On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:35:33 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 20:34:22 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 22:12:25 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 21:37:17 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 20:50:55 +0100, Jim Thomas
wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 20:19:43 +0100, dennis@home

wrote:

On 13/09/2015 20:11, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:

I'm right, if you think I'm not, prove it. A sensor needs power
to
activate the relay. It cannot have this until its source
circuit
is
made live, and you switched that off. All the other sensor can
do
is
connect live to the output of the relay contact of the first
sensor.
This will not power up the first sensor so its relay remains
open.


If you ignore the circuit to the lights and any manual override
switch.

Only the light in question could become live, nothing else.

And that can be the one you are rewiring that can kill you or see
you
fall of the ladder from the shock and break something important.

If you're rewiring the light, you make sure both PIRs are inactive
DOH!

Not even possible without turning off the power to the entire house.

Why would anyone assume that they are both on the same circuit? You
switch off a breaker, then walk in front of each PIR and see what
happens.

Useless when the breaker turns off the power to the light, but not
one of the PIRs which has no indication that its been triggered.

Like I just said, you switch off the breaker, then walk in front of
both
PIRs. If the light does not come on, you have no power available, and
it's safe to work on the light.

Not when the cat triggers the PIR that has not been turned off.

What part of "walk in front of both PIRs" didn't you understand?

What part of "PIRs which has no indication that its been triggered"
didn't
you understand?

The wires you're working on would become live, and your meter would
indicate this.

But you can't see the meter when you walk in front of both PIRs.

What kind of **** meter do you have? Doesn't it have a max/min function?

--
The only two animals that can see behind themselves without turning their heads are the rabbit and the parrot.

In article , Tough Guy no. 1265
wrote:
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:13:02 +0100, ARW
wrote:

"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 20:19:12 +0100, ARW
wrote:

"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news
Why would you assume they were on the same circuit?

On a installation that meets the IET regs than I would expect them to
be on the same circuit.

However I assume nothing as I have seen some right bodge jobs (and
not just from DIYers).

Assuming someone else has done something a particular way is stupid,
which is why you don't. So you've just answered your own question.
It's not dangerous to have two circuits, as people like you check.

You cannot always tell if two circuits are/may be connected together
via bad workmanship unless you have stripped the house apart to check
every last electrical connection.

The best solution is just to wire the job up correctly in the first
place.

As I've already said three times, you walk in front of both PIRs and make
sure neither make the wiring live.

I have a PIR I walk in front of and the light dosn't activate. Is that a
faulty PIR or a faulty lamp or something else?

"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:13:02 +0100, ARW
wrote:

"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 20:19:12 +0100, ARW
wrote:

"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news
Why would you assume they were on the same circuit?

On a installation that meets the IET regs than I would expect them to
be
on
the same circuit.

However I assume nothing as I have seen some right bodge jobs (and not
just
from DIYers).

Assuming someone else has done something a particular way is stupid,
which
is why you don't. So you've just answered your own question. It's not
dangerous to have two circuits, as people like you check.

You cannot always tell if two circuits are/may be connected together via
bad
workmanship unless you have stripped the house apart to check every last
electrical connection.

The best solution is just to wire the job up correctly in the first
place.

As I've already said three times, you walk in front of both PIRs and make
sure neither make the wiring live.

No easy way to do that last with all the wiring.

Makes a lot more sense to turn the entire house off
if someone like you has been doing anything to it
and even that isn't complete protection so you
basically have to treat it as still live even with the
entire house turned off.

On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:42:11 +0100, Charles Hope wrote:

In article , Tough Guy no. 1265
wrote:
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:13:02 +0100, ARW
wrote:

"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 20:19:12 +0100, ARW
wrote:

"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news
Why would you assume they were on the same circuit?

On a installation that meets the IET regs than I would expect them to
be on the same circuit.

However I assume nothing as I have seen some right bodge jobs (and
not just from DIYers).

Assuming someone else has done something a particular way is stupid,
which is why you don't. So you've just answered your own question.
It's not dangerous to have two circuits, as people like you check.

You cannot always tell if two circuits are/may be connected together
via bad workmanship unless you have stripped the house apart to check
every last electrical connection.

The best solution is just to wire the job up correctly in the first
place.

As I've already said three times, you walk in front of both PIRs and make
sure neither make the wiring live.

I have a PIR I walk in front of and the light dosn't activate. Is that a
faulty PIR or a faulty lamp or something else?

You're working on the wires remember. If the meter detects voltage when you walk in front of it, then it's not isolated. If the meter reads nothing, there is no live available. Doesn't matter if the PIR is faulty, there is no power to hurt your wimpy little fingers.

--
Bad command or file name! Go stand in the corner.

"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:26:56 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 20:06:41 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

On 14/09/2015 15:12, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 02:48:48 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

On 13/09/2015 20:22, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 20:19:43 +0100, dennis@home

wrote:

On 13/09/2015 20:11, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:

I'm right, if you think I'm not, prove it. A sensor needs power
to
activate the relay. It cannot have this until its source circuit
is
made live, and you switched that off. All the other sensor can do
is
connect live to the output of the relay contact of the first
sensor.
This will not power up the first sensor so its relay remains open.


If you ignore the circuit to the lights and any manual override
switch.

Only the light in question could become live, nothing else.

And let's say someone wanted to work on the switched live - adding an
additional lamp perhaps?

They'd have checked neither PIR was turning the thing on. Why would
you
assume they were on the same circuit?

So if we apply that logic, before touching anything we need to check
every light switch, PIR, FCU and anything else with a switch on it, on
any circuit, just in case some clueless PHucker decided to wire it up
to
the lamp as well.

Does your horse need feeding?

What a stupid train of thought.

We'll see...

Both PIRs activate the outside light you're working on, so you check
both.
Why would you check the bedroom light switch

Because with fools like you around, anything
is possible with borrowed neutrals etc.

If the device works, it was done correctly.

Not if the fool has borrowed a neutral and
only the most obvious circuit is disabled.

when you know that doesn't activate it,

But don't know what some fool like you has done with borrowed neutrals
etc.

That's what a multimeter is for.

Not possible to use one when walking past the PIRs.

And borrowed neutrals don't endanger you when working on the lights.

Wrong.

and you know there's nobody else in the house to press it?

Irrelevant if some fool like you has done
something stupid with borrowed neutrals etc.

Even turning the entire house off before touching anything
isn't going to protect you with fools like you around who
could have done anything, including steal power.

Then never assume, carry a meter or volt probe with you.

Carrying the meter or volt probe wont get you
anywhere useful when walking past both PIRs.

On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 22:08:15 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 21:31:28 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 20:46:33 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news I have done so. I just got a rather warm hand for a second.

And others have died that way.

Survival of the fittest.

You're actually the least fit, completely unemployable.

I am self employed.

Must be why you whine about having to
comply with the requirements to get benefits.

I do not have an alarm clock.

No point in one when completely unemployable.

From the "Rod Speed FAQ"!

"Rod's personality, as exemplified by his posts, means he is practically
unemployable which means he sits around at home all day festering away
and getting worse and worse. This means he posts more and more to try
and boost the old failing self esteem. Being unemployed also means he
as a lot of time on his hands to post in the first place."

--
A bunch of lawyers were sitting around the office playing poker.
€œI win!€� says Johnson at which point Henderson throws down his cards. €œThats it! I've had it! Johnson is cheating!!!€�
€œHow can you tell?€� Phillips asked.
€œThose aren't the cards I dealt him!€�

"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:42:11 +0100, Charles Hope
wrote:

In article , Tough Guy no. 1265
wrote:
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:13:02 +0100, ARW
wrote:

"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 20:19:12 +0100, ARW
wrote:

"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news
Why would you assume they were on the same circuit?

On a installation that meets the IET regs than I would expect them
to
be on the same circuit.

However I assume nothing as I have seen some right bodge jobs (and
not just from DIYers).

Assuming someone else has done something a particular way is stupid,
which is why you don't. So you've just answered your own question.
It's not dangerous to have two circuits, as people like you check.

You cannot always tell if two circuits are/may be connected together
via bad workmanship unless you have stripped the house apart to check
every last electrical connection.

The best solution is just to wire the job up correctly in the first
place.

As I've already said three times, you walk in front of both PIRs and
make
sure neither make the wiring live.

I have a PIR I walk in front of and the light dosn't activate. Is that a
faulty PIR or a faulty lamp or something else?

You're working on the wires remember. If the meter detects voltage when
you walk in front of it, then it's not isolated. If the meter reads
nothing, there is no live available. Doesn't matter if the PIR is faulty,
there is no power to hurt your wimpy little fingers.

But the fault can be intermittent, so that line can't fly.

