- Reaction score
- 8,181
The closest you've come to an explanation is claiming the origin of a circuit is the cable that connects it to the OCPD that supplies it.
To go back to a point I made earlier though, much of your argument seems to stem from appendix 15 in that the radial circuits show one cable and that by virtue of this you can only comply if you have one cable in the OCPD.
You side stepped my question regarding a 20A DP switch on a ring supplying a single socket outlet (a typical grid switch scenario) saying you never said it didn't comply, completely missing (or sidestepping) the point I was making.
The example I gave is standard practice and occurs in thousands of properties. But it isn't shown in appendix 15 for ring final circuits so therefore using your logic (that appendix 15 shows the things you can do), it must not comply.
So either appendix 15 shows the only things you can do or it shows SOME possibilities (as @DPG said, the regs can't possibly show every possible implementation scenario). Which is it? You can't have it both ways.
If it shows possibilities, show me a regulation that a radial circuit supplied from the middle would contravene.
Any suggestion you can't adequately test it and record the results is nonsense because the test results are the worst case results from testing, so it can be tested along it's entire length and the worst case results recorded.
To go back to a point I made earlier though, much of your argument seems to stem from appendix 15 in that the radial circuits show one cable and that by virtue of this you can only comply if you have one cable in the OCPD.
You side stepped my question regarding a 20A DP switch on a ring supplying a single socket outlet (a typical grid switch scenario) saying you never said it didn't comply, completely missing (or sidestepping) the point I was making.
The example I gave is standard practice and occurs in thousands of properties. But it isn't shown in appendix 15 for ring final circuits so therefore using your logic (that appendix 15 shows the things you can do), it must not comply.
So either appendix 15 shows the only things you can do or it shows SOME possibilities (as @DPG said, the regs can't possibly show every possible implementation scenario). Which is it? You can't have it both ways.
If it shows possibilities, show me a regulation that a radial circuit supplied from the middle would contravene.
Any suggestion you can't adequately test it and record the results is nonsense because the test results are the worst case results from testing, so it can be tested along it's entire length and the worst case results recorded.
Last edited: