]

This requirement for a new system of plugs and sockets led to the publishing in 1947 of 'British Standard 1363:1947 Fused-Plugs and Shuttered Socket-Outlets'.^[42]

One of the other recommendations in the report was the introduction of the ring circuit system (often informally called a 'ring main'). In this arrangement a cable connected to a fuse, or circuit breaker, in the distribution board was wired in sequence to a number of sockets before being terminated back at the distribution board, thus forming a ring final circuit. In the ring circuit, each socket-outlet was supplied with current by conductors on both sides of the 'loop.' This contrasts with the radial system (which is also used in the UK, often in the same installation) wherein a single cable runs out radially, like a spoke, from the distribution board to serve a number of sockets. Since the fuse or circuit breaker for a ring circuit has to be rated for the maximum current the ring could carry (30 A or 32 A for a breaker), additional protection is required at each socket-plug connection. Theoretically, such protection could have been designated either within the socket or within the plug. However, to ensure that this protection has a rating matched to the appliance flexible cord fitted to the plug, a fuse rated between 1 A and 13 A is incorporated into each plug. Wired connections may also be connected to the ring, and these are also required to include a suitably rated fuse. The ring circuit in the UK requires the use of BS 1363 plugs and sockets, but the BS 1363 system is not limited to use with ring circuits.^[43]

Chronology[edit]

BS 1363 is periodically revised, and with supplements and amendments issued between major revisions. BS 1363:1984 and earlier versions dealt only with 13 A plugs and sockets. From 1989 onwards the standard was rearranged into five parts as follows:

• Part 1: Rewirable and non-rewirable 13 A fused plugs
• Part 2: 13 A Switched and unswitched socket-outlets
• Part 3: Adaptors
• Part 4: 13 A fused connection units: switched and unswitched
• Part 5: 13 A fused conversion plugs

The following chronology shows revisions, supplements and significant amendments.

June 1947: BS 1363:1947 'Fused-Plugs and Shuttered Socket-Outlets' published.

May 1950: BS 1363:1947 Amendment 3, title changed to 'Specification for two-pole and earthing-pin fused-plugs and shuttered socket-outlets for A.C. circuits up to 250 Volts (not intended for use on D.C. circuits)'.

January 1957: BS 1363:1947 Amendment 5, added clause permitting operation of shutters by simultaneous insertion of two or more pins (in addition to original method using only earth pin).

January 1957: BS 1363:1947 Supplement No. 1 added specification for surface mounted socket-outlets.

1957: Complementary standard published, BS 2814:1957 'Two-pole and earthing-pin flush-mounted 13-Amp switch socket-outlets for A.C. circuits up to 250 Volts'. A separate standard specifying a switched version of the BS 1363 socket-outlet for use with BS 1363 plugs.

December 1960: BS 1363:1947 Supplement No. 2, added specification for Resilient Plugs.

December 1961: BS 2814:1957 Amendment 2, title simplified to '13 Ampere Switch Socket-Outlets'.

1962: BS 2814:1957 Supplement No. 1 added specification for surface mounted switch outlets.

September 1967: BS 1363:1967 'Specification for 13A plugs, switched and unswitched socket-outlets and boxes' published. This standard superseded both BS 1363:1947 and BS 2814:1957. Only 3 A and 13 A fuses are specified. Resilient Plugs are included.

August 1984: BS 1363:1984 'Specification for 13 A fused plugs switched and unswitched socket-outlets' published. This standard superseded BS 1363:1967. Changes include introduction of sleeved pins on Line and Neutral, metric dimensions replacing inches, specifications added for non-rewirable plugs and portable socket-outlets. The standard was aligned, where possible, with the proposed IEC standard for domestic plugs and socket-outlets.

February 1989: BS 1363-3:1989 '13 A plugs socket-outlets and adaptors - Part 3: Specification for adaptors' published. This new standard covers adaptors for use with BS 1363 socket-outlets and includes conversion adaptors (those which accept plugs of a different type), multiway adaptors (those which accept more than one plug, which may or may not be of a different type) and shaver adaptors. All adaptors (except for those accepting not more than two BS 1363 plugs) require to be fused. All sockets, including those to other standards, must be shuttered.

1994: A Product Approval Specification, PAS 003:1994, 'Non-Rewirable 13 A Plugs with Plastic Socket Shutter Opening Pins' published. PAS 003 allowed for the design and approval of plugs without earthing intended for class II applications only. This was superseded by BS 1363-1:1995 but the PAS was not withdrawn until 23 July 2013.

February 1995: BS 1363-1:1995 '13 A plugs socket-outlets adaptors and connection units - Part 1: Specification for rewirable and non-rewirable 13 A fused plugs' published. This standard, together with BS 1363-2:1995, supersedes BS 1363:1984. The provisions of PAS 003 are incorporated, but the plastic pin is redesignated as an 'ISOD'

September 1995: BS 1363-2:1995 '13 A plugs socket-outlets adaptors and connection units - Part 2: Specification for 13 A switched and unswitched socket-outlets' published.

September 1995: BS 1363-3:1995 '13 A plugs socket-outlets adaptors and connection units - Part 3: Specification for adaptors' published. Supersedes BS 1363-3:1989

November 1995: BS 1363-4:1995 '13 A plugs socket-outlets adaptors and connection units - Part 4: Specification for 13 A fused connection units switched and unswitched' published. A new standard.