On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 22:28:39 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:42:11 +0100, Charles Hope
wrote:

In article , Tough Guy no. 1265
wrote:
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:13:02 +0100, ARW
wrote:

"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 20:19:12 +0100, ARW
wrote:

"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news
Why would you assume they were on the same circuit?

On a installation that meets the IET regs than I would expect them
to
be on the same circuit.

However I assume nothing as I have seen some right bodge jobs (and
not just from DIYers).

Assuming someone else has done something a particular way is stupid,
which is why you don't. So you've just answered your own question.
It's not dangerous to have two circuits, as people like you check.

You cannot always tell if two circuits are/may be connected together
via bad workmanship unless you have stripped the house apart to check
every last electrical connection.

The best solution is just to wire the job up correctly in the first
place.

As I've already said three times, you walk in front of both PIRs and
make
sure neither make the wiring live.

I have a PIR I walk in front of and the light dosn't activate. Is that a
faulty PIR or a faulty lamp or something else?

You're working on the wires remember. If the meter detects voltage when
you walk in front of it, then it's not isolated. If the meter reads
nothing, there is no live available. Doesn't matter if the PIR is faulty,
there is no power to hurt your wimpy little fingers.

But the fault can be intermittent, so that line can't fly.

Grow a pair of balls.

--
Definition of Necrophilia: That Uncontrollable Urge To Crack Open A Cold One.

"Charles Hope" wrote in message
...
In article , Tough Guy no. 1265
wrote:
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:13:02 +0100, ARW
wrote:

"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 20:19:12 +0100, ARW
wrote:

"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news
Why would you assume they were on the same circuit?

On a installation that meets the IET regs than I would expect them to
be on the same circuit.

However I assume nothing as I have seen some right bodge jobs (and
not just from DIYers).

Assuming someone else has done something a particular way is stupid,
which is why you don't. So you've just answered your own question.
It's not dangerous to have two circuits, as people like you check.

You cannot always tell if two circuits are/may be connected together
via bad workmanship unless you have stripped the house apart to check
every last electrical connection.

The best solution is just to wire the job up correctly in the first
place.

As I've already said three times, you walk in front of both PIRs and make
sure neither make the wiring live.

I have a PIR I walk in front of and the light dosn't activate. Is that a
faulty PIR or a faulty lamp or something else?



The daft apprentice says it is because the sun is shining:-)

Took him 2 hours to work it out.

--
Adam

On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 21:29:37 +0100, ARW wrote:

"Charles Hope" wrote in message
...
In article , Tough Guy no. 1265
wrote:
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:13:02 +0100, ARW
wrote:

"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 20:19:12 +0100, ARW
wrote:

"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news
Why would you assume they were on the same circuit?

On a installation that meets the IET regs than I would expect them to
be on the same circuit.

However I assume nothing as I have seen some right bodge jobs (and
not just from DIYers).

Assuming someone else has done something a particular way is stupid,
which is why you don't. So you've just answered your own question.
It's not dangerous to have two circuits, as people like you check.

You cannot always tell if two circuits are/may be connected together
via bad workmanship unless you have stripped the house apart to check
every last electrical connection.

The best solution is just to wire the job up correctly in the first
place.

As I've already said three times, you walk in front of both PIRs and make
sure neither make the wiring live.

I have a PIR I walk in front of and the light dosn't activate. Is that a
faulty PIR or a faulty lamp or something else?

The daft apprentice says it is because the sun is shining:-)

Took him 2 hours to work it out.

Only a problem if you take so long to rewire the lights that it gets dark. Anyway, you'd hear the PIR clicking or something. For some reason most still click even though they are disabled due to light levels.

--
Some "chinese english" instructions (with software for a camera card). This is the contents of a file named "English installs the elucidation.doc", quoted in its entirety:

The high regard's customer:
How are you!
Thank youing can use the pico product of my company, and please press below the operation order install, and thank!
A,The software installs in proper order
1, install the good WIN2000 system;
2, open the software light the dish;
3, double click the SETUP.EXE
4, the model number of the choice gearing
a)PICO2000_104( PALApplication) this model number can at most support 4 roads see the frequency signal the importation
b)PICO2000_208( PALApplication) this model number can at most support 8 roads see the frequency signal the importation
c)PICO2000_416( PALApplication) this model number can at most support 16 roads see the frequency signal the importation
5, after finishing installing, three documents that light patch in the dish the catalogue descend: The msdxm.ocx, odbc32.dll, odbcint.dll beat arrives the c:\ windows\ system inside.
6, square version of usage hero , please double click the light the English Pack in the dish the document.
7, the copy resemble the regulating of appearance tone must install the VideoSetup software to proceed to regulate, install the procedure under the light dish root the catalogue VideoSetup the blank page clip setup.exe.
Plank card gearing
1.Insert the plank card arrive the main plank PCI the slot;
2.Start the calculator, and the auto install the plank card the drive to move the procedure( position:Light dish driver catalogue bottom)
Change the compression method
Beginning the ? circulate the ? the importation the " REGEDIT", and make sure the ?? enter the registration watch the editor, and open the HKEY ? CURRENT ? the USER\ software\ univision Canada Linited\ the pico2000 double click the " CODEC" can is worth this key to change to" MP42" or" IV50"
Note:
MP42 the MPEG4 compress the way (suggestion adoption MPEG4 compress way, should compress the way the compression the rate to is high)
IV50 the INDEO compress the way

On 15/09/2015 21:32, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 21:29:37 +0100, ARW


The daft apprentice says it is because the sun is shining:-)

Took him 2 hours to work it out.

Only a problem if you take so long to rewire the lights that it gets
dark. Anyway, you'd hear the PIR clicking or something. For some
reason most still click even though they are disabled due to light levels.

Most do not click when inhibited by ambient light levels...

(you might care to think what makes the click and its purpose)


--
Cheers,

John.

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

On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 09:13:23 +0100, John Rumm wrote:

On 15/09/2015 21:32, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 21:29:37 +0100, ARW


The daft apprentice says it is because the sun is shining:-)

Took him 2 hours to work it out.

Only a problem if you take so long to rewire the lights that it gets
dark. Anyway, you'd hear the PIR clicking or something. For some
reason most still click even though they are disabled due to light levels.

Most do not click when inhibited by ambient light levels...

(you might care to think what makes the click and its purpose)

That's why I said "for some reason".

--
Depression is merely anger without enthusiasm.

On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:52:29 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:26:56 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 20:06:41 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

On 14/09/2015 15:12, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 02:48:48 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

On 13/09/2015 20:22, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 20:19:43 +0100, dennis@home

wrote:

On 13/09/2015 20:11, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:

I'm right, if you think I'm not, prove it. A sensor needs power
to
activate the relay. It cannot have this until its source circuit
is
made live, and you switched that off. All the other sensor can do
is
connect live to the output of the relay contact of the first
sensor.
This will not power up the first sensor so its relay remains open.


If you ignore the circuit to the lights and any manual override
switch.

Only the light in question could become live, nothing else.

And let's say someone wanted to work on the switched live - adding an
additional lamp perhaps?

They'd have checked neither PIR was turning the thing on. Why would
you
assume they were on the same circuit?

So if we apply that logic, before touching anything we need to check
every light switch, PIR, FCU and anything else with a switch on it, on
any circuit, just in case some clueless PHucker decided to wire it up
to
the lamp as well.

Does your horse need feeding?

What a stupid train of thought.

We'll see...

Both PIRs activate the outside light you're working on, so you check
both.
Why would you check the bedroom light switch

Because with fools like you around, anything
is possible with borrowed neutrals etc.

If the device works, it was done correctly.

Not if the fool has borrowed a neutral and
only the most obvious circuit is disabled.

The device works, what more do you want?

when you know that doesn't activate it,

But don't know what some fool like you has done with borrowed neutrals
etc.

That's what a multimeter is for.

Not possible to use one when walking past the PIRs.

Why do you think that?

And borrowed neutrals don't endanger you when working on the lights.

Wrong.

You test for lives with the multimeter. Doesn't matter who wired what to where, you check for 240 volts with the meter.

and you know there's nobody else in the house to press it?

Irrelevant if some fool like you has done
something stupid with borrowed neutrals etc.

Even turning the entire house off before touching anything
isn't going to protect you with fools like you around who
could have done anything, including steal power.

Then never assume, carry a meter or volt probe with you.

Carrying the meter or volt probe wont get you
anywhere useful when walking past both PIRs.

Why do you believe this?

--
Sex without love is merely healthy exercise.

