Talk:Europlug

rewirable europlugs?

I'm sure, I've seen suppliers selling rewirable europlugs, though I don't have a link handy right now. And you can definately buy flexes with europlugs at one end and bare wires the other. Plugwash 17:56, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

What designers and standards committees had originally in mind, and what the free market sells, are often two very different stories. I can buy USB A-A and B-B adapter cables in many shops, even though the USB standard explicitely forbids them, and there is really no sensible application for them. If the customer asks for it, someone will sell it, whether it technically makes sense or not. Markus Kuhn 10:22, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The Europlug is defined in EN 50075, it cannot, by definition, be rewirable, see clause 9.1. (Note, it is not necessarily a moulded plug - the two are not synonymous.) Deucharman (talk) 21:36, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Ive seen the plugs the OP refers to. Strictly speaking they are not "europlugs" as they don't conform with the standard. The ones I've seen are not even the correct shape (square rather than flared edges) so wouldn't even fit many sockets (particularly the recessed type). Just because they fit SOME europlug sockets doesn't make them "europlugs" Then again as there is apparently no defined standard for europlug sockets technically there is no such thing as a "europlug socket" either ! 2.123.240.251 (talk) 20:55, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Standard or not - Europlugs as a spare are available in most electric shops in at least Germany and Switzerland. Many years ago they were mostly for soldering while modern variants seem to use screw terminals. EN 50075 is quite explicit about the plug having t become unusable when trying to open or separate it from the cable. A plug that can be attached once by whatever means but can not be separated again would be compliant. The language used in the German version is slightly more explicit on this. While the English document used the term "non-wirable" the German version says "nicht-wiederanschließbar", "non-REwirable". The French version is even clearer on this it says "non-démontable", non-removable.

Anyway, EN 50075 doesn't define the name Europlug or Eurostecker. I think it ok to use thie popular name less strictly than EN 50075. Or simply use Europlug and EN 50075 plug as synonyms with the added note that EN 50075 requires non-removability of the plug. Ralf.Baechle (talk) 16:17, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Map showing usability of the Europlug

The map (from 2010) shows the usability of the plugs CEE 7/7, CEE 7/17 and CEE 7/16 in the respective countries using different shades of green. From lightest to darkest: CEE 7/16 europlugs only, all plugs unearthed up to 5A (in BS 546 socket), all plugs unearthed up to 16A, all plugs up to 16A (earthed plugs earthed).

Dear FF-UK, I recently added a map from Commons showing the worldwide usability of the Europlug. Could you explain the reason this was removed from the article? Sauer202 (talk) 12:39, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

There is no source information given for this map. FF-UK (talk) 09:06, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Compatibility with Swiss sockets

The section on Swiss sockets claimed that the Europlug was designed to be used with all Swiss SN 441011 sockets.

I am aware that (uniquely) Swiss three phase sockets are designed to accept the corresponding sized single phase plug and that the Europlug's pin configuration allows it to fit both 10 amp and 16 amp single phase sockets, and hence the three phase versions as well.

However, I do not believe that the Europlug was specifically designed to fit any Swiss socket. After all, why would Europe design a plug to fit the sockets of a country who is not a member of the EU? The live and neutral pins of the Swiss 10 Amp single phase plug are spaced similarly to single phase sockets used throughout most of the European Union but they are, nevertheless, thinner. The earthing arrangements are unique to Switzerland.

Because the pins are the same size as the Europlug (4 mm) and because the pin spacing is close enough to the pin spacing of the Europlug (less than half a millimetre difference once straightened out), the Europlug comfortable fits the 4.5 mm socket holes. The extra half a millimetre means that the Europlug still has converging pins when inserted, but is splayed sufficiently to give a good contact.

The geometry of the 16 Amp socket similarly allows the Europlug to mate with enough splaying of the converging pins to give a good contact.

Owing to the Swiss design for single phase plugs being able to mate with three phase sockets, the article can correctly claim that the Europlug is compatible all four Swiss type sockets (which it unquestionably is). However, if anyone wishes to claim that the Europlug was designed as part of its design goal to mate with all four types, then that requires a reliable source in support.