August 2008: BS 1363-5:2008 '13 A plugs socket-outlets adaptors and connection units - Part 5: Specification for 13 A fused conversion plugs' published. A new standard.

May 2012: BS 1363-1:1995 +A4:2012 (Title unchanged) published. This amended standard allows switches to be incorporated into plugs, and introduced new overload tests amongst others. BS 1363-1:1995 remained current until 31 May 2015.

May 2012: BS 1363-2:1995 +A4:2012 (Title unchanged) published. This amended standard adds a requirement that it shall not be possible to operate a shutter by the insertion of a two-pin Europlug, and introduced new temperature rise tests amongst others. BS 1363-2:1995 remained current until 31 May 2015.

May 2012: BS 1363-4:1995 +A4:2012 (Title unchanged) published. Minor changes to BS 1363-4:1995 which remained current until 31 May 2015.

November 2012: BS 1363-3:1995 +A4:2012 (Title unchanged) published. This amended standard adds a requirement that it shall not be possible to operate a shutter by the insertion of a two-pin Europlug, and added specifications for switched adaptors amongst others. BS 1363-3:1995 will remain current until 31 December 2015.

August 2016: BS 1363-1:2016 (Title unchanged) published. Added requirements for incorporated electronic components and for electric vehicle charging. BS 1363-1:1995 +A4:2012 will remain current until 31 August 2019.

August 2016: BS 1363-2:2016 (Title unchanged) published. Added requirements for incorporated electronic components and for electric vehicle charging. BS 1363-2:1995 +A4:2012 will remain current until 31 August 2019.

August 2016: BS 1363-3:2016 (Title unchanged) published. Added requirements for incorporated electronic components. BS 1363-3:1995 +A4:2012 will remain current until 31 August 2019.

August 2016: BS 1363-4:2016 (Title unchanged) published. Minor changes only. BS 1363-4:1995 +A4:2012 will remain current until 31 August 2019.

August 2016: BS 1363-5:2016 (Title unchanged) published. Minor changes only. BS 1363-5:2008 will remain current until 31 August 2019.

BS 1363-1 Rewirable and non-rewirable 13 A fused plugs[edit]

A BS 1363 plug has two horizontal, rectangular pins for line and neutral, and above these pins, a larger, vertical pin for an earth connection. Both line and neutral carry current and are defined as live parts.^[10] The earth pin also serves to operate the basic shutter mechanism used in many sockets. Correct polarity is established by the position of the earth pin relative to the other two pins, ensuring that the line pin is connected to the correct terminal in the socket-outlet. Moulded plugs for unearthed, double-insulated appliances may instead have a non-conductive plastic pin (an Insulated Shutter Opening Device or ISOD) the same size and shape as an earth pin, to open the shutters. When looking at the plug pins with the earth uppermost the lower left pin is line, and the lower right is neutral.

UK Consumer Protection legislation^[16] requires that most domestic electrical goods sold must be provided with fitted plugs to BS 1363-1. These are usually, but not necessarily, non-rewirable. Rewirable plugs for hand-wiring with a screwdriver are commonly available and must be provided with instructions.^[44]

Nominal dimensions[edit]

BS 1363-1 specifies the dimensions of plug pins and their disposition with respect to each other in precise, absolute terms.^[45] The line and neutral pins have a rectangular cross section 6.4 mm by 4.0 mm, 17.7 mm long and with centres 22.2 mm apart. The protective-earth pin is a rectangular cross section 8.0 mm by 4.0 mm, 22.3 mm long and with a centre line 22.2 mm from the line/neutral pin centre line. The dimensions were originally specified in decimal inches with asymmetric tolerances and redefined as minimum and maximum metric dimensions in BS 1363:1984.

Dimensions are chosen to provide safe clearance to live parts. The distance from any part of the line and neutral pins to the periphery of the plug base must be not less than 9.5 mm. This ensures that nothing can be inserted alongside a pin when the plug is in use, and helps keep fingers away from the pins. The longer earth pin ensures that the earth path is connected before the live pins, and remains connected after the live pins are removed. The earth pin is too large to be inserted into the line or neutral sockets by mistake.

Pin insulation[edit]

Initially, BS 1363 did not require the line and neutral pins to have insulating sleeves. Plugs made to the recent revisions of the standard have insulated sleeves to prevent finger contact with pins, and also to stop metal objects (for example, fallen window blind slats) from becoming live if lodged between the wall and a partly pulled out plug. The length of the sleeves prevents any live contacts from being exposed while the plug is being inserted or removed. An early method of sleeving the pins involving spring-loaded sleeves is described in the 1967 British Patent GB1067870.^[46] The method actually adopted is described in the 1972 British Patent GB1292991.^[47] Plugs with such pins were available in the 1970s, a Southern Electricity/RoSPA safety pamphlet from 1978 encourages their use.^[48] Sleeved pins became required by the standard in 1984.