"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:52:29 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:26:56 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 20:06:41 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

On 14/09/2015 15:12, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 02:48:48 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

On 13/09/2015 20:22, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 20:19:43 +0100, dennis@home

wrote:

On 13/09/2015 20:11, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:

I'm right, if you think I'm not, prove it. A sensor needs power
to
activate the relay. It cannot have this until its source
circuit
is
made live, and you switched that off. All the other sensor can
do
is
connect live to the output of the relay contact of the first
sensor.
This will not power up the first sensor so its relay remains
open.


If you ignore the circuit to the lights and any manual override
switch.

Only the light in question could become live, nothing else.

And let's say someone wanted to work on the switched live - adding
an
additional lamp perhaps?

They'd have checked neither PIR was turning the thing on. Why would
you
assume they were on the same circuit?

So if we apply that logic, before touching anything we need to check
every light switch, PIR, FCU and anything else with a switch on it,
on
any circuit, just in case some clueless PHucker decided to wire it up
to
the lamp as well.

Does your horse need feeding?

What a stupid train of thought.

We'll see...

Both PIRs activate the outside light you're working on, so you check
both.
Why would you check the bedroom light switch

Because with fools like you around, anything
is possible with borrowed neutrals etc.

If the device works, it was done correctly.

Not if the fool has borrowed a neutral and
only the most obvious circuit is disabled.

The device works, what more do you want?

One that is done safely so that when it fails,
as it inevitably will sometime, someone who
isn't as careful as Adam won't get killed fixing
it when they have done the most obvious
thing and turned just the circuit that appears
to be connect to it off before fixing it.

when you know that doesn't activate it,

But don't know what some fool like you has done with borrowed neutrals
etc.

That's what a multimeter is for.

Not possible to use one when walking past the PIRs.

Why do you think that?

**** all who even have a multimeter have one with
a max min function or even know that can be used for.

And borrowed neutrals don't endanger you when working on the lights.

Wrong.

You test for lives with the multimeter.

That assumes that you know how to use one to do that.

Most of those who work on that sort of thing don't
and don't even have one so it makes a lot more
sense to not allow borrowed neutrals or to use
more than one circuit when you have more than
one PIR controlling the light.

Doesn't matter who wired what to where, you check for 240 volts with the
meter.

Not even possible with a basic multimeter and PIRs.

and you know there's nobody else in the house to press it?

Irrelevant if some fool like you has done
something stupid with borrowed neutrals etc.

Even turning the entire house off before touching anything
isn't going to protect you with fools like you around who
could have done anything, including steal power.

Then never assume, carry a meter or volt probe with you.

Carrying the meter or volt probe wont get you
anywhere useful when walking past both PIRs.

Why do you believe this?

Because even you should have noticed that you
can't actually see what the voltage at the light is
doing when you walk past the PIR with the meter
or volt probe in your hand.

On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 00:14:05 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:52:29 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:26:56 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 20:06:41 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

On 14/09/2015 15:12, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 02:48:48 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

On 13/09/2015 20:22, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 20:19:43 +0100, dennis@home

wrote:

On 13/09/2015 20:11, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:

I'm right, if you think I'm not, prove it. A sensor needs power
to
activate the relay. It cannot have this until its source
circuit
is
made live, and you switched that off. All the other sensor can
do
is
connect live to the output of the relay contact of the first
sensor.
This will not power up the first sensor so its relay remains
open.


If you ignore the circuit to the lights and any manual override
switch.

Only the light in question could become live, nothing else.

And let's say someone wanted to work on the switched live - adding
an
additional lamp perhaps?

They'd have checked neither PIR was turning the thing on. Why would
you
assume they were on the same circuit?

So if we apply that logic, before touching anything we need to check
every light switch, PIR, FCU and anything else with a switch on it,
on
any circuit, just in case some clueless PHucker decided to wire it up
to
the lamp as well.

Does your horse need feeding?

What a stupid train of thought.

We'll see...

Both PIRs activate the outside light you're working on, so you check
both.
Why would you check the bedroom light switch

Because with fools like you around, anything
is possible with borrowed neutrals etc.

If the device works, it was done correctly.

Not if the fool has borrowed a neutral and
only the most obvious circuit is disabled.

The device works, what more do you want?

One that is done safely so that when it fails,
as it inevitably will sometime, someone who
isn't as careful as Adam won't get killed fixing
it when they have done the most obvious
thing and turned just the circuit that appears
to be connect to it off before fixing it.

Wimp.

when you know that doesn't activate it,

But don't know what some fool like you has done with borrowed neutrals
etc.

That's what a multimeter is for.

Not possible to use one when walking past the PIRs.

Why do you think that?

**** all who even have a multimeter have one with
a max min function or even know that can be used for.

What cheap **** meter do you have?! My 20 year old meter has it ffs. Even if you don't, you can set it to bleep if there's a voltage.

And borrowed neutrals don't endanger you when working on the lights.

Wrong.

You test for lives with the multimeter.

That assumes that you know how to use one to do that.

Most of those who work on that sort of thing don't
and don't even have one so it makes a lot more
sense to not allow borrowed neutrals or to use
more than one circuit when you have more than
one PIR controlling the light.

Anyone who knows enough to fix a light has a meter.

and you know there's nobody else in the house to press it?

Irrelevant if some fool like you has done
something stupid with borrowed neutrals etc.

Even turning the entire house off before touching anything
isn't going to protect you with fools like you around who
could have done anything, including steal power.

Then never assume, carry a meter or volt probe with you.

Carrying the meter or volt probe wont get you
anywhere useful when walking past both PIRs.

Why do you believe this?

Because even you should have noticed that you
can't actually see what the voltage at the light is
doing when you walk past the PIR with the meter
or volt probe in your hand.

You sit it so you can see it, get a decent meter with memory, or ask someone else to watch it, or turn off both lighting circuits.

--
Two men were talking.
"My son asked me what I did during the Sexual Revolution," said one.
"I told him I was captured early and spent the duration doing the dishes.

"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 00:14:05 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:52:29 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:26:56 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 20:06:41 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

On 14/09/2015 15:12, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 02:48:48 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

On 13/09/2015 20:22, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 20:19:43 +0100, dennis@home

wrote:

On 13/09/2015 20:11, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:

I'm right, if you think I'm not, prove it. A sensor needs
power
to
activate the relay. It cannot have this until its source
circuit
is
made live, and you switched that off. All the other sensor
can
do
is
connect live to the output of the relay contact of the first
sensor.
This will not power up the first sensor so its relay remains
open.


If you ignore the circuit to the lights and any manual override
switch.

Only the light in question could become live, nothing else.

And let's say someone wanted to work on the switched live -
adding
an
additional lamp perhaps?

They'd have checked neither PIR was turning the thing on. Why
would
you
assume they were on the same circuit?

So if we apply that logic, before touching anything we need to
check
every light switch, PIR, FCU and anything else with a switch on it,
on
any circuit, just in case some clueless PHucker decided to wire it
up
to
the lamp as well.

Does your horse need feeding?

What a stupid train of thought.

We'll see...

Both PIRs activate the outside light you're working on, so you check
both.
Why would you check the bedroom light switch

Because with fools like you around, anything
is possible with borrowed neutrals etc.

If the device works, it was done correctly.

Not if the fool has borrowed a neutral and
only the most obvious circuit is disabled.

The device works, what more do you want?

One that is done safely so that when it fails,
as it inevitably will sometime, someone who
isn't as careful as Adam won't get killed fixing
it when they have done the most obvious
thing and turned just the circuit that appears
to be connect to it off before fixing it.

Wimp.

Makes no sense to kill someone else.

when you know that doesn't activate it,

But don't know what some fool like you has done with borrowed
neutrals
etc.

That's what a multimeter is for.

Not possible to use one when walking past the PIRs.

Why do you think that?

**** all who even have a multimeter have one with
a max min function or even know that can be used for.

What cheap **** meter do you have?!

I have a Fluke 19, but **** all have a meter anything like that.

My 20 year old meter has it ffs.

**** all have a meter that does.

Even if you don't, you can set it to bleep if there's a voltage.

**** all have a meter that does.

And borrowed neutrals don't endanger you when working on the lights.

Wrong.

You test for lives with the multimeter.

That assumes that you know how to use one to do that.

Most of those who work on that sort of thing don't
and don't even have one so it makes a lot more
sense to not allow borrowed neutrals or to use
more than one circuit when you have more than
one PIR controlling the light.

Anyone who knows enough to fix a light has a meter.

Wrong, as always.

and you know there's nobody else in the house to press it?

Irrelevant if some fool like you has done
something stupid with borrowed neutrals etc.

Even turning the entire house off before touching anything
isn't going to protect you with fools like you around who
could have done anything, including steal power.

Then never assume, carry a meter or volt probe with you.

Carrying the meter or volt probe wont get you
anywhere useful when walking past both PIRs.

Why do you believe this?

