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 48 replies
  • Subscribers 34 subscribers
  • Views 5324 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

Underground Cable Tracing.

Zoomup

An P.V.C./P.V.C.  cable is run in steel conduit underground from a farm barn to another location. It may run underground to some nearby concrete slabs previously used as a base for wooden sheds, or it may run for about 80 metres to some distant  derelict outbuildings.

I am not too familiar with all of the types of underground cable tracers available.

Which would be the best type of cable tracer to use to determine its run? There may be other buried metal to confuse some tracers. Will a signal injected into the cable be able to be detected by a cable tracer as the cable in inside steel conduit?

The cable is currently dead.

Thanks,

Z.

 

Parents
  • 0

    Sparkingchip: 
     

    The whole thing sounds like an exercise in trying to prove a point that not many people would even consider trying to prove in the first place.

    No no no!!!

    A bunch of people made a claim - that they could detect running water underground by dowsing. This is a common claim made by dowsers. Someone else devised an experiment to test this claim, and several dowsers agreed to participate. All those dowsers seemed to agree that it was an important-enough point to devote a day of their life to it.

    If instead the dowsers had claimed to be able to detect still water, then an experiment would have been carried out with still water in the pipes. If they had claimed to be able to detect pipes (metallic, plastic or whatever) then pipes of that sort would have been buried, and no water would have been involved. Etc. The test was driven by what the dowsers claimed to be able to do. It was a good test of the claimed ability.

Reply
  • 0

    Sparkingchip: 
     

    The whole thing sounds like an exercise in trying to prove a point that not many people would even consider trying to prove in the first place.

    No no no!!!

    A bunch of people made a claim - that they could detect running water underground by dowsing. This is a common claim made by dowsers. Someone else devised an experiment to test this claim, and several dowsers agreed to participate. All those dowsers seemed to agree that it was an important-enough point to devote a day of their life to it.

    If instead the dowsers had claimed to be able to detect still water, then an experiment would have been carried out with still water in the pipes. If they had claimed to be able to detect pipes (metallic, plastic or whatever) then pipes of that sort would have been buried, and no water would have been involved. Etc. The test was driven by what the dowsers claimed to be able to do. It was a good test of the claimed ability.

Children
No Data

Community Rules & Guidelines