Fuses[edit]

There are two common misconceptions about the purpose of the fuse in a BS 1363 plug, one is that it protects the appliance connected to the plug, and the other is that it protects against overloading. In fact the fuse is there to protect the flexible cord between the plug and the appliance under fault conditions^[49][50] (typical British ring circuits can deliver more current than appliance flexible power cords can handle). BS 1363 plugs are required to carry a cartridge fuse,^[51] which must conform to BS 1362. Post-War Building Studies No. 11, Electrical Installations included the recommendation that Provision should be made in the plug for the accommodation of a cartridge type of fuse for 13 amps., and alternatively, for 3 amps. Fuses of these ratings should be interchangeable and be readily identified.^[52] The original BS 1363:1947 specified fuse ratings of 3 A, 7 A and 13 A.^[53] The current version of the fuse standard, BS 1362:1973, allows any fuse rating up to 13 A, with 3 A (coloured red) and 13 A (coloured brown) as the preferred (but not mandated) values when used in a plug. All other ratings are to be coloured black.

Plugs, when supplied separately from any appliance, must be supplied with both a 3 A and 13 A fuse. The fuses are mechanically interchangeable; it is up to the end user or appliance manufacturer to install the appropriate rating.

BS 1362 specifies sand-filled ceramic-bodied cylindrical fuses, 1' (25.4 mm) in length, with two metallic end caps of 1/4' (6.3 mm) diameter and roughly 1/5' long. The standard specifies breaking time versus current characteristics only for 3 A or 13 A fuses.

• For 3 A fuses: 0.02–80 s at 9 A, < 0.1 s at 20 A and < 0.03 s at 30 A.
• For 13 A fuses: 1–400 s at 30 A, 0.1–20 s at 50 A and 0.01–0.2 s at 100 A.

Other safety features[edit]

1. Cable grip
2. Neutral terminal
3. Earth terminal
4. Line terminal
5. Fuse

The plug sides are shaped to improve grip and make it easier to remove the plug from a socket-outlet.^[54] The plug is polarised, so that the fuse is in the line side of the supply.^[55] The flexible cord always enters the plug from the bottom, discouraging removal by tugging on the cable, which can damage the cable.^[56] Rewireable plugs must be designed so that they can be wired in a manner which prevents strain to the earth connection before the line and neutral connection in the event of failure of the cord anchorage.^[57]

Ratings[edit]

BS 1363 plugs and sockets are rated for use at a maximum of 250 V ac and 13 A, with the exception of non-rewirable plugs which have a current rating according to the type of cable connected to them and the fuse fitted. The rating must be marked on the plug, and in the case of non-rewirable plugs the marking must be the value of the fuse fitted by the plug manufacturer in accordance with table 2 of the standard.^[58] Typical ratings for non-rewirable plugs are 3 A, 5 A, 10 A and 13 A.^[59]

Counterfeits and non-standard plugs[edit]

Plugs which do not meet BS 1363 often find their way into the UK. Some of these are legal in the country they are manufactured in, but do not meet BS 1363 - these can be brought into the UK by unsuspecting travellers, or people purchasing electrical goods online. They can also be purchased through many UK electrical component distributors. There are also counterfeit plugs which appear to meet the standards (and are marked as such) but do not in fact comply. Legislation^[17] was introduced, with the last revision in 1994, to require plugs sold to meet the technical standard. Counterfeit products are regularly seized when found, to enforce the safety standards and to protect the approval marks and trademarks of imitated manufacturers.^[60] The pressure group PlugSafe^[61] reported in March 2014 that since August 2011 'thousands' of listings of products including illegal plugs had been removed from the UK websites ebay.co.uk and amazon.co.uk. The UK Electrical Safety Council expressed shock at the magnitude of the problem and published a video^[62] showing a plug exploding due to a counterfeit BS 1362 fuse. The Institution of Engineering and Technology also published information on the extent of the problem with on-line retailers, many advertising replacement cord sets, mobile device chargers, and travel adaptors fraudulently marked BS 1363, and mentioning the same sites.^[63]

BS 1363-2 13 A switched and unswitched socket-outlets[edit]

BS 1363 sockets are commonly supplied with integral switches as a convenience, but switches are optional and did not form part of BS 1363 until 1967.

Sockets are required to mate correctly with BS 1363 plugs (as opposed to the dimensions of the socket contacts being specified). This is checked by means of the use of various gauges which are specified in the standard; these gauges ensure that the socket contacts are correctly positioned and make effective and secure contact with the plug pins.^[64] There is no provision for establishing the interchangeability with any other device having plug pins incorporated, but which is not covered by BS 1363 (for example a charger or socket cover) unless that device conforms precisely to the plug pin dimensions specified. The insertion of non-compliant plugs may damage sockets.^[65] The important socket dimensions which the standard does specify are: A minimum insertion of 9.6 mm from the face of the socket-outlet to the first point of contact with a live part,^[66] a minimum distance of 9.5 mm from the line and neutral apertures to the periphery of the socket face,^[67] and not to exceed dimensions for the apertures of 7.2 mm x 4.8 mm (line and neutral) and 8.8 mm x 4.8 mm (earth).^[68]

When looking at the front of the socket with the earth aperture uppermost (as normally mounted) the lower left aperture is for the neutral contact, and the lower right is for the line contact.

Shutters[edit]

BS 1363 sockets must have shutters on the line and neutral contacts to prevent the insertion of a foreign object into the socket.^[69] Many sockets use the original method of shutters opened by the earth pin (or plastic ISOD), longer than the other pins and hence opening the shutters before the other pins engage, alone. Alternatively, shutters may be opened by simultaneous insertion of line and neutral pins. Some later designs require all three pins to be inserted simultaneously. The use of automatic shutters for protection dates back to at least 1927.^[70] Other countries, for example the USA,^[71] are gradually requiring their sockets to be protected by shutters also.