I have heard it said that the widest part of the Europlug's hexagon shape was made the same as the widest part of the Swiss plug's heptagon. There is no evidence that this is the case and anyway they are not the same size, but they are close (the Europlug being smaller). The Europlug's elongated hexagon was dictated by the requirement to fit into the width of the slots of the German Schuko (type F) socket and the recess of the French type E while at the same time its elongated shape was dictated by not fouling the earth pin of the type E. It may be that the Swiss heptagon recess might have been designed with the Europlug in mind, but I can find no evidence to support such a hypothesis even though it is a perfectly reasonable design goal. -RFenergy (talk) 13:37, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Further research has suggested that the Europlug design preceded the introduction of the current recessed Swiss socket design by about ten years. If so this would mean the Europlug could not possibly have been designed to fit the Swiss socket. It would also suggest that the Swiss sockets may have been designed to accept the Europlug rather than the other way around. However, I have not been able to definitively find a supporting source for this hypothesis either. -RFenergy (talk) 13:28, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

RFenergy Here some history for you: The EU is quite a young reality (When did they found it?!)! And of course, Switzerland was and is "always" part of Europe and therefore also a member of the IEC. The predecessor of the IEC, the ECC, was a European body including Switzerland, of course. Besides, IEC's HQ is in Geneva (www.iec.ch)!

Further, the 11 plug has been specified since 1952, the recessed type 13 socket since 1953. The Europlug, however, was not specified before 1963. So you can easily imagine that the requirements of all participating members took part for the specification of the CEE 7/16 Alternative II in 1963. As the Europlug article says "The dimensions of the Europlug were chosen for compatibility and safe use, such that with continental European domestic power sockets". This included with no doubt Switzerland's requirements. -- ZH8000 (talk) 16:38, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. I had managed to figure out much of what you supplied. The timing of the developments, would certainly suggest that the Europlug could have been designed to fit the Swiss sockets as the article claimed before I removed it. However: without a definitive source to support the assertion it remains original research. After all, it just might have been a lucky coincidence as it is with Italian sockets. The strict untoleranced dimensions of both the Swiss sockets and the Europlug certainly suggest that this is the case as it is only the tolerances that allow mating. But again: this is original research.

Incidentally: Switzerland although enclaved by the European Union is not a member. It's not even a member of the European Economic Area (EAA). -RFenergy (talk) 18:32, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Again ("The EU is quite a young reality ..." sic!), the history about (household) plugs and sockets has nothing to do with, neither, the EU, nor the EAA! Why are you repeating this? Fact is that Switzerland is a full and active member of IEC/CEE since 1911. All things relating standardisation of electric household devices are and have been decided by the members of ICE's TC23 and in particular by the members of SC23B–and the corresponding CENLEC committees. Whether Switzerland is a member of the EU/EAA does not matter at all in this context!! The decisions about the accepted standardisation is always a "compromise" by its active members and a result of several developing steps and member votes (70% of the voting members have to accept the proposals, i.e. the working documents).

That the shape of the Europlug (and of the IEC60906-1 standard, besides) is derived/inspired from the Swiss T11 plug and T13 socket is widely known among experts–especially of a certain age–since obvious (expecting requirements by the then Swiss member during its standardisation process). And yes, there are currently no publicly available documents available "proving" this, since we would have to dig into the deep history of ICE/CEE's document archives–if available at all–, but they are only available to their members.

Nevertheless, we could mention this quite widely supported assumption as such and challenge it with a e.g. {{cn}}-template instead of deleting it completely–in the very sense of WP:BOLD. That's the way it is done in other wikis, such like the German one. Fact is that the Europlug is |officially compatible with SEV1011. You could also buy the |corresponding historic document from 1963 at IEC's shop to prove it. -- ZH8000 (talk) 14:08, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

This is an encyclopaedia. We do not put inferences of this type into any article as all material must be sourced to reliable and verifiable sources. Per WP:BRD, the claim has been removed, therefore it is up to anyone restoring it to prove that is correct (See WP:BURDEN). An alternative is to start a discussion (which is this thread), and obtain a consensus to include it, though I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for it. That it is 'widely known among experts' is not an acceptable source. Experts are widely known to be wrong. The {cn} tag is a short term temporary measure giving others the opportunity to reference a disputed claim, but you have claimed above that there are no available documents proving the claim.