Because even you should have noticed that you
can't actually see what the voltage at the light is
doing when you walk past the PIR with the meter
or volt probe in your hand.

You sit it so you can see it,

Not even possible with most lights with more than one PIR.

get a decent meter with memory,

**** all have a meter that does.

or ask someone else to watch it,

**** all realise that its possible some fool
like you has used more than one circuit.

or turn off both lighting circuits.

How would they know which other one to turn off ?

You should have said turn off the whole house.

On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 04:54:09 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 00:14:05 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:52:29 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:26:56 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 20:06:41 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

On 14/09/2015 15:12, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 02:48:48 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

On 13/09/2015 20:22, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 20:19:43 +0100, dennis@home

wrote:

On 13/09/2015 20:11, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:

I'm right, if you think I'm not, prove it. A sensor needs
power
to
activate the relay. It cannot have this until its source
circuit
is
made live, and you switched that off. All the other sensor
can
do
is
connect live to the output of the relay contact of the first
sensor.
This will not power up the first sensor so its relay remains
open.


If you ignore the circuit to the lights and any manual override
switch.

Only the light in question could become live, nothing else.

And let's say someone wanted to work on the switched live -
adding
an
additional lamp perhaps?

They'd have checked neither PIR was turning the thing on. Why
would
you
assume they were on the same circuit?

So if we apply that logic, before touching anything we need to
check
every light switch, PIR, FCU and anything else with a switch on it,
on
any circuit, just in case some clueless PHucker decided to wire it
up
to
the lamp as well.

Does your horse need feeding?

What a stupid train of thought.

We'll see...

Both PIRs activate the outside light you're working on, so you check
both.
Why would you check the bedroom light switch

Because with fools like you around, anything
is possible with borrowed neutrals etc.

If the device works, it was done correctly.

Not if the fool has borrowed a neutral and
only the most obvious circuit is disabled.

The device works, what more do you want?

One that is done safely so that when it fails,
as it inevitably will sometime, someone who
isn't as careful as Adam won't get killed fixing
it when they have done the most obvious
thing and turned just the circuit that appears
to be connect to it off before fixing it.

Wimp.

Makes no sense to kill someone else.

Their problem for not being careful.

when you know that doesn't activate it,

But don't know what some fool like you has done with borrowed
neutrals
etc.

That's what a multimeter is for.

Not possible to use one when walking past the PIRs.

Why do you think that?

**** all who even have a multimeter have one with
a max min function or even know that can be used for.

What cheap **** meter do you have?!

I have a Fluke 19, but **** all have a meter anything like that.

My 20 year old meter has it ffs.

**** all have a meter that does.

Even if you don't, you can set it to bleep if there's a voltage.

**** all have a meter that does.

They should.

And borrowed neutrals don't endanger you when working on the lights.

Wrong.

You test for lives with the multimeter.

That assumes that you know how to use one to do that.

Most of those who work on that sort of thing don't
and don't even have one so it makes a lot more
sense to not allow borrowed neutrals or to use
more than one circuit when you have more than
one PIR controlling the light.

Anyone who knows enough to fix a light has a meter.

Wrong, as always.

They don't cost much nowadays.

and you know there's nobody else in the house to press it?

Irrelevant if some fool like you has done
something stupid with borrowed neutrals etc.

Even turning the entire house off before touching anything
isn't going to protect you with fools like you around who
could have done anything, including steal power.

Then never assume, carry a meter or volt probe with you.

Carrying the meter or volt probe wont get you
anywhere useful when walking past both PIRs.

Why do you believe this?

Because even you should have noticed that you
can't actually see what the voltage at the light is
doing when you walk past the PIR with the meter
or volt probe in your hand.

You sit it so you can see it,

Not even possible with most lights with more than one PIR.

Use a mirror.

get a decent meter with memory,

**** all have a meter that does.

or ask someone else to watch it,

**** all realise that its possible some fool
like you has used more than one circuit.

**** all are scared of only 240 volts.

or turn off both lighting circuits.

How would they know which other one to turn off ?

You should have said turn off the whole house.

They will most likely both be on lighting circuits.

--
Why did kamikaze pilots wear helmets?

"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 04:54:09 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 00:14:05 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:52:29 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:26:56 +0100, Jim Thomas
wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 20:06:41 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

On 14/09/2015 15:12, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 02:48:48 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

On 13/09/2015 20:22, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 20:19:43 +0100, dennis@home

wrote:

On 13/09/2015 20:11, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:

I'm right, if you think I'm not, prove it. A sensor needs
power
to
activate the relay. It cannot have this until its source
circuit
is
made live, and you switched that off. All the other sensor
can
do
is
connect live to the output of the relay contact of the first
sensor.
This will not power up the first sensor so its relay remains
open.


If you ignore the circuit to the lights and any manual
override
switch.

Only the light in question could become live, nothing else.

And let's say someone wanted to work on the switched live -
adding
an
additional lamp perhaps?

They'd have checked neither PIR was turning the thing on. Why
would
you
assume they were on the same circuit?

So if we apply that logic, before touching anything we need to
check
every light switch, PIR, FCU and anything else with a switch on
it,
on
any circuit, just in case some clueless PHucker decided to wire
it
up
to
the lamp as well.

Does your horse need feeding?

What a stupid train of thought.

We'll see...

Both PIRs activate the outside light you're working on, so you
check
both.
Why would you check the bedroom light switch

Because with fools like you around, anything
is possible with borrowed neutrals etc.

If the device works, it was done correctly.

Not if the fool has borrowed a neutral and
only the most obvious circuit is disabled.

The device works, what more do you want?

One that is done safely so that when it fails,
as it inevitably will sometime, someone who
isn't as careful as Adam won't get killed fixing
it when they have done the most obvious
thing and turned just the circuit that appears
to be connect to it off before fixing it.

Wimp.

Makes no sense to kill someone else.

Their problem for not being careful.

That's the way most european and third
world countries do their electrical systems.

Yes, you can certainly turn the entire house off
when doing anything to the electrical system,
but it makes a lot more sense to not use more
than one circuit for a particular light and to not
borrow neutrals.

when you know that doesn't activate it,

But don't know what some fool like you has done with borrowed
neutrals
etc.

That's what a multimeter is for.

Not possible to use one when walking past the PIRs.

Why do you think that?

**** all who even have a multimeter have one with
a max min function or even know that can be used for.

What cheap **** meter do you have?!

I have a Fluke 19, but **** all have a meter anything like that.

My 20 year old meter has it ffs.

**** all have a meter that does.

Even if you don't, you can set it to bleep if there's a voltage.

**** all have a meter that does.

They should.

Makes a lot more sense to turn the entire house off instead.

And borrowed neutrals don't endanger you when working on the lights.

Wrong.

You test for lives with the multimeter.

That assumes that you know how to use one to do that.

Most of those who work on that sort of thing don't
and don't even have one so it makes a lot more
sense to not allow borrowed neutrals or to use
more than one circuit when you have more than
one PIR controlling the light.

Anyone who knows enough to fix a light has a meter.

Wrong, as always.

They don't cost much nowadays.

Those with a max min function which are
safe to use on the mains aren't that cheap.

and you know there's nobody else in the house to press it?

Irrelevant if some fool like you has done
something stupid with borrowed neutrals etc.

Even turning the entire house off before touching anything
isn't going to protect you with fools like you around who
could have done anything, including steal power.

Then never assume, carry a meter or volt probe with you.

Carrying the meter or volt probe wont get you
anywhere useful when walking past both PIRs.

Why do you believe this?

Because even you should have noticed that you
can't actually see what the voltage at the light is
doing when you walk past the PIR with the meter
or volt probe in your hand.

You sit it so you can see it,

Not even possible with most lights with more than one PIR.

Use a mirror.

Much easier to turn the whole house off
before doing any work on that config.

get a decent meter with memory,

**** all have a meter that does.

or ask someone else to watch it,

**** all realise that its possible some fool
like you has used more than one circuit.

**** all are scared of only 240 volts.

Its only fools like you that aren't.

or turn off both lighting circuits.

How would they know which other one to turn off ?

You should have said turn off the whole house.

They will most likely both be on lighting circuits.

Most likely is irrelevant with fools like you around.

On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 23:29:34 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 04:54:09 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 00:14:05 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:52:29 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:26:56 +0100, Jim Thomas
wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 20:06:41 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

On 14/09/2015 15:12, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 02:48:48 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

On 13/09/2015 20:22, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 20:19:43 +0100, dennis@home

wrote:

On 13/09/2015 20:11, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:

I'm right, if you think I'm not, prove it. A sensor needs
power
to
activate the relay. It cannot have this until its source
circuit
is
made live, and you switched that off. All the other sensor
can
do
is
connect live to the output of the relay contact of the first
sensor.
This will not power up the first sensor so its relay remains
open.


