Probably to cater for this activity?It is, of course, moot, since even in the days of incandescent bulbs/lamps, there was no way that the 'normal running current' through a lampholder could be anywhere near even 2A
Probably to cater for this activity?It is, of course, moot, since even in the days of incandescent bulbs/lamps, there was no way that the 'normal running current' through a lampholder could be anywhere near even 2A
This is just one of three different brands I have and they are all rated thus:Even if that were true (and I find it hard to believe it is)
Even if that were true (and I find it hard to believe it is)...
Ah. It doesn't look too much like her, even in her youth, but my first reaction was to think that you'd posted a photo of my grandmother!Probably to cater for this activity?
This is just one of three different brands I have and they are all rated thus:.....
Interesting. As I implied before, even if those are the 'ratings' (which presumably implies that they have to pass tested at 2A), I do doubt that there are many that could not safely handle a fair bit more than that - the 'components (like pins and terminals) 'obviously' could, the only uncertainty relating to the electrical connection between the holder and whatever was plugged in.BS EN 61184 says: .......Standard rated currents are:
– 2 A for lampholders B15;
– 2 A for lampholders B22.
The rated current shall be not less than the standard value. Rated currents higher than 2 A are allowed.
Why did you find it hard to believe?Even if that were true (and I find it hard to believe it is),
Well, it's been demonstrated that I was wrong 'to find it hard to believe' that it was true, but the reason I said that was explained in the rest of my sentence, which you have omitted from your quote. The sentence in full was ...Why did you find it hard to believe?
JohnW2 said:Even if that were true (and I find it hard to believe it is), I would have to wonder what 'rated at' would actually meant in that context, since it's very hard to think of how, even if one wanted to, one could design a lampholder which could not safely 'tolerate' a lot more than 2A!
werll, the contact between the 'pins' of the holder and the bulb/whatever that was plugged in -0 since, as I have said, the components themselves (pins & terminals) are clearly capable of carrying a lot more than 2A.... I'd imagine the current limiting factor will be the spring or spring tension.
Yes, that is true (although the effective "contact area of a plug and socket" can be a lot less than one might think. I remain somewhat surprised, but its seems to be 'how it is'. Even the "contact area" between conductor and terminal of a plug or socket can also be 'small'.The actual contact area of a BC pin to the lamp is small. It is just the very tip of the pin. They
The contact area of a plug and socket is much higher.
even in the days of incandescent bulbs/lamps, there was no way that the 'normal running current' through a lampholder could be anywhere near even 2A
Kind Regards, John
My goodness! Judging by how hot even a 40W or 60W incandescent bulb could get, I would have thought that 'current rating' would probably have been the least of one's concerns with an ~500W bulb!I think the railway used to use lamps aproaching that.
When i started there was T1 and T2 holders often older people would burn them out with just there 150W lamps, I think a Railway lamps a bit much for a house, you would likely bash your head on it tooMy goodness! Judging by how hot even a 40W or 60W incandescent bulb could get, I would have thought that 'current rating' would probably have been the least of one's concerns with an ~500W bulb!
Kind Regards, John