Just binned the two in my office desk, one a Kewtech (so not a Fluke,
but not bargain basement either). Should I buy a Fluke, or two or three
cheaper ones for the same total?

newshound has brought this to us :
Just binned the two in my office desk, one a Kewtech (so not a Fluke, but not
bargain basement either). Should I buy a Fluke, or two or three cheaper ones
for the same total?

I always found Fluke to work well.

On 30/01/2021 21:48, newshound wrote:
Just binned the two in my office desk, one a Kewtech (so not a Fluke,
but not bargain basement either). Should I buy a Fluke, or two or three
cheaper ones for the same total?


If you had several, would these be kept in different places?

On 30/01/2021 22:59, GB wrote:
On 30/01/2021 21:48, newshound wrote:
Just binned the two in my office desk, one a Kewtech (so not a Fluke,
but not bargain basement either). Should I buy a Fluke, or two or
three cheaper ones for the same total?


If you had several, would these be kept in different places?

I have one or two in my workshop, but I find it increasingly handy to
have some duplicate small tools in my office. In the days of neon
screwdrivers I would always have several around, to have a spare if one
decided to die. And, of course, always doing a positive test before
relying on a negative indication.

"newshound" wrote in message
o.uk...
Just binned the two in my office desk, one a Kewtech (so not a Fluke, but
not bargain basement either). Should I buy a Fluke, or two or three
cheaper ones for the same total?

Hopefully these work better than the one I bought from B&Q (model 18W51).
That is *very* unreliable. The instructions tell you to test it on a
known-live circuit before using it to determine whether a test circuit is
live or to trace where a live cable goes. But it needs to be very close to a
live wire or pin, and doesn't detect wires in a conduit in a wall. When did
building regs (or normal electrician practice) change from using metal to
using plastic conduits? I can imagine metal conduits would block any volt
stick, especially if the conduit was earthed.

NY presented the following explanation :
The instructions tell you to test it on a known-live circuit before using it
to determine whether a test circuit is live or to trace where a live cable
goes.

You can test one by rubbing the tip up and down your arm, to create
static.

But it needs to be very close to a live wire or pin, and doesn't detect
wires in a conduit in a wall.

Their range is very limited, which is useful to identify L from N in
bunches of cables, or in flexes. The range can be refined even more, by
placing your fingers around the tip as a screen.

When did building regs (or normal electrician
practice) change from using metal to using plastic conduits? I can imagine
metal conduits would block any volt stick, especially if the conduit was
earthed.

Why would you expect them to work through metal or screening? Either
metal or plastic conduits are in use.

"Harry Bloomfield"; "Esq." wrote in message
...
When did building regs (or normal electrician practice) change from using
metal to using plastic conduits? I can imagine metal conduits would block
any volt stick, especially if the conduit was earthed.

Why would you expect them to work through metal or screening? Either metal
or plastic conduits are in use.

As I said above, I *wouldn't* expect them to work through metal conduits. I
presume that was one of the reasons (along with cost, weight and ease of
cutting) for conduits mostly being plastic nowadays. Though maybe *good*
conduit tracers can detect either induced voltage from live wires, for wires
in plastic conduits, or can detect the alteration of a magnetic field (metal
detector principle) for metal conduits, irrespective of whether there's a
current flowing. Usually, the ability to trace where buried wires go is more
important than to detect which wires are live - usually it's for working out
where it's safe to drill or nail into a wall when putting up a picture etc.

I'm not sure how the batteries in my B&Q detector last as long as they do,
because there's no on/off switch: it's permanently on and just bleeps (but
very unreliably) when you put the tip near a current-carrying wire.

In article , NY wrote:
"Harry Bloomfield"; "Esq." wrote in message
...
When did building regs (or normal electrician practice) change from
using metal to using plastic conduits? I can imagine metal conduits
would block any volt stick, especially if the conduit was earthed.

Why would you expect them to work through metal or screening? Either
metal or plastic conduits are in use.

As I said above, I *wouldn't* expect them to work through metal conduits.
I presume that was one of the reasons (along with cost, weight and ease
of cutting) for conduits mostly being plastic nowadays.

Don't forget threading ...

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

On 01/02/2021 10:50, charles wrote:
In article , NY wrote:
"Harry Bloomfield"; "Esq." wrote in message
...
When did building regs (or normal electrician practice) change from
using metal to using plastic conduits? I can imagine metal conduits
would block any volt stick, especially if the conduit was earthed.

Why would you expect them to work through metal or screening? Either
metal or plastic conduits are in use.

As I said above, I *wouldn't* expect them to work through metal conduits.
I presume that was one of the reasons (along with cost, weight and ease
of cutting) for conduits mostly being plastic nowadays.

Don't forget threading ...

and bending


--
Cheers,

John.

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

After serious thinking NY wrote :
Though maybe *good* conduit tracers can detect either induced voltage from
live wires,

Nothing can detect live wires inside metal conduit, but metal conduit
is easily detected with a metal detector buried several inches deep in
a wall.

for wires in plastic conduits, or can detect the alteration of a
magnetic field (metal detector principle) for metal conduits, irrespective of
whether there's a current flowing.

As above. It is not the magnetic field which is detected by a metal
detector, they detect a change in inductance. The actual change depends
upon whether it is ferrous or non-ferrous. Hence metal detectors can
discriminate between the two.