If you ignore the circuit to the lights and any manual
override
switch.

Only the light in question could become live, nothing else.

And let's say someone wanted to work on the switched live -
adding
an
additional lamp perhaps?

They'd have checked neither PIR was turning the thing on. Why
would
you
assume they were on the same circuit?

So if we apply that logic, before touching anything we need to
check
every light switch, PIR, FCU and anything else with a switch on
it,
on
any circuit, just in case some clueless PHucker decided to wire
it
up
to
the lamp as well.

Does your horse need feeding?

What a stupid train of thought.

We'll see...

Both PIRs activate the outside light you're working on, so you
check
both.
Why would you check the bedroom light switch

Because with fools like you around, anything
is possible with borrowed neutrals etc.

If the device works, it was done correctly.

Not if the fool has borrowed a neutral and
only the most obvious circuit is disabled.

The device works, what more do you want?

One that is done safely so that when it fails,
as it inevitably will sometime, someone who
isn't as careful as Adam won't get killed fixing
it when they have done the most obvious
thing and turned just the circuit that appears
to be connect to it off before fixing it.

Wimp.

Makes no sense to kill someone else.

Their problem for not being careful.

That's the way most european and third
world countries do their electrical systems.

Which is why they do better than us at a lot of things. China for example is leading the world economy because "developed" countries waste money on safety.

Yes, you can certainly turn the entire house off
when doing anything to the electrical system,
but it makes a lot more sense to not use more
than one circuit for a particular light and to not
borrow neutrals.

If you have two lighting circuits, just turn them both off. And think of the time you save borrowing a neutral.

when you know that doesn't activate it,

But don't know what some fool like you has done with borrowed
neutrals
etc.

That's what a multimeter is for.

Not possible to use one when walking past the PIRs.

Why do you think that?

**** all who even have a multimeter have one with
a max min function or even know that can be used for.

What cheap **** meter do you have?!

I have a Fluke 19, but **** all have a meter anything like that.

My 20 year old meter has it ffs.

**** all have a meter that does.

Even if you don't, you can set it to bleep if there's a voltage.

**** all have a meter that does.

They should.

Makes a lot more sense to turn the entire house off instead.

A decent meter is a basic tool, like a screwdriver.

And borrowed neutrals don't endanger you when working on the lights.

Wrong.

You test for lives with the multimeter.

That assumes that you know how to use one to do that.

Most of those who work on that sort of thing don't
and don't even have one so it makes a lot more
sense to not allow borrowed neutrals or to use
more than one circuit when you have more than
one PIR controlling the light.

Anyone who knows enough to fix a light has a meter.

Wrong, as always.

They don't cost much nowadays.

Those with a max min function which are
safe to use on the mains aren't that cheap.

All multimeters take mains voltage. And max min is available on all but the very ****tiest ones.

and you know there's nobody else in the house to press it?

Irrelevant if some fool like you has done
something stupid with borrowed neutrals etc.

Even turning the entire house off before touching anything
isn't going to protect you with fools like you around who
could have done anything, including steal power.

Then never assume, carry a meter or volt probe with you.

Carrying the meter or volt probe wont get you
anywhere useful when walking past both PIRs.

Why do you believe this?

Because even you should have noticed that you
can't actually see what the voltage at the light is
doing when you walk past the PIR with the meter
or volt probe in your hand.

You sit it so you can see it,

Not even possible with most lights with more than one PIR.

Use a mirror.

Much easier to turn the whole house off
before doing any work on that config.

Which means the borrowed neutral and using the other circuit isn't a problem.

get a decent meter with memory,

**** all have a meter that does.

or ask someone else to watch it,

**** all realise that its possible some fool
like you has used more than one circuit.

**** all are scared of only 240 volts.

Its only fools like you that aren't.

I'm a realist, 240 volts just makes you jump. Why do you think we don't have 1000 volts in our houses?

--
Why do I have to wear a shirt and tie to go in a bar to see a topless dancer?

"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 23:29:34 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 04:54:09 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 00:14:05 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:52:29 +0100, Jim Thomas
wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:26:56 +0100, Jim Thomas
wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 20:06:41 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

On 14/09/2015 15:12, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 02:48:48 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

On 13/09/2015 20:22, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 20:19:43 +0100, dennis@home

wrote:

On 13/09/2015 20:11, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:

I'm right, if you think I'm not, prove it. A sensor needs
power
to
activate the relay. It cannot have this until its source
circuit
is
made live, and you switched that off. All the other
sensor
can
do
is
connect live to the output of the relay contact of the
first
sensor.
This will not power up the first sensor so its relay
remains
open.


If you ignore the circuit to the lights and any manual
override
switch.

Only the light in question could become live, nothing else.

And let's say someone wanted to work on the switched live -
adding
an
additional lamp perhaps?

They'd have checked neither PIR was turning the thing on. Why
would
you
assume they were on the same circuit?

So if we apply that logic, before touching anything we need to
check
every light switch, PIR, FCU and anything else with a switch on
it,
on
any circuit, just in case some clueless PHucker decided to wire
it
up
to
the lamp as well.

Does your horse need feeding?

What a stupid train of thought.

We'll see...

Both PIRs activate the outside light you're working on, so you
check
both.
Why would you check the bedroom light switch

Because with fools like you around, anything
is possible with borrowed neutrals etc.

If the device works, it was done correctly.

Not if the fool has borrowed a neutral and
only the most obvious circuit is disabled.

The device works, what more do you want?

One that is done safely so that when it fails,
as it inevitably will sometime, someone who
isn't as careful as Adam won't get killed fixing
it when they have done the most obvious
thing and turned just the circuit that appears
to be connect to it off before fixing it.

Wimp.

Makes no sense to kill someone else.

Their problem for not being careful.

That's the way most european and third
world countries do their electrical systems.

Which is why they do better than us at a lot of things.

Nope, the krauts do better than you lot at almost everything
but don't do their electrical systems like that.

China for example is leading the world economy

Like hell it is.

because "developed" countries waste money on safety.

Nope, because they pay MUCH lower wages than the west does.

Yes, you can certainly turn the entire house off
when doing anything to the electrical system,
but it makes a lot more sense to not use more
than one circuit for a particular light and to not
borrow neutrals.

If you have two lighting circuits, just turn them both off.

You don't know whether some fool like you has
borrowed a neutral from a non lighting circuit.

And think of the time you save borrowing a neutral.

Think of the time you save when dead.

when you know that doesn't activate it,

But don't know what some fool like you has done with borrowed
neutrals
etc.

That's what a multimeter is for.

Not possible to use one when walking past the PIRs.

Why do you think that?

**** all who even have a multimeter have one with
a max min function or even know that can be used for.

What cheap **** meter do you have?!

I have a Fluke 19, but **** all have a meter anything like that.

My 20 year old meter has it ffs.

**** all have a meter that does.

Even if you don't, you can set it to bleep if there's a voltage.

**** all have a meter that does.

They should.

Makes a lot more sense to turn the entire house off instead.

A decent meter is a basic tool, like a screwdriver.

**** all even know how to use a basic multimeter, let alone a
decent one which has max min or even how to use those functions.

Even someone as stupid as you knows how to turn the entire house off.

And borrowed neutrals don't endanger you when working on the
lights.

Wrong.

You test for lives with the multimeter.

That assumes that you know how to use one to do that.

Most of those who work on that sort of thing don't
and don't even have one so it makes a lot more
sense to not allow borrowed neutrals or to use
more than one circuit when you have more than
one PIR controlling the light.

Anyone who knows enough to fix a light has a meter.

Wrong, as always.

They don't cost much nowadays.

Those with a max min function which are
safe to use on the mains aren't that cheap.

All multimeters take mains voltage.

Very dangerously with the worst of them.

And max min is available on all but the very ****tiest ones.

And **** all who can manage to wire a light even know
how to use the max min function in those in that situation.

And it's a lot quicker to just turn the entire house
off and much safer with an intermittent fault too.

and you know there's nobody else in the house to press it?

Irrelevant if some fool like you has done
something stupid with borrowed neutrals etc.

Even turning the entire house off before touching anything
isn't going to protect you with fools like you around who
could have done anything, including steal power.

Then never assume, carry a meter or volt probe with you.

Carrying the meter or volt probe wont get you
anywhere useful when walking past both PIRs.

Why do you believe this?

Because even you should have noticed that you
can't actually see what the voltage at the light is
doing when you walk past the PIR with the meter
or volt probe in your hand.

You sit it so you can see it,

Not even possible with most lights with more than one PIR.

Use a mirror.

Much easier to turn the whole house off
before doing any work on that config.

