http://i61.tinypic.com/72stmr.jpg

Woopee it's a clamp. It's now in the right place.

But I am impressed I'm getting immeasurably small resistance readings
everywhere, including right back to the bathroom basin taps (0.04 Ohms)
from the main earth terminal.

This is measured with a Megger 1552 and a bloody long wander lead,
nulled. Trouble with such measurements though is as soon as you cough on
the banana plugs, you shift 30mOhms off calibration.

But anyway, pleased with that. Especially as the copper pipes are not
yet continuous through the house so there are bonding links bridging the
gaps for now.

"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
http://i61.tinypic.com/72stmr.jpg

Woopee it's a clamp. It's now in the right place.

But I am impressed I'm getting immeasurably small resistance readings
everywhere, including right back to the bathroom basin taps (0.04 Ohms)
from the main earth terminal.




Is this ADS or EEBAD:-)?


--
Adam

On Sat, 22 Nov 2014 16:12:17 -0000, Tim Watts wrote:

http://i61.tinypic.com/72stmr.jpg

Woopee it's a clamp. It's now in the right place.

But I am impressed I'm getting immeasurably small resistance readings
everywhere, including right back to the bathroom basin taps (0.04 Ohms)
from the main earth terminal.

This is measured with a Megger 1552 and a bloody long wander lead,
nulled. Trouble with such measurements though is as soon as you cough on
the banana plugs, you shift 30mOhms off calibration.

But anyway, pleased with that. Especially as the copper pipes are not
yet continuous through the house so there are bonding links bridging the
gaps for now.

What are you doing? Using an old valve radio that needs amazing earths?

--
What comes after 69?
Mouthwash.

On 22/11/14 16:31, ARW wrote:
"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
http://i61.tinypic.com/72stmr.jpg

Woopee it's a clamp. It's now in the right place.

But I am impressed I'm getting immeasurably small resistance readings
everywhere, including right back to the bathroom basin taps (0.04
Ohms) from the main earth terminal.




Is this ADS or EEBAD:-)?



The former now isn't it? Pretty sure it was EEBADS when I did my exam.

I'm not big on names, especially when they change just to mean the same
thing!


So here goes:

"Live wire, phase, earth bond, bulb, "

That should give a few people apoplexy ;-)


On a serious note -

I am very much against the continual changing of nomenclature for the
sake of it which we seem to get a lot of these days...

My water pipe has a main equipotential bond to the main earth terminal.
So we might as well say it's earth-bonded. 90% of regular people at
least know what that means. The other 10% would shove the wire into a
pot plant on the window cill.

"PIR" was easy to say. Does anyone ask for an "EICR"?


I was trying to find a numerous picture of the earth wire thing. But I
found this instead:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-cannabis.html

WTF? I did not know weed could do that (even superstrenghth weed).

On 22/11/2014 16:52, Tim Watts wrote:
On 22/11/14 16:31, ARW wrote:
"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
http://i61.tinypic.com/72stmr.jpg

Woopee it's a clamp. It's now in the right place.

But I am impressed I'm getting immeasurably small resistance readings
everywhere, including right back to the bathroom basin taps (0.04
Ohms) from the main earth terminal.




Is this ADS or EEBAD:-)?



The former now isn't it? Pretty sure it was EEBADS when I did my exam.

I'm not big on names, especially when they change just to mean the same
thing!

Although to be fair, its a bit more than just a name change... with ADS
one can forgo most of the supplementary EQ bonding.

So here goes:

"Live wire, phase, earth bond, bulb, "

That should give a few people apoplexy ;-)

nope, not biting ;-)

On a serious note -

I am very much against the continual changing of nomenclature for the
sake of it which we seem to get a lot of these days...

My water pipe has a main equipotential bond to the main earth terminal.
So we might as well say it's earth-bonded. 90% of regular people at
least know what that means. The other 10% would shove the wire into a
pot plant on the window cill.

Indeed they will. The only problem with the nomenclature is that is
actually makes understanding the reason for its existence a bit more
difficult.

If you can keep the concepts of earthing and EQ bonding separate in your
mind, the whole point that they do different things (limit the duration
of a shock, vs limit its magnitude), by different mechanisms (opening a
CPD with a fault current Vs limit potential difference) is much easier
to get a grip on I find.

"PIR" was easy to say. Does anyone ask for an "EICR"?

Yup agreed it does not add much. I suppose the fact that the P was not
necessarily actually true is what sank that one.

I was trying to find a numerous picture of the earth wire thing. But I
found this instead:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-cannabis.html


WTF? I did not know weed could do that (even superstrenghth weed).

That last photo in particular looks fairly scary... still I suppose the
power was off by then!


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On 22/11/14 19:27, John Rumm wrote:

"Live wire, phase, earth bond, bulb, "

That should give a few people apoplexy ;-)

nope, not biting ;-)

:-

On a serious note -

I am very much against the continual changing of nomenclature for the
sake of it which we seem to get a lot of these days...

