Rules and Guidelines
Want to participate in the discussions? Please read our Community Rules and Guidelines. Need some help? Visit Support and Answers.

  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 32 replies
  • Subscribers 32 subscribers
  • Views 2632 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

my surge protection 'cpd', such as it is...

psychicwarrior
Good morning all


I have obtained the following [I feel as the] 'best we can do for now' information from the DNO. They were helpful in my test case request for info.


"...address 1:

LV underground - 362m

HV underground to primary-  2000m

No Surge protection devices


address 2:

LV underground to substation - 110 m

HV UG from substation to HV pole is 823m then 301m 11kV overhead then 190m HV UG to the primary substation.

Distance to cable termination with surge protection device from secondary substation is 1124m (823m 11kV UG + 301m 11kV Overhead).  The nearest cable

termination does not have surge protection installed. ..."


In relation to the risk assessment equation variables dealing with distribution cable lengths  ie. the Lpal Lpcl Lpah Lpch, how would one fit the given values into the variables ?


For addr1, ignore the HV (e.g. use zero for Lpah Lpch),  then take Lpcl as 362 and Lpal as 638 ?


For addr2, i'm not sure on this one ?


Thanks for your input.

Habs


Parents
  • 0
    @gkenyon  -  and my apologies to you too, if you thought that I'd taken 'it' the wrong way :-)   I hadn't btw.


    Thank you for the followup though - its comments like this that add an interpretative aspect on to Regs etc and I appreciate it, as it allows me to think around the subject based on others' opinions etc.


    I had come to the same conclusion as you with respect to your 'simplest approaches' considerations.  It is the following that you mentioned that is interesting too:


    "...
    No. This depends on what's going on in the shop.


    So, the commercial activity of the junk shop you describe is unlikely to be affected by a surge event, and the business can probably continue using cash and hand-written receipts. However, the following kinds of shop are a different situation:


    • Supermarkets, butchers and similar with high value of products in refrigerators and freezers

    • Jeweller or antique shop with expensive security systems

    • Businesses that rely heavily on electronic transactions ..."



    What you say above makes sense. It had occurred to me that a particular commercial activity may conclude that it can continue and would be unaffected but it would be the business' consideration - almost a risk assessment, though that is not demanded anywhere in the Book - but from a compliance with Regs. for work completed (or later periodic inspection!), is it more that one cannot predict the potential affects and therefore the requirement is to fit one and not get into the 'what may or may be affected' assessment etc.  ie. it is as written, if its industrial/commercial..it has to be fitted...no leeway.    ?


Reply
  • 0
    @gkenyon  -  and my apologies to you too, if you thought that I'd taken 'it' the wrong way :-)   I hadn't btw.


    Thank you for the followup though - its comments like this that add an interpretative aspect on to Regs etc and I appreciate it, as it allows me to think around the subject based on others' opinions etc.


    I had come to the same conclusion as you with respect to your 'simplest approaches' considerations.  It is the following that you mentioned that is interesting too:


    "...
    No. This depends on what's going on in the shop.


    So, the commercial activity of the junk shop you describe is unlikely to be affected by a surge event, and the business can probably continue using cash and hand-written receipts. However, the following kinds of shop are a different situation:


    • Supermarkets, butchers and similar with high value of products in refrigerators and freezers

    • Jeweller or antique shop with expensive security systems

    • Businesses that rely heavily on electronic transactions ..."



    What you say above makes sense. It had occurred to me that a particular commercial activity may conclude that it can continue and would be unaffected but it would be the business' consideration - almost a risk assessment, though that is not demanded anywhere in the Book - but from a compliance with Regs. for work completed (or later periodic inspection!), is it more that one cannot predict the potential affects and therefore the requirement is to fit one and not get into the 'what may or may be affected' assessment etc.  ie. it is as written, if its industrial/commercial..it has to be fitted...no leeway.    ?


Children
No Data

Community Rules & Guidelines