On 30/01/2021 21:48, newshound wrote:

Just binned the two in my office desk, one a Kewtech (so not a Fluke,
but not bargain basement either).

What was wrong with them?

Should I buy a Fluke, or two or three
cheaper ones for the same total?

I have been impressed with my fluke. In normal use it seems rock solid
reliable. While expensive compared to some, they are not that pricey in
absolute terms, so worth in IMHO.

I did try some experiments a while back to see if I could trick it into
giving a false reading. I could not get a false negative out of it, but
did manage one false positive - although had to try hard!

http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php/...ck_experiments


--
Cheers,

John.

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

On 31/01/2021 14:08, John Rumm wrote:
On 30/01/2021 21:48, newshound wrote:

Just binned the two in my office desk, one a Kewtech (so not a Fluke,
but not bargain basement either).

What was wrong with them?

Stopped working. The older one was very old, it may have been poor
contacts on the mercury cells, but it also had a mechanical slider switch.

The Kewtech one was switchless, the batteries were fine and the contacts
all looked OK (and I did tweak the springs to increase the contact
pressure). It just didn't respond on thin, twin conductor desk-light flex.


Should I buy a Fluke, or two or three cheaper ones for the same total?

I have been impressed with my fluke. In normal use it seems rock solid
reliable. While expensive compared to some, they are not that pricey in
absolute terms, so worth in IMHO.

I did try some experiments a while back to see if I could trick it into
giving a false reading. I could not get a false negative out of it, but
did manage one false positive - although had to try hard!

http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php/...ck_experiments


Fluke it is then.

On 31/01/2021 22:21, newshound wrote:

Fluke it is then.

Pamper yourself. You deserve it.

John Rumm formulated on Sunday :
I did try some experiments a while back to see if I could trick it into
giving a false reading. I could not get a false negative out of it, but did
manage one false positive - although had to try hard!

http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php/...ck_experiments

They are the best thing since sliced bread, if you thoroughly
understand fully their limitations.

On 01/02/2021 09:36, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
John Rumm formulated on Sunday :
I did try some experiments a while back to see if I could trick it
into giving a false reading. I could not get a false negative out of
it, but did manage one false positive - although had to try hard!

http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php/...ck_experiments

They are the best thing since sliced bread, if you thoroughly understand
fully their limitations.

I find the "beep" facility quite handy at times - plomp it down close to
a circuit you want to turn off, go to (typically unlabelled) CU, and
turn off MCBs until the bleeping stops!

--
Cheers,

John.

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

John Rumm wrote:
On 01/02/2021 09:36, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
John Rumm formulated on Sunday :
I did try some experiments a while back to see if I could trick it
into giving a false reading. I could not get a false negative out of
it, but did manage one false positive - although had to try hard!

http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php/...ck_experiments

They are the best thing since sliced bread, if you thoroughly understand
fully their limitations.

I find the "beep" facility quite handy at times - plomp it down close to
a circuit you want to turn off, go to (typically unlabelled) CU, and
turn off MCBs until the bleeping stops!

As I have changed and updated the wiring in our house I have labelled
everything as I go. After 20 years of living here it now means just
about everything is labelled. I have even put little stickers on the
top edge of sockets to indicate which MCB/RCD feeds them.

I do check as well when working (i.e. have a lamp plugged in on the
circuit) but it saves a *lot* of time being able to go straight to the
right switch in the CU.

--
Chris Green
·

On 01/02/2021 10:28, Chris Green wrote:
John Rumm wrote:
On 01/02/2021 09:36, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
John Rumm formulated on Sunday :
I did try some experiments a while back to see if I could trick it
into giving a false reading. I could not get a false negative out of
it, but did manage one false positive - although had to try hard!

http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php/...ck_experiments

They are the best thing since sliced bread, if you thoroughly understand
fully their limitations.

I find the "beep" facility quite handy at times - plomp it down close to
a circuit you want to turn off, go to (typically unlabelled) CU, and
turn off MCBs until the bleeping stops!

As I have changed and updated the wiring in our house I have labelled
everything as I go. After 20 years of living here it now means just
about everything is labelled. I have even put little stickers on the
top edge of sockets to indicate which MCB/RCD feeds them.

Yup good move - you quite often see that in commercial setups - each
socket indicating what circuit/phase/CU its on etc.

Possibly overkill in domestic so long as all the sockets are when you
would expect them to be according to the main CU labels. (e.g. if a
"Downstairs Sockets" label on a MCB accurately identifies everything
that is controlled by it without exceptions).

(although thinking about that, I have MCBs with Sockets Downstairs,
Sockets Upstairs, and then a RCBO with Sockets Kitchen. So my Sockets
Downstairs really ought to have "except Kitchen" added to its label!)

I do check as well when working (i.e. have a lamp plugged in on the
circuit) but it saves a *lot* of time being able to go straight to the
right switch in the CU.

Sure does :-)

--
Cheers,

John.

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

On Mon, 1 Feb 2021 10:05:44 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

I find the "beep" facility quite handy at times - plomp it down close to
a circuit you want to turn off, go to (typically unlabelled) CU, and
turn off MCBs until the bleeping stops!

What he said...


Thomas Prufer

John Rumm brought next idea :
I find the "beep" facility quite handy at times - plomp it down close to a
circuit you want to turn off, go to (typically unlabelled) CU, and turn off
MCBs until the bleeping stops!

Yep, done that many times :-)