There is a specific requirement in the standard to ensure that Europlugs and other two-pin plugs may not be used with BS 1363 sockets It shall not be possible to operate a shutter by inserting a 2-pin plug into a 3-pin socket-outlet.^[69] However, many extension sockets will allow a plug to be inserted upside down, i.e. only the earth pin, defeating the shutter mechanism. This method is sometimes used to allow a Europlug (with two small round pins and no earth pin) to be forced into the open line and neutral ports. The UK Electrical Safety Council has drawn attention to the fire risk associated with forcing Europlugs into BS 1363 sockets.^[72]

Socket covers[edit]

In countries using other socket-outlet types, socket covers are sold to prevent children inserting objects into otherwise unprotected sockets. Such covers are also sold in the UK, but the shutters of the BS 1363 socket-outlet make these unnecessary.^[73] A 2012 article in the Institution of Engineering and Technology journal Wiring Matters concludes that 'Socket protectors are not regulated for safety, therefore, using a non-standard system to protect a long established safe system is not sensible.'^{[74][dead link]}

In 2016 the use of socket covers was banned in premises controlled by the National Health Service (NHS) in the United Kingdom.^[75] BEAMA (British Electrotechnical and Allied Manufacturers Association) published the following statement in June 2017: 'BEAMA strongly advises against the use of socket-outlet ‘protective’ covers.'^[76]

BS 1363-3 Adaptors[edit]

Plug adaptors permit two or more plugs to share one socket-outlet, or allow the use of a plug of different type. There are several common types, including double- and triple-socket blocks, shaver adaptors, and multi-socket strips. Adaptors which allow the use of non-BS 1363 plugs, or more than two BS 1363 plugs, must be fused.^[77] Appliances are designed not to draw more power than their plug is rated for; the use of such adaptors, and also multi-socketed extension leads, makes it possible for several appliances to be connected through a single outlet, with the potential to cause dangerous overloads.^[78]

Shaver adaptors[edit]

The purpose of these adaptors is to accept the 2 pin plugs of shavers, they are required to be marked as such.^[79] Shaver adaptors must have a 1 A BS 646 fuse. They must accept UK shaver plugs complying with BS 4573 and also Europlugs and American two-pin plugs.^[80]

BS 1363-4 13 A fused connection units switched and unswitched[edit]

Switched and unswitched fused connection units, without sockets, use BS 1362 fuses for connection of permanently wired appliances to a socket-outlet circuit. They are also used in other situations where a fuse or switch (or both) is required, such as when feeding lighting off a socket-outlet circuit, to protect spurs off a ring circuit with more than one socket-outlet, and sometimes to switch feeds to otherwise concealed sockets for kitchen appliances.

BS 1363-5 13 A fused conversion plugs[edit]

A conversion plug^[81] is a special type of plug suitable for the connection of non-BS 1363 type plugs (to a recognized standard) to BS 1363 sockets. An example would be Class 2 appliances from mainland Europe which are fitted with moulded europlugs. Similar converters are available for a variety of other plug types. Unlike a temporary travel adaptor, conversion plugs, when closed, resemble normal plugs, although larger and squarer. The non-BS 1363 plug is inserted into the contacts, and the hinged body of the conversion plug is closed and fixed shut to grip the plug. There must be an accessible fuse. Conversion plugs may be non-reusable (permanently closed) or reusable, in which case it must be impossible to open the conversion plug without using a tool.

The Plugs and Sockets, etc. (Safety) Regulations 1994 permit domestic appliances fitted with non-BS 1363 plugs to be supplied in the UK with conversion plugs fitted, but not with conversion plugs supplied for fitting by the consumer.

BS 1363 variations[edit]

Folding plugs[edit]

Due to the size of the BS 1363 plug, attempts have been made to develop a compatible folding plug. As of July 2014 two folding plugs have been certified under specially developed ASTA Standards.^[18] SlimPlug^[82] which complies with ASTA AS153 and ThinPlug^[83] which complies with ASTA AS158. SlimPlug is available only as part of a complete power lead terminating in an IEC 60320 C7 unpolarized (figure-of-eight) connector.^[84] In 2009 the ThinPlug received a 'Red Dot' award^[85] for product design, the first product, also a power lead terminating in an IEC 60320 C7 unpolarized (figure-of-eight) connector^[83] became available in 2011.

• Folding plugs

• The SlimPlug folding plug

• SlimPlug with pins retracted

• The ThinPlug folding plug

• ThinPlug with ISOD folded

Variant pin configurations[edit]

Several manufacturers have made deliberately incompatible variants for use where connection with standard plugs is not acceptable. Common uses include filtered supplies for computer equipment and cleaners' supplies in public buildings and areas (to prevent visitors plugging in unauthorised equipment). Examples are one design made by MK which has a T-shaped earth pin, and the Walsall Gauge 13 A plug, which has each pin rotated 90°, the latter being in use on parts of the London Underground for 110 V AC supply.^[86] and also in some British Rail offices for filtered computer supplies.

