Search results

...

...

Has this just started to happen? It sounds like a borrowed neutral or neutral in the wrong neutral bar.

No drawing - just copy and paste.

I agree with Eric.

Why?

Yes the switch in the four-gang with five wires connected to the switch. The two-gang has what is called an intermediate switch (with four wires) on the circuit.

Someone wrote some guidance. Why?

Then it would probably be better not on that circuit although it would likely not be a problem if there is no other heavy loads.

It depends what else is on the circuit. Is it just a normal socket circuit?

Are you saying conductors that can be disconnected are C2?

So - - - not much point discussing it, then.

Ok, but, as you indicate, it is merely 'guidance' because the author thinks it should be - unlike the authors of the regulations.

That is correct. I can only remember the continuous myth relating to the gas as it is somehow more important - or maybe water companies know there is no such rule. Yes but I had assumed that neither the existing gas nor water bond was long enough to do that.

They are even wronger than I thought, then. Those regulations obviously do not mention looping nor single conductor. As I mentioned earlier, it is allowed to actually use the water pipe as a main bonding conductor. How they think that could be achieved as a single conductor I have no idea.

No. If you are wrongly told that it is not allowed to bond the gas pipe with anything other than a continuous wire, then bond the gas with the continuous wire and then connect another from gas to water. So the gas is already bonded with a continuous wire.

No, just found Schedule 4 specifically states replacing electrical equipment is not notifiable.

You can always connect the gas with the continuous conductor and loop to the water.

These companies cannot make up their own wiring regulations.