This discussion is locked.
You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

Zs, to test or calculate?

A large contractor working on our site have told me yesterday that it is their policy not to live test final circuits where they cannot use a plug? In order to reduce risk, they will now only calculate Zs, on circuits where they would have to open an enclosure, such as FCU's and light fittings.
The control measures we insist are in place, are IP2X equipment, GS38 leads, two man rule with second man having resus training, among others. So I feel the risk has been reduced to as low as reasonably practicable. An d my instinct tells me that a measured Zs reading must be more accurate than a calculated one, since it will include all parallel paths under test.
The contractor is happy to live test distribution circuits, so it seems they want to pick and choose.
They also state that this is how things are now, and have worked at many different sites, Cross Rail, Heathrow, various MOD sites etc, and that they al accept this as common practice.

I like some opinions to find out what's going on out there on other sites. 
Parents
  • Method 1 (R1+R2) in the OSG and GN3 doesn't show the cpc being disconnected.

    Very good point Graham. I've certainly seen the c.p.c. and line 'choc blocked' together suggested somewhere (I'll have to rack my brains as to where now) - and was under the impression that it was frequently taught that way too - I've certainly seen it been done that way in practice. Good news if that's officially incorrect.

     
    Why would the impact of parallel paths differ between Method 1 to Method 2?

    I mean to suggest it would - just that disconnecting the c.p.c. from the Earth bar would eliminate some parallel paths (which I understood was the reason for the disconnection approach in the first place).


      - Andy.
Reply
  • Method 1 (R1+R2) in the OSG and GN3 doesn't show the cpc being disconnected.

    Very good point Graham. I've certainly seen the c.p.c. and line 'choc blocked' together suggested somewhere (I'll have to rack my brains as to where now) - and was under the impression that it was frequently taught that way too - I've certainly seen it been done that way in practice. Good news if that's officially incorrect.

     
    Why would the impact of parallel paths differ between Method 1 to Method 2?

    I mean to suggest it would - just that disconnecting the c.p.c. from the Earth bar would eliminate some parallel paths (which I understood was the reason for the disconnection approach in the first place).


      - Andy.
Children
No Data