My water pipe has a main equipotential bond to the main earth terminal.
So we might as well say it's earth-bonded. 90% of regular people at
least know what that means. The other 10% would shove the wire into a
pot plant on the window cill.

Indeed they will. The only problem with the nomenclature is that is
actually makes understanding the reason for its existence a bit more
difficult.

If you can keep the concepts of earthing and EQ bonding separate in your
mind, the whole point that they do different things (limit the duration
of a shock, vs limit its magnitude), by different mechanisms (opening a
CPD with a fault current Vs limit potential difference) is much easier
to get a grip on I find.

I agree with that - it's just that folk who work with it will know that
anyway - but ordinary folk just get more confused.

"PIR" was easy to say. Does anyone ask for an "EICR"?

Yup agreed it does not add much. I suppose the fact that the P was not
necessarily actually true is what sank that one.

I was trying to find a numerous picture of the earth wire thing. But I
found this instead:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-cannabis.html



WTF? I did not know weed could do that (even superstrenghth weed).

That last photo in particular looks fairly scary... still I suppose the
power was off by then!

On Sat, 22 Nov 2014 19:27:49 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

On 22/11/2014 16:52, Tim Watts wrote:
On 22/11/14 16:31, ARW wrote:
"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
http://i61.tinypic.com/72stmr.jpg

Woopee it's a clamp. It's now in the right place.

But I am impressed I'm getting immeasurably small resistance readings
everywhere, including right back to the bathroom basin taps (0.04
Ohms) from the main earth terminal.




Is this ADS or EEBAD:-)?



The former now isn't it? Pretty sure it was EEBADS when I did my exam.

I'm not big on names, especially when they change just to mean the same
thing!

Although to be fair, its a bit more than just a name change... with ADS
one can forgo most of the supplementary EQ bonding.

So here goes:

"Live wire, phase, earth bond, bulb, "

That should give a few people apoplexy ;-)

nope, not biting ;-)

On a serious note -

I am very much against the continual changing of nomenclature for the
sake of it which we seem to get a lot of these days...

My water pipe has a main equipotential bond to the main earth terminal.
So we might as well say it's earth-bonded. 90% of regular people at
least know what that means. The other 10% would shove the wire into a
pot plant on the window cill.

Indeed they will. The only problem with the nomenclature is that is
actually makes understanding the reason for its existence a bit more
difficult.

If you can keep the concepts of earthing and EQ bonding separate in your
mind, the whole point that they do different things (limit the duration
of a shock, vs limit its magnitude), by different mechanisms (opening a
CPD with a fault current Vs limit potential difference) is much easier
to get a grip on I find.

"PIR" was easy to say. Does anyone ask for an "EICR"?

Yup agreed it does not add much. I suppose the fact that the P was not
necessarily actually true is what sank that one.

I was trying to find a numerous picture of the earth wire thing. But I
found this instead:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-cannabis.html


WTF? I did not know weed could do that (even superstrenghth weed).

That last photo in particular looks fairly scary... still I suppose the
power was off by then!

We still take are cars for an MOT test even though the MOT was
abolished in 1970.

I dare say some people still refer to the electrical regs as IEE

There must be other historical agencys that are still around through
common usage.




--

Graham.

%Profound_observation%

On 22/11/14 20:21, Graham. wrote:
We still take are cars for an MOT test even though the MOT was
abolished in 1970.

I dare say some people still refer to the electrical regs as IEE

That was a silly name change IMO - "THe Institute of Electrical
Engineers" is a very old name and caries quite some weight.

There must be other historical agencys that are still around through
common usage.

You have still buy "Type 1 MoT" at builder's merchants.

People will still talk about the "D(H)SS" even though that agency has
not existed for over a decade.

Bombay?

On 22/11/2014 20:28, Tim Watts wrote:
On 22/11/14 20:21, Graham. wrote:
We still take are cars for an MOT test even though the MOT was
abolished in 1970.

I dare say some people still refer to the electrical regs as IEE

That was a silly name change IMO - "THe Institute of Electrical
Engineers" is a very old name and caries quite some weight.

Main problem I guess was confusion with the IEEE

There must be other historical agencys that are still around through
common usage.

You have still buy "Type 1 MoT" at builder's merchants.

People will still talk about the "D(H)SS" even though that agency has
not existed for over a decade.

Bombay?

Potato - yum ;-)

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

Tim Watts wrote:

On 22/11/14 20:21, Graham. wrote:
We still take are cars for an MOT test even though the MOT was
abolished in 1970.

I dare say some people still refer to the electrical regs as IEE

That was a silly name change IMO - "THe Institute of Electrical
Engineers" is a very old name and caries quite some weight.

As a member at the time, I was never convinced that it was a good
idea.

Chris
--
Chris J Dixon Nottingham UK


Plant amazing Acers.