Which means the borrowed neutral and using the other circuit isn't a
problem.

But can kill those who don't turn the whole house off.

get a decent meter with memory,

**** all have a meter that does.

or ask someone else to watch it,

**** all realise that its possible some fool
like you has used more than one circuit.

**** all are scared of only 240 volts.

Its only fools like you that aren't.

I'm a realist, 240 volts just makes you jump.

Must explain how all those get killed by it.

On Sun, 27 Sep 2015 00:21:56 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 23:29:34 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 04:54:09 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 00:14:05 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:52:29 +0100, Jim Thomas
wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:26:56 +0100, Jim Thomas
wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 20:06:41 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

On 14/09/2015 15:12, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 02:48:48 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

On 13/09/2015 20:22, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 20:19:43 +0100, dennis@home

wrote:

On 13/09/2015 20:11, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:

I'm right, if you think I'm not, prove it. A sensor needs
power
to
activate the relay. It cannot have this until its source
circuit
is
made live, and you switched that off. All the other
sensor
can
do
is
connect live to the output of the relay contact of the
first
sensor.
This will not power up the first sensor so its relay
remains
open.


If you ignore the circuit to the lights and any manual
override
switch.

Only the light in question could become live, nothing else.

And let's say someone wanted to work on the switched live -
adding
an
additional lamp perhaps?

They'd have checked neither PIR was turning the thing on. Why
would
you
assume they were on the same circuit?

So if we apply that logic, before touching anything we need to
check
every light switch, PIR, FCU and anything else with a switch on
it,
on
any circuit, just in case some clueless PHucker decided to wire
it
up
to
the lamp as well.

Does your horse need feeding?

What a stupid train of thought.

We'll see...

Both PIRs activate the outside light you're working on, so you
check
both.
Why would you check the bedroom light switch

Because with fools like you around, anything
is possible with borrowed neutrals etc.

If the device works, it was done correctly.

Not if the fool has borrowed a neutral and
only the most obvious circuit is disabled.

The device works, what more do you want?

One that is done safely so that when it fails,
as it inevitably will sometime, someone who
isn't as careful as Adam won't get killed fixing
it when they have done the most obvious
thing and turned just the circuit that appears
to be connect to it off before fixing it.

Wimp.

Makes no sense to kill someone else.

Their problem for not being careful.

That's the way most european and third
world countries do their electrical systems.

Which is why they do better than us at a lot of things.

Nope, the krauts do better than you lot at almost everything
but don't do their electrical systems like that.

The Krauts are overly pedantic about everything. They examine their **** before flushing it!

China for example is leading the world economy

Like hell it is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_China

because "developed" countries waste money on safety.

Nope, because they pay MUCH lower wages than the west does.

Because the cost of living is lower, because they're not all paying for safety in every product.

Yes, you can certainly turn the entire house off
when doing anything to the electrical system,
but it makes a lot more sense to not use more
than one circuit for a particular light and to not
borrow neutrals.

If you have two lighting circuits, just turn them both off.

You don't know whether some fool like you has
borrowed a neutral from a non lighting circuit.

Unlikely to be nearby.

And think of the time you save borrowing a neutral.

Think of the time you save when dead.

Wimp. A bit of juice won't kill you.

when you know that doesn't activate it,

But don't know what some fool like you has done with borrowed
neutrals
etc.

That's what a multimeter is for.

Not possible to use one when walking past the PIRs.

Why do you think that?

**** all who even have a multimeter have one with
a max min function or even know that can be used for.

What cheap **** meter do you have?!

I have a Fluke 19, but **** all have a meter anything like that.

My 20 year old meter has it ffs.

**** all have a meter that does.

Even if you don't, you can set it to bleep if there's a voltage.

**** all have a meter that does.

They should.

Makes a lot more sense to turn the entire house off instead.

A decent meter is a basic tool, like a screwdriver.

**** all even know how to use a basic multimeter, let alone a
decent one which has max min or even how to use those functions.

Even someone as stupid as you knows how to turn the entire house off.

You call me stupid, yet I can use a multimeter. You seem to think this requires intelligence.

And borrowed neutrals don't endanger you when working on the
lights.

Wrong.

You test for lives with the multimeter.

That assumes that you know how to use one to do that.

Most of those who work on that sort of thing don't
and don't even have one so it makes a lot more
sense to not allow borrowed neutrals or to use
more than one circuit when you have more than
one PIR controlling the light.

Anyone who knows enough to fix a light has a meter.

Wrong, as always.

They don't cost much nowadays.

Those with a max min function which are
safe to use on the mains aren't that cheap.

All multimeters take mains voltage.

Very dangerously with the worst of them.

Rubbish. I've never even felt a tingle using mine for mains, including three phase.

And max min is available on all but the very ****tiest ones.

And **** all who can manage to wire a light even know
how to use the max min function in those in that situation.

It's as simple as operating a toaster.

And it's a lot quicker to just turn the entire house
off and much safer with an intermittent fault too.

Easier to work on it live, as I often do. Just don't touch the bare ends.

and you know there's nobody else in the house to press it?

Irrelevant if some fool like you has done
something stupid with borrowed neutrals etc.

Even turning the entire house off before touching anything
isn't going to protect you with fools like you around who
could have done anything, including steal power.

Then never assume, carry a meter or volt probe with you.

Carrying the meter or volt probe wont get you
anywhere useful when walking past both PIRs.

Why do you believe this?

Because even you should have noticed that you
can't actually see what the voltage at the light is
doing when you walk past the PIR with the meter
or volt probe in your hand.

You sit it so you can see it,

Not even possible with most lights with more than one PIR.

Use a mirror.

Much easier to turn the whole house off
before doing any work on that config.

Which means the borrowed neutral and using the other circuit isn't a
problem.

But can kill those who don't turn the whole house off.

Survival of the fittest.

get a decent meter with memory,

**** all have a meter that does.

or ask someone else to watch it,

**** all realise that its possible some fool
like you has used more than one circuit.

**** all are scared of only 240 volts.

Its only fools like you that aren't.

I'm a realist, 240 volts just makes you jump.

Must explain how all those get killed by it.

Survival of the fittest.

--
Police cordoned off Liverpool City Centre this morning when a suspicious object was discovered in a car.
It later turned out to be a tax disc.

"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 27 Sep 2015 00:21:56 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 23:29:34 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 04:54:09 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 00:14:05 +0100, Jim Thomas
wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:52:29 +0100, Jim Thomas
wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:26:56 +0100, Jim Thomas
wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 20:06:41 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

On 14/09/2015 15:12, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 02:48:48 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

On 13/09/2015 20:22, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 20:19:43 +0100, dennis@home

wrote:

On 13/09/2015 20:11, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:

I'm right, if you think I'm not, prove it. A sensor
needs
power
to
activate the relay. It cannot have this until its
source
circuit
is
made live, and you switched that off. All the other
sensor
can
do
is
connect live to the output of the relay contact of the
first
sensor.
This will not power up the first sensor so its relay
remains
open.


If you ignore the circuit to the lights and any manual
override
switch.

Only the light in question could become live, nothing
else.

And let's say someone wanted to work on the switched live -
adding
an
additional lamp perhaps?

They'd have checked neither PIR was turning the thing on.
Why
would
you
assume they were on the same circuit?

So if we apply that logic, before touching anything we need
to
check
every light switch, PIR, FCU and anything else with a switch
on
it,
on
any circuit, just in case some clueless PHucker decided to
wire
it
up
to
the lamp as well.

Does your horse need feeding?

What a stupid train of thought.

We'll see...

Both PIRs activate the outside light you're working on, so you
check
both.
Why would you check the bedroom light switch

Because with fools like you around, anything
is possible with borrowed neutrals etc.

If the device works, it was done correctly.

Not if the fool has borrowed a neutral and
only the most obvious circuit is disabled.

The device works, what more do you want?

One that is done safely so that when it fails,
as it inevitably will sometime, someone who
isn't as careful as Adam won't get killed fixing
it when they have done the most obvious
thing and turned just the circuit that appears
to be connect to it off before fixing it.

Wimp.

Makes no sense to kill someone else.

Their problem for not being careful.

That's the way most european and third
world countries do their electrical systems.

Which is why they do better than us at a lot of things.

Nope, the krauts do better than you lot at almost everything
but don't do their electrical systems like that.

The Krauts are overly pedantic about everything.

Not about toilet 'humour'

China for example is leading the world economy

Like hell it is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_China

Doesn't say it is leading the world economy.

because "developed" countries waste money on safety.

Nope, because they pay MUCH lower wages than the west does.

Because the cost of living is lower, because they're not all paying for
safety in every product.

Nope, because the standard of living is way below what it is in the west.