• Variant plugs

• MK 13 A Plug with a T-shaped earth pin

• Walsall Gauge 13 A plug (bottom) compared with regular BS 1363 plug

• Walsall Gauge 13 A plug

BS 8546 travel adaptors compatible with UK plug and socket system[edit]

BS 8546 applies to travel adaptors having at least one plug or socket-outlet portion compatible with BS 1363 plugs and socket-outlets.^[87] It was first published in April 2016 to provide a standard for travel adaptors suitable for the connection of a non-BS 1363 plug, or to a non-BS 1363 socket-outlet. It provides for an overall rating of 250 V ac, minimum current rating of 5 A, and a maximum of 13 A. Adaptors with BS 1363 plug pins must incorporate a BS 1362 fuse. BS 8546 travel adaptors may also include USB charging ports.

UK electric clock connector[edit]

Fused plugs and sockets of various proprietary and non-interchangeable types are found in older public buildings in the UK, where they are used to feed AC electric wall clocks. They are smaller than conventional sockets, commonly being made to fit BESA junction boxes, and are often of very low profile. Early types were available fused in both poles, later types fused in the line only and provided an earth pin. Most are equipped with a retaining screw or clip to prevent accidental disconnection. The prevalence of battery powered quartz controlled wall clocks has meant that this connector is rarely seen in new installations for clock use. However, it has found use where a low profile fused connector is required and is still available.^[88] A relatively common example of such a use is to supply power to an illuminated mirror that has limited clearance from the wall.^[89]

Obsolete non-BS types[edit]

Wylex plug[edit]

Prior to the first British Standard for earthed plugs, George H. Scholes Ltd. of Manchester introduced plugs with a hollow round earth pin between rectangular current-carrying pins in 1926 under the Wylex brand name.^[26] The Wylex plugs were initially made in three ratings, 5 A, 10 A and 15 A and were unpolarized (the current carrying pins were on the same centre line as the earth pin). In 1933 an asymmetric polarized version was introduced, with line pin slightly offset from the centre line.^[26] In 1934 the dual plug system was introduced with the socket rated at 15 A and three sizes of plug, fused 2 A and 5 A plugs and a 15 A plug. The 15 A 'dual plug' incorporated a socket with narrower apertures than a standard Wylex 15 A socket, that accepted only the narrow rectangular pins of the lower-rated plugs.^[26] The introduction of a 13 A fused plug, rated as 3 kW.,^[90] enabled Scholes to propose their system as a possible solution for the new standard competing with the Dorman & Smith round pin solution, but it was not selected and the completely new BS 1363 design prevailed.^[91] Wylex sockets were used in council housing and public sector buildings and, for a short time in private housing. They were particularly popular in the Manchester area although they were installed throughout England, mainly in schools, university accommodation, and government laboratories. In some London schools built in the 1960s they were used as low-voltage AC sockets, typically 12 V, 5 A from a transformer serving one or more laboratories, for microscope lamps etc. Wylex plugs and sockets continued to be manufactured for several years after BS 1363 sockets became standard, and were commonly used by banks and in computer rooms during the 1960s and 1970s for uninterruptible power supplies or 'clean' filtered mains supplies.

Dorman & Smith (D&S)[edit]

Made by Dorman & Smith Ltd. (using patents applied for in 1943) the plugs and sockets were rated at 13 A and were one of the competing types for use on ring final circuits.^[91] They were never popular in private houses but were widely deployed in prefabricated houses, council housing and LCC schools. The BBC also used them. Some local authorities continued to use them in new installations until the late 1950s. Many D&S sockets were still in use until the early 1980s, although the difficulty in obtaining plugs for them after around 1970 often forced their users to replace them with BS 1363 sockets. The D&S plug suffered from a serious design fault: the line pin was a fuse which screwed into the plug body and tended to come unscrewed on its own in use. A fuse that worked loose could end up protruding from the socket, electrically live and posing a shock hazard, when the plug was removed.^[92]

International usage of BS types[edit]

Standards derived from BS 546[edit]

Indian IS 1293[edit]

Indian standard IS 1293:2005 Plugs and Socket-Outlets of Rated Voltage up to and including 250 Volts and Rated Current up to and including 16 Amperes includes versions of the 5 A and 15 A BS 546 connectors, but they are rated at 6 A and 16 A respectively. Some 6 A 3 pin sockets also have two extra holes above the line and neutral holes to allow a 5 A 2-pin plug to be connected.

Malaysian Standard MS 1577[edit]

MS 1577:2003 15 A plugs and socket-outlets for domestic and similar purposes

British Bs 1363 Plug

Russian GOST 7396[edit]

The 2 A, 5 A, and 15 A, connectors of BS 546 are duplicated by Group B1 of the GOST 7396 standard.

Singapore Standard SS 472[edit]

SS 472:1999 15 A plugs and switched socket-outlets for domestic and similar purposes

South African SANS 164[edit]

The South African standard SANS 164 Plug and socket-outlet systems for household and similar purposes for use in South Africa defines a number of derivatives of BS 546.^[93] A household plug and socket is defined in SANS 164-1, and is essentially a modernised version of the BS 546 15 A (the essential differences are that pins can be hollowed to reduce the amount of metal used, the dimensions are metricated, and it is rated 16 A). SANS 164-3 defines a 6 A plug and socket based on the BS 546 5 A. The South African Wiring Code now defines the plug and socket system defined in SANS 164-2 (IEC 60906-1) as the preferred standard, and it is expected that SANS 164-1 and SANS 164-3 devices will be phased out by around 2035.^[94]

