Very Hi ZS Reading on TT system? any advice

[JONOXNAM]

Come on now, and just how many actually buy those couplers or come to that, the second rod... NO need IQ, ...they only need 200 ohms ...and what's stability all about, when it's at home, do we really need it .... It rarely happens, and You know it doesn't!!!

I would just ask one Q for all the people who believe the regs values are the end of... if we switch to I/R - would you walk away from a dwelling if the I/R was 2.0Mohm?

The regs values are the as a min safety values....

 

[IQ Electrical]

Come on now, and just how many actually buy those couplers or come to that, the second rod... NO need IQ, ...they only need 200 ohms ...and what's stability all about, when it's at home, do we really need it .... It rarely happens, and You know it doesn't!!!

I wish you'd been invited to the Guidance Note 3 Amendment panel that I attended, if you'd produced all the evidence and research to back up your argument (none) then we could have revised this lethal 200 Ohm figure and saved countless lives in the process.

Until then I'll just continue with my reckless adherence to all published guidance on the subject.

 

[GLENNSPARK]

I would just ask one Q for all the people who believe the regs values are the end of... if we switch to I/R - would you walk away from a dwelling if the I/R was 2.0Mohm?

The regs values are the as a min safety values....

well iwouldn`t walk away as it stands now as the min. acceptable IR is 1 MEG...not 2.....

 

[JONOXNAM]

well iwouldn`t walk away as it stands now as the min. acceptable IR is 1 MEG...not 2.....

Ah yes as of 1st Jan.... but I was more trying to point out even at 2Meg so that would be 2x the min would you really be happy to walk away.... but the regs say you have a clear conscience?

 

[Deleted member 9648]

I would just ask one Q for all the people who believe the regs values are the end of... if we switch to I/R - would you walk away from a dwelling if the I/R was 2.0Mohm?

The regs values are the as a min safety values....

As above...1 meg...
On a new install I would not accept one...or two megs because from experience I would expect a new install be to be a lot higher.
On an existing install.(PIR?)...yes...because I know from experience that there are many,many perfectly sound existing installs with IR's circa 1-2 megs
which require no attention at all,and I wouldnt waste a clients money attempting to improve it.
I would also point out that under the 15th edition...(not that long ago)...the minimum was 0.5 megs.

 

[GLENNSPARK]

Ah yes as of 1st Jan.... but I was more trying to point out even at 2Meg so that would be 2x the min would you really be happy to walk away.... but the regs say you have a clear conscience?

as of the 1st of Jan?..what 2012?...i think not mate.....was 1 meg when the 17th edition kicked off...if testing at the tails (all at once) then 2 MEG...if less than this value then you would test individually...but as has been said here n all...if i was getting near these kind of values then it would be prudent to recommend to the client that some remedial works may be due......

 

[Engineer54]

I wish you'd been invited to the Guidance Note 3 Amendment panel that I attended, if you'd produced all the evidence and research to back up your argument (none) then we could have revised this lethal 200 Ohm figure and saved countless lives in the process.

Until then I'll just continue with my reckless adherence to all published guidance on the subject.

You're beginning to make me laugh now, so what evidence (published or otherwise) have you got to hand that say's i'm wrong and your 100% right?? None, zilch, Zero, Your basically totally relying on an RCD for your total protection/disconnection. Forget your flowery semantics, and trying to look clever here, as i can remember you and others on here talking about trying to convince some panel you/they were invited too, to lower this numbty 200ohm threshold. So at one time or another, you too thought it an unrealistic value also, but now it's not , ...Right!! ...lol!!!

Another thing, this figure of 200 ohms is talking about stability, now how the hell an Ra value, can be related to stability is something i'd love someone to explain to me?? Can you IQ, ....seeing as your so clever and knowledgeable and experienced on this subject?? I must have missed something along the way, during the 1000's of rods i've been responsible for putting in the ground!!

As i've said to you and others here.... you do whatever you want to do, so by all means, you follow these published guidance's, but please don't tell me that's it's me that's talking nonsense here, ...because i most certainly am not!!

 

[Deleted member 9648]

You're beginning to make me laugh now, so what evidence (published or otherwise) have you got to hand that say's i'm wrong and your 100% right?? None, zilch, Zero,Kindly provide the evidence (published or otherwise) to say you are right and Bs 7671 is wrong then Your basically totally relying on an RCD for your total protection/disconnectionSee 411.5.2. Forget your flowery semantics, and trying to look clever here, as i can remember you and others on here talking about trying to convince some panel you/they were invited too, to lower this numbty 200ohm threshold. So at one time or another, you too thought it an unrealistic value also, but now it's not , ...Right!! ...lol!!!

