• IMPORTANT: Please note that nobody on this forum should be seeking from or providing advice to those who are not competent and / or trained and qualified in their field (local laws permitting). There is a discussion thread on this global industry-wide matter HERE. This also has more information about the warning with regards to sharing electrical advice in some countries. By using this forum you do so in agreement to this.

Discuss 138/240Y System in the Electrical Talk - All Other Countries area at ElectriciansForums.net

How would everyone feel about a 240Y system in a building with everything connected Line-Line?

I personally like (want) this system. No TN-C, TN-C-S vs TN-S debate. No earthing/bonding debates of how to keep the neutrals separate in a multi source or generator system. No fire or shock risk from a broken PEN/MEN. No need to keep track of live and neutral in a circuit.

Just asking curious.
 
CK Tools :) The professionals choice when it comes to Electrical Tools
This official sponsor may provide discounts for members

Lucien Nunes

-
Mentor
Arms
Esteemed
This was quite common in mainland Europe at one time but AFAIK never used in the UK. It requires double-pole fusing and switching for single-phase loads, which we do not generally adopt, and reduces the overall system voltage by sqrt(3) meaning more copper is needed for the same power. If you are not going to use the neutral then there's no real point distributing that, so you might as well call it a delta supply. Ground a centre-tap on one winding and you've got the US system, which is ingenious and versatile but through UK eyes, when we're used to working with 400V, the amount of current you need to do anything useful seems terribly cumbersome.

You seem to be trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist. If you don't accept the risk of a MEN / CNE, then make it TN-S and use 5 wires everywhere. You'll still use less copper than lowering the line-line voltage to 240V and getting rid of the neutral.
 
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #3
But there is a point in distributing it (as a PE) in an effort to create a low impedance path to facilitate the operation of over current devices.

TN-S still has the risk of open neutral.

But I will agree with you, the copper will be greater. Perhaps double is not more in some cases.
 

Lucien Nunes

-
Mentor
Arms
Esteemed
Sure, running single-phase loads line-line eliminates the possibility of damage by overvoltage from a broken neutral. I've seen plenty of that in my line of work. But in TN-S the impact is an economic one, not one of shock protection. Which is cheaper, replacing stuff broken by overvoltage or running heavier cables? There is a possible incidental benefit of imposing double-pole OCPD and switching on things out of necessity, although that could be introduced in regulations even for 1P+N+E.

The case for / against PME on grounds of shock risk is separate.
 
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #5
Well, if you are going to damage equipment, you will also shock on a TN-C-S.

And switches don't have to be double pole, only the over current and disconnection (for service) devices.
 
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #6
And I don't mean to be a hard head lol, but in the US this system would actually save copper. And fix so many stray current/voltage issues.
 
Dealing with MEN's is often a power quality issue , the NEC doctrine only acknowledges Mr Kirchhoff when convenient to do so. ~S~
 

davesparks

-
Mentor
Arms
Esteemed
Well, if you are going to damage equipment, you will also shock on a TN-C-S.

And switches don't have to be double pole, only the over current and disconnection (for service) devices.
In the UK they would have to be DP switches to satisfy the regulations.
 
B

Bobster

Because you would still have a dangerously high potential to earth at the lamp fitting.

So mr.homeowner could inadvertently touch something lethal changing a blown lamp.
 
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #12
Only if he or she were to stick their fingers in the Bayonet.
 
Last edited:
Because lightswitches are the means of isolation for each light fitting therefore need to isolate all conductors.
A light switch generally does not provide isolation it is a functional device to control a light.
 
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #19
A light switch generally does not provide isolation it is a functional device to control a light.

Exactly my thoughts and how the NEC views it. Control vs a disconnecting means are two different things.

As is I doubt there is much concern with a GU24 socket.


1565899000512.png
 
Last edited:

Reply to 138/240Y System in the Electrical Talk - All Other Countries area at ElectriciansForums.net

uHeat Banner - Forum Discount Available
This official sponsor may provide discounts for members
Top Bottom