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 16 replies
  • Subscribers 27 subscribers
  • Views 752 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in
This discussion is locked.
You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

AMD 2 - insulation testing

AJJewsbury
Looks like the DPC has made a bit of a change about insulation testing where some devices might be vulnerable to a 500V test voltage or distort the results. Previously we were allowed to either disconnect the item concerned (or do the test prior to initial connection) OR carry out a 250V test (with a 1MΩ limit to meet).


As I read it, a full 500V test will soon be required prior to connection of such equipment PLUS an additional 250V test (with a 1MΩ limit to meet) will be required after it is connected.


I can see the sense in that, in that it doesn't 'excuse' the rest of the circuit from a full 500V test, but I'm slightly uneasy about some equipment not being happy with a relatively long duration 250V d.c. test L&N - PE - especially if it has to meet a 1MΩ limit. Does anyone have any thoughts on that?


All strictly speaking for an initial verification - for a periodic we still seem to have the flexibility of choosing 'appropriate' tests (however that's going to be interpreted...).


Seems it's going to be a bit of extra work, especially if you've a house full of USB power sockets....


   - Andy.
Parents
  • 0
    To be be accepted it needs a natty abbreviation , like the old EEBADs and DR ABC for first aid.


    I struggled with that

    Perhaps
    Begin by Activating Network Gingerly

    Or
    Basic Active Noise Generation  when it goes wrong



    Joking aside we have the same problem with the PAT of things that do not fall neatly into a proper category but are not dangerous.

    Also it is unwise to rely on meggar results to tell you a cable is intact - there are plenty of nasty ways to compromise a cable or junction with ham fisted installation, that will still pass the electrical tests.

    regards Mike.

Reply
  • 0
    To be be accepted it needs a natty abbreviation , like the old EEBADs and DR ABC for first aid.


    I struggled with that

    Perhaps
    Begin by Activating Network Gingerly

    Or
    Basic Active Noise Generation  when it goes wrong



    Joking aside we have the same problem with the PAT of things that do not fall neatly into a proper category but are not dangerous.

    Also it is unwise to rely on meggar results to tell you a cable is intact - there are plenty of nasty ways to compromise a cable or junction with ham fisted installation, that will still pass the electrical tests.

    regards Mike.

Children
No Data

Join us to get the best from IET EngX.

Joining EngX lets you personalise your experience so you stay up to date on the topics that interest you, plus you’ll be able to make connections who are looking to collaborate, exchange ideas and more.

Join us Not now

Community Rules & Guidelines