Another thing, this figure of 200 ohms is talking about stability, now how the hell an Ra value, can be related to stability is something i'd love someone to explain to me?? Can you IQ, ....seeing as your so clever and knowledgeable and experienced on this subject?? I must have missed something along the way, during the 1000's of rods i've been responsible for putting in the ground!! Given that a 30ma RCD will provide EFP up to an Ra of 1667ohms minus final circuits R1+R2 that leaves a comfort zone of 1447 ohms for increase in ground resistance....I'd call that reasonably stable.

As i've said to you and others here.... you do whatever you want to do, so by all means, you follow these published guidance's, but please don't tell me that's it's me that's talking nonsense here, ...because i most certainly am not!!

..........

 

[IQ Electrical]

You're beginning to make me laugh now, so what evidence (published or otherwise) have you got to hand that say's i'm wrong and your 100% right?? None, zilch, Zero, Your basically totally relying on an RCD for your total protection/disconnection. Forget your flowery semantics, and trying to look clever here, as i can remember you and others on here talking about trying to convince some panel you/they were invited too, to lower this numbty 200ohm threshold. So at one time or another, you too thought it an unrealistic value also, but now it's not , ...Right!! ...lol!!!

Another thing, this figure of 200 ohms is talking about stability, now how the hell an Ra value, can be related to stability is something i'd love someone to explain to me?? Can you IQ, ....seeing as your so clever and knowledgeable and experienced on this subject?? I must have missed something along the way, during the 1000's of rods i've been responsible for putting in the ground!!

As i've said to you and others here.... you do whatever you want to do, so by all means, you follow these published guidance's, but please don't tell me that's it's me that's talking nonsense here, ...because i most certainly am not!!

I've never 'attempted to lower the 200 Ohm value.'

This isn't about you or me being right or wrong or looking clever, it's about you castigating myself and other members for handing out advice on TT installations fully in line with published guidelines and British Standards and propogating the myth that this advice is somehow dangerous.

For the last time, please give me any evidence of just 1 case where there has been an injury or death as a result of following the published guidelines on TT installations....

Last time.......

 

[Engineer54]

..........

Ha ha .... you mean you actually need evidence that a 200ohm Ra is a nonsense?? I Really can't even be bothered to answer that, or your relationship of an RCD mA rating to the stability of an earth electrode... your just pulling at straws now!! lol!!

If you missed the drift here wirepuller, RCDs have a tendency to Fail quite often, they are all well and good when functioning correctly, ....were talking about when FAIL!!

 

[GLENNSPARK]

well i will throw my too penneth in n all and say that RCDs not liking damp conditions (cellars) where a lot of C/Us can be found......

 

[Engineer54]

I've never 'attempted to lower the 200 Ohm value.'

This isn't about you or me being right or wrong or looking clever, it's about you castigating myself and other members for handing out advice on TT installations fully in line with published guidelines and British Standards and propogating the myth that this advice is somehow dangerous.

For the last time, please give me any evidence of just 1 case where there has been an injury or death as a result of following the published guidelines on TT installations....

Last time.......

I'm castigating no-one... but when someone tries to belittle me because he thinks he has to protect the UK way of doing things, then i will react!!

By the way, why is it always me that needs to prove this or that, to You, ...but you can't or won't move on anything i ask?? i asked you a question in my last post, that has like any other question/query been totally skipped over in favour of another line of ridicule ...

What myth, there's no myth there at all, the probability is plainly there, ...as for evidence, i can't, exactly the same as you can't show any evidence that it hasn't done so!! But i have already stated that in an earlier post didn't i ??

 

[IQ Electrical]

Belittle? I can't be doing with paranoia.

I'm sitting in my office surrounded by publications 'backing up' my beliefs and opinion, do I just send them over?

They are UK publications but that's where I carry out my lethal TT installations.

 

[La Poste]

What I will say is, in generally found garden British soils, I could in most circumstances achieve a below 10ohm Ra with a maximum of 2 twin rod positions.

I'm not taking sides in this debate or anything like that but I would really love some advice on how to achieve this or anywhere near this value with two twin rods.

Thanks

 

[Engineer54]

Belittle? I can't be doing with paranoia.

I'm sitting in my office surrounded by publications 'backing up' my beliefs and opinion, do I just send them over?