Yes, you can certainly turn the entire house off
when doing anything to the electrical system,
but it makes a lot more sense to not use more
than one circuit for a particular light and to not
borrow neutrals.

If you have two lighting circuits, just turn them both off.

You don't know whether some fool like you has
borrowed a neutral from a non lighting circuit.

Unlikely to be nearby.

Bull****.

And think of the time you save borrowing a neutral.

Think of the time you save when dead.

Wimp. A bit of juice won't kill you.

It clearly does kill plenty.

when you know that doesn't activate it,

But don't know what some fool like you has done with borrowed
neutrals
etc.

That's what a multimeter is for.

Not possible to use one when walking past the PIRs.

Why do you think that?

**** all who even have a multimeter have one with
a max min function or even know that can be used for.

What cheap **** meter do you have?!

I have a Fluke 19, but **** all have a meter anything like that.

My 20 year old meter has it ffs.

**** all have a meter that does.

Even if you don't, you can set it to bleep if there's a voltage.

**** all have a meter that does.

They should.

Makes a lot more sense to turn the entire house off instead.

A decent meter is a basic tool, like a screwdriver.

**** all even know how to use a basic multimeter, let alone a
decent one which has max min or even how to use those functions.

Even someone as stupid as you knows how to turn the entire house off.

You call me stupid, yet I can use a multimeter. You seem to think this
requires intelligence.

Nope, just that most don't know how to use one.

Most don't know how knit either.

Doesn't require any intelligence either.

And borrowed neutrals don't endanger you when working on the
lights.

Wrong.

You test for lives with the multimeter.

That assumes that you know how to use one to do that.

Most of those who work on that sort of thing don't
and don't even have one so it makes a lot more
sense to not allow borrowed neutrals or to use
more than one circuit when you have more than
one PIR controlling the light.

Anyone who knows enough to fix a light has a meter.

Wrong, as always.

They don't cost much nowadays.

Those with a max min function which are
safe to use on the mains aren't that cheap.

All multimeters take mains voltage.

Very dangerously with the worst of them.

Rubbish.

Fact.

I've never even felt a tingle using mine for mains, including three phase.

It ain't about tingles.

And max min is available on all but the very ****tiest ones.

And **** all who can manage to wire a light even know
how to use the max min function in those in that situation.

It's as simple as operating a toaster.

Pigs arse it is.

And it's a lot quicker to just turn the entire house
off and much safer with an intermittent fault too.

Easier to work on it live, as I often do. Just don't touch the bare ends.

So why do you fart around with a max
min multimeter walking past the PIRs ?

You're clearly lying thru your teeth.

and you know there's nobody else in the house to press it?

Irrelevant if some fool like you has done
something stupid with borrowed neutrals etc.

Even turning the entire house off before touching anything
isn't going to protect you with fools like you around who
could have done anything, including steal power.

Then never assume, carry a meter or volt probe with you.

Carrying the meter or volt probe wont get you
anywhere useful when walking past both PIRs.

Why do you believe this?

Because even you should have noticed that you
can't actually see what the voltage at the light is
doing when you walk past the PIR with the meter
or volt probe in your hand.

You sit it so you can see it,

Not even possible with most lights with more than one PIR.

Use a mirror.

Much easier to turn the whole house off
before doing any work on that config.

Which means the borrowed neutral and using the other circuit isn't a
problem.

But can kill those who don't turn the whole house off.

Survival of the fittest.

Nope, not once they have already spawned their offspring.

Fortunately you never have.

get a decent meter with memory,

**** all have a meter that does.

or ask someone else to watch it,

**** all realise that its possible some fool
like you has used more than one circuit.

**** all are scared of only 240 volts.

Its only fools like you that aren't.

I'm a realist, 240 volts just makes you jump.

Must explain how all those get killed by it.

Survival of the fittest.

Nope, not once they have already spawned their offspring.

Fortunately you never have.

On Tue, 29 Sep 2015 22:50:54 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 27 Sep 2015 00:21:56 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 23:29:34 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 04:54:09 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 00:14:05 +0100, Jim Thomas
wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:52:29 +0100, Jim Thomas
wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:26:56 +0100, Jim Thomas
wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 20:06:41 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

On 14/09/2015 15:12, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 02:48:48 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

On 13/09/2015 20:22, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 20:19:43 +0100, dennis@home

wrote:

On 13/09/2015 20:11, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:

I'm right, if you think I'm not, prove it. A sensor
needs
power
to
activate the relay. It cannot have this until its
source
circuit
is
made live, and you switched that off. All the other
sensor
can
do
is
connect live to the output of the relay contact of the
first
sensor.
This will not power up the first sensor so its relay
remains
open.


If you ignore the circuit to the lights and any manual
override
switch.

Only the light in question could become live, nothing
else.

And let's say someone wanted to work on the switched live -
adding
an
additional lamp perhaps?

They'd have checked neither PIR was turning the thing on.
Why
would
you
assume they were on the same circuit?

So if we apply that logic, before touching anything we need
to
check
every light switch, PIR, FCU and anything else with a switch
on
it,
on
any circuit, just in case some clueless PHucker decided to
wire
it
up
to
the lamp as well.

Does your horse need feeding?

What a stupid train of thought.

We'll see...

Both PIRs activate the outside light you're working on, so you
check
both.
Why would you check the bedroom light switch

Because with fools like you around, anything
is possible with borrowed neutrals etc.

If the device works, it was done correctly.

Not if the fool has borrowed a neutral and
only the most obvious circuit is disabled.

The device works, what more do you want?

One that is done safely so that when it fails,
as it inevitably will sometime, someone who
isn't as careful as Adam won't get killed fixing
it when they have done the most obvious
thing and turned just the circuit that appears
to be connect to it off before fixing it.

Wimp.

Makes no sense to kill someone else.

Their problem for not being careful.

That's the way most european and third
world countries do their electrical systems.

Which is why they do better than us at a lot of things.

Nope, the krauts do better than you lot at almost everything
but don't do their electrical systems like that.

The Krauts are overly pedantic about everything.

Not about toilet 'humour'

Explain.

China for example is leading the world economy

Like hell it is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_China

Doesn't say it is leading the world economy.

"world's second largest economy" - near enough.

because "developed" countries waste money on safety.

Nope, because they pay MUCH lower wages than the west does.

Because the cost of living is lower, because they're not all paying for
safety in every product.

Nope, because the standard of living is way below what it is in the west.

I disagree.

Yes, you can certainly turn the entire house off
when doing anything to the electrical system,
but it makes a lot more sense to not use more
than one circuit for a particular light and to not
borrow neutrals.

If you have two lighting circuits, just turn them both off.

You don't know whether some fool like you has
borrowed a neutral from a non lighting circuit.

Unlikely to be nearby.

Bull****.

Lights are on the ceiling, sockets are near the floor.

And think of the time you save borrowing a neutral.

Think of the time you save when dead.

Wimp. A bit of juice won't kill you.

It clearly does kill plenty.

Survival of the fittest.

when you know that doesn't activate it,

But don't know what some fool like you has done with borrowed
neutrals
etc.

That's what a multimeter is for.

Not possible to use one when walking past the PIRs.

Why do you think that?

**** all who even have a multimeter have one with
a max min function or even know that can be used for.

What cheap **** meter do you have?!

I have a Fluke 19, but **** all have a meter anything like that.

My 20 year old meter has it ffs.

**** all have a meter that does.

Even if you don't, you can set it to bleep if there's a voltage.

**** all have a meter that does.

They should.

Makes a lot more sense to turn the entire house off instead.

A decent meter is a basic tool, like a screwdriver.

**** all even know how to use a basic multimeter, let alone a
decent one which has max min or even how to use those functions.

Even someone as stupid as you knows how to turn the entire house off.

You call me stupid, yet I can use a multimeter. You seem to think this
requires intelligence.

Nope, just that most don't know how to use one.

Most don't know how knit either.

Doesn't require any intelligence either.

You don't need to know how to use a multimeter, it's as easy as riding a bike.

And borrowed neutrals don't endanger you when working on the
lights.

Wrong.

You test for lives with the multimeter.

That assumes that you know how to use one to do that.

Most of those who work on that sort of thing don't
and don't even have one so it makes a lot more
sense to not allow borrowed neutrals or to use
more than one circuit when you have more than
one PIR controlling the light.

Anyone who knows enough to fix a light has a meter.

Wrong, as always.

They don't cost much nowadays.

Those with a max min function which are
safe to use on the mains aren't that cheap.

All multimeters take mains voltage.

Very dangerously with the worst of them.

Rubbish.

Fact.

I've never even felt a tingle using mine for mains, including three phase.

It ain't about tingles.

Well I'm not dead.

And max min is available on all but the very ****tiest ones.

