Does a tumble dryer require its own socket?

[JohnW2]

Tumble drier fires are usually the result of misuse , failure to clear filters regularly causing fluff to ignite on the heater element or drying items unsuitable ,

... or a design fault in the drying which allows fluff to get to the element where it cannot be removed by the user.

As I've said, I'm sure that the great majority of fires related to tumble dryers originate in the dryer itself, not due to any over-heating of plug/socket. It happened to us, since we had one of the dryers with such a design fault. Despite our keeping the filter, and accessible parts of ducting, clear of fluff, it 'caught on fire' (but fortunately did not harm because we detected the smoke before anything nasty happened), at a time when the plug/socket were not even warm.

 

[foxhole]

... or a design fault in the drying which allows fluff to get to the element where it cannot be removed by the user.

As I've said, I'm sure that the great majority of fires related to tumble dryers originate in the dryer itself, not due to any over-heating of plug/socket. It happened to us, since we had one of the dryers with such a design fault. Despite our keeping the filter, and accessible parts of ducting, clear of fluff, it 'caught on fire' (but fortunately did not harm because we detected the smoke before anything nasty happened), at a time when the plug/socket were not even warm.

Have never repaired a tumble dryer without finding the heater full of fluff, the filters only stop so much.

 

[JohnW2]

Have never repaired a tumble dryer without finding the heater full of fluff, the filters only stop so much.

That's the real world!

I would guess that the small amounts of fluff which get through filters simply 'burn away' very quickly without doing any harm. I imagine that it's only when large amounts of fluff get to the element that there's much chance of a 'real fire'.

 

[foxhole]

That's the real world!

I would guess that the small amounts of fluff which get through filters simply 'burn away' very quickly without doing any harm. I imagine that it's only when large amounts of fluff get to the element that there's much chance of a 'real fire'.

The filter components are usually made from plastic which warps and loses its seal with the heat involved, have seen filters whose edges have melted.TD don't seem to be constructed to high tolerances in the design.

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

I have just seen a BBC report on tumble drier fire and it says

The major risk from driers, is one of the fluff from the clothing, catching fire from the heating elements of older type driers.

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

That's the real world!

I would guess that the small amounts of fluff which get through filters simply 'burn away' very quickly without doing any harm. I imagine that it's only when large amounts of fluff get to the element that there's much chance of a 'real fire'.

Exactly so. We bought a washer/condensing drier long ago, it uses a water jacket, to condense the moisture. The drier soon failed, which I quickly traced to the heater, over-heating, and tripping the over-heat stat. This, plus the element, a circulating fan, and cooling water flow - were mounted in an alloy cast duct work. The ductwork was clamped together with tamper-proof bolts, once accessed, it was chocka with fluff on the elements. I fixed it, then banned further use of it, except for carefully supervised, emergency drying.

 

[ebee]

I am baffled as to how ebee forces the user of the double sockets he fits, not to load them with more than 13A. I can only assume he always powers it from an FCU.

No I do not "force" that at all.
I reckon that the standard and type test allows pretty much of all to not exceed the rating of dangerously over the 13A and certainly not over the 14 + 6 scenario for extended periods of normal or even slightly abnormal use in practice on any half decent make, if installed properly on a proper circuit.
In other words, it is not normally a problem but in some instances it could be.
They have pretty much stood the test of time just in the same way our normal diversity of a standard cooker circuit has.

 

[DetlefSchmitz]

So I still don't get it. What is it you do whilst wiring that matches your statement "we stick to the standard of 13 amps for the whole item." Use thinner wire? Not use double sockets? Stick labels on double sockets telling people to calculate the full load they are plugging in?

 

[JohnW2]

I reckon that the standard and type test allows pretty much of all to not exceed the rating of dangerously over the 13A and certainly not over the 14 + 6 scenario for extended periods of normal or even slightly abnormal use in practice on any half decent make, if installed properly on a proper circuit.
In other words, it is not normally a problem but in some instances it could be. ... They have pretty much stood the test of time just in the same way our normal diversity of a standard cooker circuit has.

On the face of it, you appearing to be presenting a good argument for 'not worrying' about what loads are plugged into a double socket, a view with which I would definitely be inclined to believe.

Yes, BS1363 plugs/sockets do sometimes suffer thermal damage - but, as I've said, seemingly usually because of poor connections between the plug fuse and its holder at a time when a 'high' (but <13A) current is being carried through the plug. However, I'm not even sure that such is more common when a double socket is involved (it could just be that they are much more commonly used), or whether it is more common when the other outlet of a double socket is also carrying a fairly high current.

Kind Regards, John

 

[ebee]

So I still don't get it. What is it you do whilst wiring that matches your statement "we stick to the standard of 13 amps for the whole item." Use thinner wire? Not use double sockets? Stick labels on double sockets telling people to calculate the full load they are plugging in?

Occasionally I might actually install a single socket to , hopefully, avoid the issue depending upon it`s location in the set up as it is but usually just advise the customer only to use one heating load of one of the main appliances at a time. I also advise that the cooker control unit socket is not used for such heavy loads either but merely intended for occasional use of a kettle (How many times I have actually seen them in use for a washer or dryer though used to surprise me).

I might not be considered "normal average" in my workload as a domestic electrician though for the simple reason I have worked in an area of Northern, working class folk and particularly of an older age set due to my works with Care and Repair UK, amongst others - an Organisation which dealt much with Grant Aided works for people 60yrs and over (some of my customers were 90), so perhaps the mindset of "Make Do and Mend" and "Save a Shilling" predominates from a time including a World War or two.

 

[ebee]

I worked against a mindset (public and tradesfolk alike) who believed that a Local Authority Grant Aided works should pay for the whole Job Lot for a house rewire where in reality the local authority had an expectation that it should pay around 90$ or so and the customer finds the other 10% for a very basic rewire and with the hope that the customer decides it is a good time to have at least an extra socket or three privately at their own expense at the same time. In my experience that extra socket or so was almost never taken up. The basic spec was , simple lighting (often 1 way lighting was considered OK in almost all rooms), 1 twin socket per room except kitchen was 2 twins. Immersion heater, cooker and that was usually it. In fact some would even have only 1 lighting circuit and 1 power circuit - I would always include 2 of both lighting and power circuits in even the smallest abode.

 

[ericmark]

The HSE has issued a warning this is not to do with overloaded sockets, or a build up of fluff, but

The most recent appears to have resulted from an insufficient 'cooling cycle' and involved a number of cloths (tea towels and catering cloths), which may have been contaminated with combustible substances such as fats, oils or grease.

 

[DetlefSchmitz]

The HSE has issued a warning this is not to do with overloaded sockets, or a build up of fluff,

...in this one particular case.

 

[ebee]

I don`t think that the statement "...in this one particular case." is actually helpful or significant, seems to me that some others have been reported and my guess would be that some have not, probably not many but I am just speculating.

If we attempt in every way in every subject in life to reduce risks by simple changes of practice (and sometimes not so simple but not too difficult) then it has its merits, each one might just make a minor difference but if we have that mindset and we have quite a lot of them it could add up to a not such minor difference after all (but not a big difference though). We simply play the numbers game and hope for the best, nothing guaranteed but could (yes could, not will) be helpful.

 

[DetlefSchmitz]

I don`t think that the statement "...in this one particular case." is actually helpful or significant...

I was intending to correct the statement that fires were not caused by fluff, nor overloaded sockets. This would seem to be a message having a negative effect.