The IEC specification isn't actually the specification to which Swiss plugs and sockets must conform. That is a Swiss standard, SN 441011. The IEC 60906 was published in response to a madcap EU idea of adopting a single plug and socket system throughout the entire EU (officially 'harmonisation of AC plugs and sockets' after they had harmonised the voltage - which they actually had not). The committee that was given the job of implementation, in typical EU fashion, decided to settle on a plug and socket design and power distribution requirements before bothering with the more mundane issue of considering the feasibility of the project. As it happened, the committee decided that none of the existing systems in the EU met their requirements (which they didn't) and that the current Swiss plug and socket system did meet all their requirements. This was an unusually wise decision for such a committee, given that the Swiss design is actually a very good plug and socket system. IEC 60906 was more or less a straight cut and paste of SN 441011, at least as far as the technical aspects are concerned (though, as ever, the translation to other EU languages vary wildly).

The project faltered once the feasibility was considered. Every socket and plug (except Europlugs) was going to have to be replaced and every building in most countries was going to have to be rewired for the new system. It was going to cost north of €1,000,000,000 (at the time of the exercise). Building owners were likely to resist fielding the cost themselves. It was going to create an estimated 1,000,000 tonnes of electrical waste (mostly plugs, sockets, cable and distribution units not including the recoverable metals - the recovery cost of which was not included in the up front cost price). Finally, it was going to take not far short of a century to fully execute the task, by which time the requirements for electrical plugs and distribution was likely to change (the current objective of many governments to phase out diesel and petrol cars is going to have a considerable impact on electrical generation and distribution that these governments have not considered).

Why did you include a (sic!) at the beginning of your post? You haven't quoted anything to identify that any error was in the quote. -RFenergy (talk) 17:17, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

First of all, the EU exists since November 1993, so please stop referring to it in a context before that date! Thanks.

Of course, an expert's meaning is a valid source, as soon it has been published. LOL. But, seriously, the respective issue has been published, I currently just have no access to it. Or you have to pay for it.

I have not the slightest intention to discuss the background of IEC 60906-1, except that it was not initiated by the EU (but again, see above). It is just an example. Besides: WP:NOTBLOG.

The issue here, however, is the history of the CEE 7/16 Alternative II, and its relation to T11 of SV1011, so before 1963, period. -- ZH8000 (talk) 16:25, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

A European organisation existed long before 1993. It's changed its name a few times and has expanded its remit since 1951 when it really came into being though not resembling the current organisation until 1953.

The predecessor organisations have been harmonising much in Europe since at least the 1960's. The harmonisation of plugs and sockets idea was hatched in 1985 with the IEC 60906 being commissioned the following year though no decision was taken at that time to adopt the design. It was not until 1991 that consideration was once again considered in earnest, but vested interests from constituent countries prevailed and by 1995 no progress had been made and the idea put on hold though it had been realised that it was going to be expensive. In 2012, the now European Union once again resurrected the idea and this time, after another three years, in 2015 the IEC 60906 plug and socket was finally adopted as the best candidate. In 2017, the feasibility study was eventually done as part of the EU's Regulatory Fitness and Performance (REFIT) programme. It quickly realised that the whole ridiculous idea was totally infeasible for the reasons that I gave above and the idea was finally abandoned after consuming 30 years of effort.

Expert's opinions are not valid unless published in reliable peer reviewed sources.

If you are not prepared to discuss the issue then fine. It just means that I will not be troubled with having to refute your obvious lack of knowledge on the subject or of how Wikipedia works. -RFenergy (talk) 17:36, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

References

are there power strips with europlugs?

Or is there a technical limitation preventing europlugs from being used to supply power strips?

does the europlug really not have a socket?

i highly doubt that, as there's europlug sockets on a power strip i have The motan (talk) 19:50, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Of course it doesn't, that's its whole purpose. It fits a number of pre-existing sockets, and it fits them overall better than a dedicated plug for one would fit the other sockets it's not intended for. To make "Europlug sockets" would be to add yet another format of socket into the mix, making things even worse.

So, of course, several makers have gone right ahead and done just that. [1]

There's no standard for this socket. There's no 'CEE 7/16 Alternative II' socket. The regulatory status of such sockets is unclear. But of course, they're still going to be made, sold and used. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:08, 23 November 2023 (UTC)