Cooker hood - can I run it from the cooker switch?

[DNS1]

Hi chaps,

Very quick one for you.

I know I have to have an easily accessible switch for fixed kitchen equipment like the cooker hood, but can this be shared with another item of equipment?

Going to have a standard double pole cooker switch for the built in oven, but wondered if I can also run the hood from this too. Just thought maybe I could avoid having a separate switch cluttering up the area.

Cheers

 

[MDJ]

from personal choice only I'd run a 2.5mm2 and double the cable over in the terminal next to the 6mm2, the connection would be fine then IMO

 

[D Skelton]

The main problem here is going to be getting a secure termination where you have a 6mm conductor and 1.5mm conductor sharing the same terminal.

When I do this I double the 1/1.5mm over twice and make sure the 6/10mm is on the screw side of the termination. It's quite easy to get a secure termination with a bit of attention to detail

 

[HappyHippyDad]

Regulation 433.2.1 Except where Regulation 433.2.2 or 433.3 applies, a device for protection against overload shall be installed at the point where a reduction occurs in the value of the current-carrying-capacity of the conductors of the installation.
NOTE: A reduction in curent-carrying-capacity may be due to a change in cross-sectional area, method of installation, type of cable or conductor, or in environmental conditions.

433.2.2 The device protecting a conductor against overload may be installed along the run of that conductor if the part of the run between the point where a change occurs (in cross-sectional area, method of installation, type of cable or conductor, or in environmental conditions) and the position of the protective device has neither branch circuits nor outlets for connection of current-using equipment and fulfils at least one of the following conditions:
(i) It is protected against fault current in accordance with the requirements stated in Section 434
(ii) It's length does not exceed 3 m, it is installed in such a manner as to reduce the risk of fault to a minimum, and it is installed in such a manner as to reduce to a minimum the risk of fire or danger to persons (see also Reglation 434.2.1).

It is these two Regulations, that allow us to spur off of a RFC, without having to use an increased size of conductor, and why the maximum length for tails is generally restricted to 3m unless a switched fuse is used.

This is really good to know. So if the cooker switch incorporated a socket then you would still have to use the same cable size (leading to FCU) as that supplying the cooker switch (i.e 6 or 10mm)?

433.2.2 (ii) says 3meters, Why 3 meters? Why would 3m be ok and 4m not? Decrease risk of damage, less of a hazard??

 

[D Skelton]

So if the cooker switch incorporated a socket then you would still have to use the same cable size (leading to FCU) as that supplying the cooker switch (i.e 6 or 10mm)?

In short, no. The socket isn't a spur as it makes up part of the same accessory.

433.2.2 (ii) says 3meters, Why 3 meters? Why would 3m be ok and 4m not? Decrease risk of damage, less of a hazard??

Maybe to limit the possibility of additions to the branch. Personally, I feel that it should depend entirely on the scenario however. The thing to remember is that there are a lot of people who are very high up within the IEE, people who are instrumental in implementing new regulations and who's views are considered expert and yet they actually know very little! Believe it or not the IEE is full of your NIC inspector types and the sort of people who love propergating a good ol' myth. Most of the regs are common sense, but if you read through it carefully you will find plenty of little gems that were clearly never thought out, regs that were dreamed up by people that don't have any idea what they are on about!

 

[Dan]

Bump