How to test a circuits in steel conduit as the cpc | Page 2 | on ElectriciansForums

Discuss How to test a circuits in steel conduit as the cpc in the UK Electrical Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net

Joined
Feb 27, 2019
Messages
56
Reaction score
16
Location
Leicester
Good evening

I am currently a training to become an electrician. I do hold both initial verification and periodic testing qualifications however this is an issue I have never personally had to deal with and was never mentioned on any of my courses as often seems to be the case.

Basically I am wondering how you would hypothetically go about testing either a ring or radial circuit if you didn't have a seperate cpc but the conduit itself acted as this.

Look forward to hopefully getting a response and some clarity

Regards Harry
 
With a wandering earth lead. If I explain any further I feel that I am teaching you to suck eggs.
I’ve had that feeling every time I’ve replied to a comment lol. On a serious note I feel that some people who are doing EICRs are not clued up enough to be doing them. But I’m happy to help anyone out. We all have to learn and help each other out. Two heads are better than one.
 
Problem here, is that we work to BS7671, not to the NICEIC regulations.
There are no tables of maximum R1+R2 in BS7671, there are only tables for maximum Zs.
So it’s all very well measuring R1+R2 and adding it to Ze, but what do you do if that value is above the maximum permissible?
Then either the design is wrong or it has not been constructed to the design. A parallel path can be out of the control of the designer and in practice, this could disappear by a plumber inserting a plastic Tee in a copper pipe.
 
In the 17th GN8 amd3 (which is the last GN series I currently have) it gives reg 411.3.2.6 and states "Supplementary bonding is required by BS7671 to be provided in the following circumstances: where, in the event of an Earth fault, the conditions for automatic disconnection cannot be fulfilled in the time required by reg 411.3.2.2, 411.3.2.3 or 411.3.2.4, as appropriate"

The other circumstances listed are in special locations such as bathrooms etc,,, etc.

This sure looks like reducing the Zs to me :)
 
I’ve had that feeling every time I’ve replied to a comment lol. On a serious note I feel that some people who are doing EICRs are not clued up enough to be doing them.
When you've had that feeling as often as I have, over the years, I might take you seriously.;)

As regards your serious note....I totally agree.
 
Just out of (genuine) interest Westy can you give me the reg number for the 16th where SB was not allowed to reduce a Zs ?, I still have regs books and some OSGs going back to the 15th ed and I will look it up.

The special locations bit in my previous post, which I never bothered writing out is more to do with reducing Ut (touch voltages) which is a different kettle of fish entirely.
 
So Ian, are you saying in effect that SB can be used to lower a Zs to achieve disconnection times ?, I do have the 18th regs book but I am just being lazy ;)

I don't have the 18th GNs yet, but I am considering getting them
 
So Ian, are you saying in effect that SB can be used to lower a Zs to achieve disconnection times ?, I do have the 18th regs book but I am just being lazy ;)
Supplementary bonding to the location between accessible exposed conductive parts and extraneous parts and circuits is one method.
Another more commonly used method is Rcd protection
 
There are basically two reasons for SB, the special locations part is to do with reducing Ut to keep it below 50V, medical locations below 25V, back in the 16th agricultural locations required Ut below 25V as well I recall, but I don't recall now which specific amd, or if it ever changed in that entire edition.
The other part is to achieve disconnection times and was to reduce Zs by default, the regs are worded --- backward in a lot of cases.
 

Reply to How to test a circuits in steel conduit as the cpc in the UK Electrical Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net

Similar Threads

  • Question
My older card has it but my newer card doesn’t
    • Like
Replies
1
Views
470
  • Question
Youre in the same boat as me. I was previously with niceic and later on, napit. No issues. I didn't bother finishing my nvq3 as in 2010 during the...
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • Question
Yes I've seen quite a few electrical installations on farms some good and plenty you just want to run away from Before you start you may be...
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • Question
Thanks. This really has been useful. Can definitely see the pitfalls to relying on live Zs. I think I'll get cracking on writing up some...
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • Question
A test rig is no substitute for site experience where you start out not knowing what the fault is rather than an x from y choice of faults that...
Replies
25
Views
6K

OFFICIAL SPONSORS

Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Electrician Courses Green Electrical Goods PCB Way Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Pushfit Wire Connectors Electric Underfloor Heating Electrician Courses
These Official Forum Sponsors May Provide Discounts to Regular Forum Members - If you would like to sponsor us then CLICK HERE and post a thread with who you are, and we'll send you some stats etc

YOUR Unread Posts

This website was designed, optimised and is hosted by untold.media Operating under the name Untold Media since 2001.
Back
Top
AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website. For the best site experience please disable your AdBlocker.

I've Disabled AdBlock    No Thanks