SANS 164-4 defines three variants of the 16 A plug and socket intended for specialist (known as 'dedicated') applications. The variants use a flattened earth pin, each at a different specified rotational position. This arrangement ensures that the dedicated plugs can all plug into an ordinary ('non-dedicated') socket, but that the various dedicated plug and socket combinations are not interchangeable (nor can a non-dedicated plug be inserted into a dedicated socket).^[95]

The dedicated versions have specific colours assigned to them, depending on the rotational position of the flattened portion. These are black (-53°), red (0°), and blue (+53°). The red (0°) version is by far the most common, and is widely used on computer and telecommunication equipment (although this is not required in the standard). In this application the 'dedicated' socket refers to one that is not connected to a residual current circuit breaker, which is otherwise mandated for all normal power sockets.^[96]

International usage of Type D[edit]

The IEC World Plugs lists Type D^[97] as being used in the following locations: Bangladesh, Bhutan, Botswana, Chad, Congo (Democratic Rep. of), Dominica, French Guiana, Ghana, Guadeloupe, Guyana, Hong Kong, India, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya, Macau, Madagascar, Maldives, Martinique, Monaco, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan, Qatar, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Senegal, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Tanzania, United Arab Emirates, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

International usage of Type M[edit]

This plug is often used for air conditioners and washing machines. The IEC World Plugs lists Type M^[34] as being used in the following locations: Bhutan, Botswana, India, Israel, Lesotho, Macau, Malaysia, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, Pakistan, Singapore, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Swaziland.

Standards derived from BS 1363[edit]

Irish I.S. 401[edit]

Irish Standard 401:1997 Safety requirements for rewirable and non-rewirable 13 A fused plugs for normal and rough use having insulating sleeves on live and neutral pins^[98] is the equivalent of BS 1363 in Ireland. The use of this standard is enforced by Consumer Protection legislation^[99] which requires that most domestic electrical goods sold in Ireland be fitted with an I.S. 401 plug.

Malaysian Standard MS 589[edit]

MS 589 parts 1,2,3 and 4 correspond to BS 1363-1, BS 1363-2, BS 1363-3 and BS 1363-4

Russian GOST 7396[edit]

Group B2 of the GOST 7396 standard describes BS 1363 plugs and sockets.

Saudi Arabian Standard SASO 2203:2003[edit]

SASO 2203:2003 Plugs and socket-outlets for household and similar general use 220 V

Singapore Standard SS 145[edit]

SS 145-1:2010 Specification for 13 A plugs and socket-outlets - Part 1 : Rewirable and non-rewirable 13 A fused plugsSS 145-2:2010 Specification for 13 A plugs and socket-outlets - Part 2 : 13 A switched and unswitched socket-outlets

International usage of Type G[edit]

The IEC World Plugs lists Type G^[37] as being used in the following locations: Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belize, Bhutan, Botswana, Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Cyprus, Dominica, Falkland Islands, Gambia, Ghana, Gibraltar, Grenada, Guyana, Hong Kong, Iraq, Ireland, Isle of Man, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lebanon, Macau, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Mauritius, Myanmar, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, Tanzania, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, Vanuatu, Vietnam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

References[edit]

1. ^BS 546: 'Specification. Two-pole and earthing-pin plugs, socket-outlets and socket-outlet adaptors' (1950)
2. ^[1], Assembly Automation and Product Design, Second Edition, Geoffrey Boothroyd, CRC Press, 2005, p.315 (retrieved 20 December 2013 from Google Books)
3. ^[2], Physics for AQA, Patrick Fullick, Heinemann, 2001, p.16 (retrieved 1 March 2013 from Google Books)
4. ^[3], Trevor Linsley, Routledge, 2008, p.37 (retrieved 2 March 2013 from Google Books)
5. ^[4], IEC/TR 60083 Ed. 6.0, IEC, 2009 (retrieved 1 March 2013 from Techstreet)
6. ^Collins (2006), 'Power Point', Essential English Dictionary (2nd ed.), The Free Dictionary
7. ^[5], Building Surveys and Reports, James Douglas, John Wiley & Sons, 2010, p.254 (retrieved 1 March 2013 from Google Books)
8. ^[6], Computer Networking First-Step, Wendell Odom, Cisco Press, 2004, p.38 (retrieved 1 March 2013 from Google Books)
9. ^[7], Building Technology: Mechanical and Electrical Systems, Benjamin Stein, John Wiley & Sons, 1997, p.723 (retrieved 1 March 2013 from Google Books)
10. ^ ^ab[8]17th Edition IEE Wiring Regulations: Explained and Illustrated], Brian Scaddan, Routledge, 2011, p.18 (retrieved 6 March 2013 from Google Books)
11. ^[9]Electrical Product Safety], Dave Holland, M.B, Jimmy Tzimenakis, Newnes, 1999, p.58 (retrieved 3 March 2013 from Google Books)
12. ^Peacock, David (Winter 2013). 'The Remarkable Evolution of BS 1363'. IET Wiring Matters. Institution of Engineering and Technology. Retrieved 7 November 2013.
13. ^ ^ab'>BS 546: 'Specification. Two-pole and earthing-pin plugs, socket-outlets and socket-outlet adaptors', Figure 1' (1950)
14. ^BS 1363-1:1995+A4:2012, figure 3
15. ^'The Plugs and Sockets etc. (Safety) Regulations 1987'. Opsi.gov.uk. 1987. Retrieved 23 July 2014.
16. ^ ^ab'The Plugs and Sockets etc. (Safety) Regulations 1994'. Opsi.gov.uk. 1994. Retrieved 23 July 2014.
17. ^ ^ab'Electrical Equipment - Requirements for Plugs & Sockets etc Guidance notes on the UK Plugs & 2007'(PDF). Archived from the original(PDF) on 8 July 2012. Retrieved 23 July 2014.
18. ^ ^ab'ASTA Standards'. Retrieved 23 July 2014.
19. ^'Guidelines on the application of Directive 2006/95/EC'. p. 7. Retrieved 24 February 2015.
20. ^'Fraudulant use of CE Marking'. Retrieved 24 February 2015.
21. ^'The History of Electric Wiring' (1957), London: Macdonald.
22. ^[10], Second Chance: Two Centuries of German-speaking Jews in the United Kingdom, edited by Werner Eugen Mosse, Julius Carlebach, Mohr Siebeck, 1991, p.362 (retrieved 20 December 2013 from Google Books)
23. ^[11], A Company of Many Parts, A. Heerding and Derek. S Jordan, Cambridge University Press, 1989, p.51 (retrieved 20 December 2013 from Google Books)
24. ^ ^ab'SMALL SWITCHES, etc., and their CIRCUITS' (1911), MAYCOCK, W. Perren, London: S. Rentall & Co.
25. ^[12], Electric cooking, heating, cleaning, etc: being a manual of electricity in the service of the home, Maud Lucas Lancaster, Constable & Company, Ltd., 1914, p.312 (retrieved 13 March 2013 from Google Books)
26. ^ ^abcdef'The History of Electric Wiring' John Mellanby, Ch 10, (1957), London: Macdonald.
27. ^ ^abc'History of the 13 amp plug and the ring circuit' DWM Latimer FIEE, (2007), London: IET. http://www.theiet.org/resources/wiring-regulations/ringcir.cfm?type=zip
28. ^BS 4573 (1970), British Standard Specification for two-pin reversible plugs and shaver socket-outlets, British Standards Institution.
29. ^IEC/TR 60083, Plugs and socket-outlets for domestic and similar general use standardized in member countries of IEC – Sheet GB6, CH: International Electrotechnical Commission, 2009
30. ^BS 4573 (1970), British Standard Specification for two-pin reversible plugs and shaver socket-outlets, Section 1.1 Scope, British Standards Institution.
31. ^BS EN 61558-2-5:2010 Safety of transformers, reactors, power supply units and combinations thereof. Particular requirements and tests for transformer for shavers, power supply units for shavers and shaver supply units
32. ^BS EN 61558-2-5 includes the following definitions: (3.1.101) Shaver transformer: isolating transformer for fixed installation and with a limited output, designed to supply electric shavers, toothbrushes, and similar appliances rated 50 VA or less used in a bathroom. It supplies only one shaver, or the like, at a time and (3.1.102) Shaver supply unit: accessory embodying a shaver transformer or a power supply unit incorporating a shaver transformer, and one or more socket outlets allowing the use of only one plug at a time.
33. ^'World Plugs, Plug Type D'. CH: IEC.
34. ^ ^ab'World Plugs, Plug Type M'. CH: IEC.
35. ^'Blue Room - 15A Connector'. Retrieved 4 July 2012.
36. ^Robert S. Simpson Lighting control-technology and applications, Focal Press, 2003 ISBN0-240-51566-8, page 512
37. ^ ^ab'World Plugs, Plug Type G'. CH: IEC.
38. ^Messenger, Rosalind (1967), The Doors of Opportunity, A Biography of Dame Caroline Haslett DBE Companion IEE, London: Femina Books, pp. 76–77
39. ^'Post-War Building Studies No. 11 Electrical Installations', HMSO, London 1944
40. ^Post War Building Studies No. 11, Electrical Installations, Paragraph 84
41. ^Post War Building Studies No. 11, Electrical Installations, Appendix
42. ^Mullins, Malcolm (Spring 2006). 'The Origin of the BS 1363 Plug and Socket-Outlet System'. IEE Wiring Matters. Institute of Electrical Engineers. Retrieved 20 June 2009.