They are UK publications but that's where I carry out my lethal TT installations.

Did i say you ..?? And i don't do paranoia

Surrounded, wow!! Send them over, by all means, ...I'll be happy to peruse your publications backing up your beliefs!!

I see your still ''trying'' to be clever!!..... lol!!

 

[Deleted member 9648]

I'm castigating no-one... but when someone tries to belittle me because he thinks he has to protect the UK way of doing things, then i will react!!

It's got nothing to do with 'protecting the UK way of doing things' E54....I recall you 'accusing' me of patriotism during a previous TT/Ra skirmish a while ago. But you miss the point....This is a BRITISH STANDARD ffs....it's not like this is being made up. I spent 5 years as an apprentice being taught that 'the regs' as they were then,are the bible....nothing has changed....If the powers that be deem that a change is required to british standards on TT systems I will change my practices accordingly,untill such a change,complying with Bs 7671 cannot be unsatisfactory,dangerous...or any other accusation you may care to throw at it....and is the correct advise to give to TT questions on a UK based forum.

 

[IQ Electrical]

Did i say you ..?? And i don't do paranoia

Surrounded, wow!! Send them over, by all means, ...I'll be happy to peruse your publications backing up your beliefs!!

I see your still ''trying'' to be clever!!..... lol!!

You posted the comment under my quoted post.

You're slaughtering me with facts and hard evidence, along with the 'trying to be clever' comments, if you pay the courier costs, I'll send my publications over, I'll meet the costs for yours lol!

Of course they're all based on pathetic British Standards that have been proven adequate over many decades but don't let that sway the argument!

 

[Engineer54]

You posted the comment under my quoted post.

You're slaughtering me with facts and hard evidence, along with the 'trying to be clever' comments, if you pay the courier costs, I'll send my publications over, I'll meet the costs for yours lol!

Of course they're all based on pathetic British Standards that have been proven adequate over many decades but don't let that sway the argument!

I have indeed posted comments under your posts, ...???

You hide behind your publications, but if you honestly believe what your defending, then i really don't know what to think!! You stick to your RCDs that haven't harmed anyone, .....well, not that You've read about anyway!! Geezus!!

Still nothing on anything i've asked you then i see?? Can't you quote anything from any of these publications that are surrounding you, on my last Query of you??

You mean like your slaughtering me with all of yours, ...lol!! As i stated before, you stick with your pathetic standards, that relates 200ohms Ra with stability, ...while i'll continue to install TT systems of all types and descriptions safely and correctly....lol!! But i don't think you'll find a mention of 200 ohms going back past the 15th edition!!

If i were to produce a TT system of anywhere approaching your magical 200 ohms, on any of my projects large or small, which i might add are fairly strongly based on BS7671, ...i'd be hung drawn and quartered , ...and quite rightly so too!! But hey, it's a good-un, ... it says so in BS7671.

I guess you'd be arguing the point all the way to the airport, with all your magnitude of publications.... And that is just about as pathetic as your argument goes!!!

 

[Engineer54]

It's got nothing to do with 'protecting the UK way of doing things' E54....I recall you 'accusing' me of patriotism during a previous TT/Ra skirmish a while ago. But you miss the point....This is a BRITISH STANDARD ffs....it's not like this is being made up. I spent 5 years as an apprentice being taught that 'the regs' as they were then,are the bible....nothing has changed....If the powers that be deem that a change is required to british standards on TT systems I will change my practices accordingly,untill such a change,complying with Bs 7671 cannot be unsatisfactory,dangerous...or any other accusation you may care to throw at it....and is the correct advise to give to TT questions on a UK based forum.

I don't believe that you can't think for yourself, and need to rely on every quotation in the Reg's to perform your trade as an electrician Wirepuller, your better than that. As been proved in the many good posts you've made on the Forum. ...On that note, i'll say no-more!!

 

[Dave 85]

To the OP:
You dont seem to have any idea how testing actually works. Its no use randomly pulling figures from the regs book if you don't actually understand them. Your Zs reading should be approx Ze plus R1=R2 (It is, after all, exactly the same test, just furthur from the source) so if your max Ze on a TT is 200ohm (which is what my assessor always tells me to aim for) Then as long as your Zs is, for arguments sake, less then 200ohm aswell, you're fine. The fact that your Zs is so much lower suggests you must be getter a far better earth from the water main than you are getting from the earth stake.

 

[malcolmsanford]

Just out of curiosity what size earthing conductor did you use ..................................stop it Malc .....:grinningelf: