R2 vs R1 + R2

[old man sparky]

Just wondered how many guys would fill an R2 column as opposed to R1 + R2.
Its there but when I look over completed EICR's very rarely see it used.
Maybe not for all circuits but there are occasions when test methods can differ.
So why are you not using the R2 columns ? And giving it some thought when would you use it ? ?

 

[telectrix]

sometimes eaier with lighting to use a wander lead and do R2, going room to room saves linking out L and E at fittings. can also easily get a R2 at switch from the faceplate screw/swithout taking faceplates off. ( except where cavity boxes are fitted ). a bonus is ensuring that metal fittings have their casings earthed without dissassembly.

 

[old man sparky]

sometimes eaier with lighting to use a wander lead and do R2, going room to room saves linking out L and E at fittings. can als easily get a R2 at switch from the faceplate screw/swithout taking faceplates off. ( except where cavity boxes are fitted ).

New I could rely on you Tel ? But as said very few testers seem to be taking advantage of the R2 column and yet it does have some very relevant uses. Just getting the younger lads to give it some thought, as its an interesting topic.

 

[SJD]

Yes, I sometimes complete R2 instead of R1+R2 for lighting, especially where there are lots of dimmers and metal fittings. As Tel says, quite easy with a long R2 wander lead to quickly work round fittings.

 

[Dartlec]

The main issue with R2 is that it doesn't prove polarity, so requires a further test, whereas R1 + R2 can prove both and then be used to calculate Zs.

I use a wander lead often to quickly test earthing of lighting points or metal sockets, though unless you remove the cpc at the board that's not actually R2.

I did use R2 on a recent CU change/EICR (after someone else's bodged EICR) for a lighting circuit because they were metal fittings that would have been difficult to all take down.

 

[old man sparky]

The main issue with R2 is that it doesn't prove polarity, so requires a further test, whereas R1 + R2 can prove both and then be used to calculate Zs.

I use a wander lead often to quickly test earthing of lighting points or metal sockets, though unless you remove the cpc at the board that's not actually R2.

I did use R2 on a recent CU change/EICR (after someone else's bodged EICR) for a lighting circuit because they were metal fittings that would have been difficult to all take down.

Agree. Its a useful check where a lot of class 1 fittings are used. Especially those fancy foreign light fittings, combined with 3 plate wiring.

 

[Dartlec]

Agree. Its a useful check where a lot of class 1 fittings are used. Especially those fancy foreign light fittings, combined with 3 plate wiring.

Only bought one about a year ago when I started doing more EICRs but I am a definite convert and think it should be a standard bit of kit in everyone's van really.

It's sometimes not possible to properly verify main bonding without one, let alone verifying supplementary bonding in a bathroom to decide if lack of additional protection is C2 or C3.|

I did used to have an adapter that turned an extension lead into a wander lead, but was fiddly so rarely used it...

 

[Dartlec]

Just to add though - when using a wander lead on metal light fittings I often find that I only get a reading on the bracket screws, not the fitting itself, because (I assume) of their powder coating finish or lacquer not actually being conductive.

I find clients usually prefer I don't scratch the nice finish with my probe tip to test elsewhere ?

How you determine exactly which parts of a Class 1 light are meant to be conductive and which aren't is a mystery.

Outside lights are normally fine because the coating has flaked off enough to get a good reading on the actual metal!

 

[old man sparky]

Just to add though - when using a wander lead on metal light fittings I often find that I only get a reading on the bracket screws, not the fitting itself, because (I assume) of their powder coating finish or lacquer not actually being conductive.

I find clients usually prefer I don't scratch the nice finish with my probe tip to test elsewhere ?

How you determine exactly which parts of a Class 1 light are meant to be conductive and which aren't is a mystery.

Outside lights are normally fine because the coating has flaked off enough to get a good reading on the actual metal!

Had one customer receive a tingle (fitting from Milan) and one customer full blown belt which chucked him off a ladder. (made in china) both fittings had lousy insulation and both had disconnected fly leads leaving the fittings live with no return. In both instances they thought they were safe because the light switches were off. (3 plate) Luckily it doesn't happen often, but it does happen.

 

[Strima]

I generally do R1+R2 on lighting but also an R2 to switches etc to confirm the CPC to the point.