43. ^[13], Guide to the Wiring Regulations: 17th Edition IEE Wiring Regulations (BS 7671:2008), Darrell Locke, John Wiley & Sons, 2008, pp.86-88 (retrieved 18 January 2015 from Google Books)
44. ^BS 1363-1:1995+A4:2012, cl. 7.4
45. ^BS 1363-1:1995+A4:2012, fig. 4a
46. ^British Patent GB1067870 (Spring loaded pin sleeves)
47. ^British Patent GB1292991 (Fixed pin sleeves)
48. ^'Safety in the home', Southern Electricity & RoSPA 00-980-05 , October 1978
49. ^[14], A Practical Guide to the Wiring Regulations, Geoffrey Stokes, John Wiley & Sons, 2008, p.65 (retrieved 24 February 2014 from Google Books)
50. ^[15] Cl 6.8, Cook, Paul 'Commentary on IEE Wiring Regulations 16th Edition (BS 7671:2001)' IET 2002 ISBN0852962371
51. ^Mullins, Malcolm (Spring 2006). 'The Origin of the BS 1363 Plug and Socket-Outlet System'. IEE Wiring Matters. Institute of Electrical Engineers. Retrieved 20 June 2009.
52. ^'Post-War Building Studies No. 11 Electrical Installations', Appendix 'Supplementary report on a recommended new standard socket-outlet and plug', page 88, para x., HMSO, London 1944
53. ^'Journal of the Institution of Electrical Engineers, Volume: 94, Issue: 81, page 390, September, 1947
54. ^BS 1363-1:1995+A4:2012, cl. 12.13
55. ^BS 1363-1:1995+A4:2012, cl. 12.4
56. ^BS 1363-1:1995+A4:2012, cl. 19.1
57. ^BS 1363-1:1995+A4:2012, cl. 11.8
58. ^BS 1363-1:1995+A4:2012, cl. 7.1 f)
59. ^[16], Volex company website, (retrieved 7 March 2013)
60. ^Wiring Accessories & Counterfeiting
61. ^PlugSafe website
62. ^[17]
63. ^'Buyer Beware, Many plugs and chargers – often obtained online – pose a serious risk to users', Wiring Matters, Summer 2013, p14 '... the main problem is with online stores such as eBay and amazon marketplace'
64. ^BS 1363-2:1995+A4:2012, figs. 11 to 16
65. ^Peacock, David (Winter 2013). 'The Remarkable Evolution of BS 1363'. IET Wiring Matters. Institution of Engineering and Technology. Retrieved 7 November 2013.
66. ^BS 1363-2:1995+A4:2012, cl. 13.3
67. ^BS 1363-2:1995+A4:2012, cl. 13.10
68. ^BS 1363-2:1995+A4:2012, cl. 13.9
69. ^ ^abBS 1363-2:1995+A4:2012, cl. 13.7
70. ^GB Patent 294,689: 'Improvements in or in connection with Plug and Socket Connectors for Electric Circuits.' (MK Electric Ltd.)
71. ^'Archived copy'. Archived from the original on 20 December 2013. Retrieved 4 January 2014.CS1 maint: Archived copy as title (link)
72. ^[18] 'Conversion Plugs for Foreign Appliances', Switched On, Issue 9, Summer 2008, p17
73. ^UK Government safety advice
74. ^Coles, Mark (Autumn 2012). 'Socket Protectors'. IET Wiring Matters. Institution of Engineering and Technology. Retrieved 28 September 2012.
75. ^'Estates and Facilities Alert - Ref: EFA/2016/002 - 13A electrical socket inserts (socket covers or protectors)'. Department of Health (United Kingdom). 30 June 2016. Retrieved 16 July 2016.
76. ^'BEAMA Position Paper on Socket Outlet Covers'. BEAMA. 5 June 2017. Retrieved 5 September 2017.
77. ^BS 1363-3:1989, cl. 12.5
78. ^Electrical Safety First: Overloading sockets
79. ^BS 1363-3:1989, cl. 7.1
80. ^BS 1363-3:1989, cl. 18
81. ^BS 1363-5:2008
82. ^[19]
83. ^ ^abThinPlug
84. ^Alan Winstanley. 'Slimplug Compact UK Power Lead'. EPEmag.net. Archived from the original on 20 June 2014. Retrieved 23 July 2014.
85. ^[20]
86. ^Walsall Gauge in use at London Underground
87. ^'BS 8546:2016 Travel adaptors compatible with UK plug and socket system – Specification'. BSI. April 2016. Retrieved 5 September 2017.
88. ^'Clock Connectors'. Retrieved 18 February 2013.
89. ^Installation instructions for the Italian made Inda (stage arch model) illuminated mirror: States that a low profile plug and socket are required (It has to fit in a space of just 15 mm). In the UK, this clock connector seems to be the only option but only if the socket is sunk into the wall.
90. ^Oud, Oof. 'Wylex plugs and sockets'. Digital Museum of Plugs and Sockets. NL. Retrieved 17 December 2011.
91. ^ ^ab'History of the 13 amp plug and the ring circuit' DWM Latimer FIEE, (2007), London: IET. http://www.theiet.org/resources/wiring-regulations/ringcir.cfm?type=zip
92. ^'Museum of Plugs and Sockets: Dorman & Smith plugs and sockets'. plugsocketmuseum.nl. Retrieved 2 March 2018.
93. ^Campetti, Gian (2008). 'SANS 164 standards: a working group perspective'(PDF). Vector (April). Archived from the original(PDF) on 20 March 2012. Retrieved 20 June 2012.
94. ^'New plug and socket system for SA'. ZA: EE Publishers (Pty) Ltd.
95. ^South African Bureau of Standards (2006). Plug and socket-outlet systems for household and similar purposes for use in South Africa Part 0: General and safety requirements(PDF). SANS 164 (1 ed.). Standards South Africa. p. 5. ISBN0-626-17847-9. Retrieved 29 July 2012.
96. ^Brian Bilton. 'Earth leakage protection unravelled'. Retrieved 29 July 2012.
97. ^'World Plugs, Plug Type D'. CH: IEC.
98. ^I.S. 401, 'Safety requirements for rewirable and non-rewirable 13A fused plugs for normal and rough use having insulating sleeves on live and neutral pins', NSAI (National Standards Authority of Ireland), (1997), Dublin
99. ^'S.I. No. 526/1997 — National Standards Authority Of Ireland (Section 28) (Electrical Plugs, Plug Similar Devices and Sockets For Domestic Use) Regulations, 1997'. irishstatutebook.ie. Retrieved 28 May 2011.