And **** all who can manage to wire a light even know
how to use the max min function in those in that situation.

It's as simple as operating a toaster.

Pigs arse it is.

Select volts to measure volts and put the probes on live and neutral/earth.

And it's a lot quicker to just turn the entire house
off and much safer with an intermittent fault too.

Easier to work on it live, as I often do. Just don't touch the bare ends.

So why do you fart around with a max
min multimeter walking past the PIRs ?

I wouldn't. I was suggesting that's what someone would do if they wanted to work on a dead circuit.

You're clearly lying thru your teeth.

and you know there's nobody else in the house to press it?

Irrelevant if some fool like you has done
something stupid with borrowed neutrals etc.

Even turning the entire house off before touching anything
isn't going to protect you with fools like you around who
could have done anything, including steal power.

Then never assume, carry a meter or volt probe with you.

Carrying the meter or volt probe wont get you
anywhere useful when walking past both PIRs.

Why do you believe this?

Because even you should have noticed that you
can't actually see what the voltage at the light is
doing when you walk past the PIR with the meter
or volt probe in your hand.

You sit it so you can see it,

Not even possible with most lights with more than one PIR.

Use a mirror.

Much easier to turn the whole house off
before doing any work on that config.

Which means the borrowed neutral and using the other circuit isn't a
problem.

But can kill those who don't turn the whole house off.

Survival of the fittest.

Nope, not once they have already spawned their offspring.

Chances are that will half the time not be the case.

Fortunately you never have.

Different reason.

--
When you want a man to play with you, wear a full-length black nightgown with buttons all over it.
Sure it's uncomfortable, but it makes you look just like his remote control.

"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 29 Sep 2015 22:50:54 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 27 Sep 2015 00:21:56 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 23:29:34 +0100, Jim Thomas wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 04:54:09 +0100, Jim Thomas
wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 00:14:05 +0100, Jim Thomas
wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:52:29 +0100, Jim Thomas
wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:26:56 +0100, Jim Thomas
wrote:



"Tough Guy no. 1265" wrote in message
news On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 20:06:41 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

On 14/09/2015 15:12, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 02:48:48 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

On 13/09/2015 20:22, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 20:19:43 +0100, dennis@home

wrote:

On 13/09/2015 20:11, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:

I'm right, if you think I'm not, prove it. A sensor
needs
power
to
activate the relay. It cannot have this until its
source
circuit
is
made live, and you switched that off. All the other
sensor
can
do
is
connect live to the output of the relay contact of the
first
sensor.
This will not power up the first sensor so its relay
remains
open.


If you ignore the circuit to the lights and any manual
override
switch.

Only the light in question could become live, nothing
else.

And let's say someone wanted to work on the switched
live -
adding
an
additional lamp perhaps?

They'd have checked neither PIR was turning the thing on.
Why
would
you
assume they were on the same circuit?

So if we apply that logic, before touching anything we need
to
check
every light switch, PIR, FCU and anything else with a
switch
on
it,
on
any circuit, just in case some clueless PHucker decided to
wire
it
up
to
the lamp as well.

Does your horse need feeding?

What a stupid train of thought.

We'll see...

Both PIRs activate the outside light you're working on, so
you
check
both.
Why would you check the bedroom light switch

Because with fools like you around, anything
is possible with borrowed neutrals etc.

If the device works, it was done correctly.

Not if the fool has borrowed a neutral and
only the most obvious circuit is disabled.

The device works, what more do you want?

One that is done safely so that when it fails,
as it inevitably will sometime, someone who
isn't as careful as Adam won't get killed fixing
it when they have done the most obvious
thing and turned just the circuit that appears
to be connect to it off before fixing it.

Wimp.

Makes no sense to kill someone else.

Their problem for not being careful.

That's the way most european and third
world countries do their electrical systems.

Which is why they do better than us at a lot of things.

Nope, the krauts do better than you lot at almost everything
but don't do their electrical systems like that.

The Krauts are overly pedantic about everything.

Not about toilet 'humour'

Explain.

Krauts are notorious for being into toilet
humour and they aren't pedantic about that.

China for example is leading the world economy

Like hell it is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_China

Doesn't say it is leading the world economy.

"world's second largest economy" - near enough.

You never could bull**** your way out of a wet paper bag.

because "developed" countries waste money on safety.

Nope, because they pay MUCH lower wages than the west does.

Because the cost of living is lower, because they're not all paying for
safety in every product.

Nope, because the standard of living is way below what it is in the west.

I disagree.

You are completely irrelevant. Its true anyway.

Yes, you can certainly turn the entire house off
when doing anything to the electrical system,
but it makes a lot more sense to not use more
than one circuit for a particular light and to not
borrow neutrals.

If you have two lighting circuits, just turn them both off.

You don't know whether some fool like you has
borrowed a neutral from a non lighting circuit.

Unlikely to be nearby.

Bull****.

Lights are on the ceiling, sockets are near the floor.

Irrelevant to where the wiring to them goes.

And think of the time you save borrowing a neutral.

Think of the time you save when dead.

Wimp. A bit of juice won't kill you.

It clearly does kill plenty.

Survival of the fittest.

Survival of the most stupid in your case.

Fortunately you don't breed so you genes will be flushed where they belong.

when you know that doesn't activate it,

But don't know what some fool like you has done with borrowed
neutrals
etc.

That's what a multimeter is for.

Not possible to use one when walking past the PIRs.

Why do you think that?

**** all who even have a multimeter have one with
a max min function or even know that can be used for.

What cheap **** meter do you have?!

I have a Fluke 19, but **** all have a meter anything like that.

My 20 year old meter has it ffs.

**** all have a meter that does.

Even if you don't, you can set it to bleep if there's a voltage.

**** all have a meter that does.

They should.

Makes a lot more sense to turn the entire house off instead.

A decent meter is a basic tool, like a screwdriver.

**** all even know how to use a basic multimeter, let alone a
decent one which has max min or even how to use those functions.

Even someone as stupid as you knows how to turn the entire house off.

You call me stupid, yet I can use a multimeter. You seem to think this
requires intelligence.

Nope, just that most don't know how to use one.

Most don't know how knit either.

Doesn't require any intelligence either.

You don't need to know how to use a multimeter,

Corse you do.

it's as easy as riding a bike.

Mate of mine is one of the best mechanics around.

Cant use one, gets me to do that stuff for him.

And borrowed neutrals don't endanger you when working on the
lights.

Wrong.

You test for lives with the multimeter.

That assumes that you know how to use one to do that.

Most of those who work on that sort of thing don't
and don't even have one so it makes a lot more
sense to not allow borrowed neutrals or to use
more than one circuit when you have more than
one PIR controlling the light.

Anyone who knows enough to fix a light has a meter.

Wrong, as always.

They don't cost much nowadays.

Those with a max min function which are
safe to use on the mains aren't that cheap.

All multimeters take mains voltage.

Very dangerously with the worst of them.

Rubbish.

Fact.

I've never even felt a tingle using mine for mains, including three
phase.

It ain't about tingles.

Well I'm not dead.

More's the pity.

And max min is available on all but the very ****tiest ones.

And **** all who can manage to wire a light even know
how to use the max min function in those in that situation.

It's as simple as operating a toaster.

Pigs arse it is.

Select volts to measure volts and put the probes on live and
neutral/earth.

Nothing like a toaster when you don't have to do anything like that.

And it's a lot quicker to just turn the entire house
off and much safer with an intermittent fault too.

Easier to work on it live, as I often do. Just don't touch the bare
ends.

So why do you fart around with a max
min multimeter walking past the PIRs ?

I wouldn't. I was suggesting that's what someone would do if they wanted
to work on a dead circuit.

Makes a lot more sense to turn the house off.

You're clearly lying thru your teeth.

and you know there's nobody else in the house to press it?

Irrelevant if some fool like you has done
something stupid with borrowed neutrals etc.

Even turning the entire house off before touching anything
isn't going to protect you with fools like you around who
could have done anything, including steal power.

Then never assume, carry a meter or volt probe with you.

Carrying the meter or volt probe wont get you
anywhere useful when walking past both PIRs.

Why do you believe this?

Because even you should have noticed that you
can't actually see what the voltage at the light is
doing when you walk past the PIR with the meter
or volt probe in your hand.

You sit it so you can see it,

Not even possible with most lights with more than one PIR.

Use a mirror.

Much easier to turn the whole house off
before doing any work on that config.

Which means the borrowed neutral and using the other circuit isn't a
problem.

But can kill those who don't turn the whole house off.

Survival of the fittest.

Nope, not once they have already spawned their offspring.

Chances are that will half the time not be the case.

Even sillier than you usually manage.

Fortunately you never have.

Different reason.

Same result.