Search results

I knew a chap who used to choose his words very carefully. He would say something that was ususually factually correct, however he would put itin such a way that people would likely assume something better or different. I reckon he was very cunning at it and he could always almost comment "I do...

A number of people seemto be so "sure they reported something" whenin reality they merely metioned it in passing tosomeone at some time and hoped that the person they told would take it further up the food chain, then they think "not my problem as I have done my bit by reporting it" another...

Wondering where this "26mm" might be measured from and to? or is it a diameter or something or is it a dimension that the jaw faces will open up to? Still doesn`t make sense to me.

Previously called "Indirect Contact", whoh I am showing my age now! Anyways, a sad thing happend, could it have been avoided?

Thats just reminded me of a funny one John, a few years back I remember a contractor saying " Regs says Supp bonding is 4.0mm !" . Being pedantic I asked hime where the reg was and what does it state? nope , OK a will accept a Guidance note explanation then ? Nope. I then pointed it out that is...

Yes - indeed, a few years back some "Pulnix" infra red dual beem outside detectors had a statement that proper alignment reduced chances of poor visiblity causing problems in "Snow or Frogs" it was a laugh but we reckoned they meant "Fog"

Hmm a bit of an innocent careless mix up or a devious money making scam ???

Yup, I think that China took over from Japan a few years back (Well it was heavily Japan a few years back!)

Yes I seem to remember the oscilations being the most mentioned of all.

Yes good thinking. We tend to reckon its safe to use the same as E as a Live conductor for a circuit or reduced size E that have become sort of defacto in standard T & E or 3C & E but we are probably mainly thinking of possible touch voltage of a zero ohms fault , So equal sizes become around...

Good question

Manchester in Lancashire, yes it would work anywhere.

Yes - I was think that I could not readily see a reason to disconnect one of the 4 gates even if not actually required "Two Heads are better than one" so two gates would be better than one, in theory - unless there was some problem if one could be a split second in front of the other on initial...

Well it can "sometimes" be something to consider but most times its merely to consider it is worthy of considering and the answer is usually no I would not consider considering it

Well I will admit it`s sometimes easy to get the MCBs slightly out from slanted a tadd on some makes. So same thing really to a lesser degree :unsure:

Would it not have been better pratice to just disconnect pin 3 of IC1d ? to leave the inputs fed and not "floating" , I thought that was the general convenntion!

I do , sometimes, have a passing thought for cpc size reduction compared to L size for circuits with conductors over 1.0. Will it be a possible/credible great benefit to effectively increase the cpc size by commoning some together to some extent or building in a little auto redundancy. Usually...

Only resience I can think of. Example - conduit runs are often the only earth (theorectically quite a robust one) and ight have items on a run that has several distinct circuits. You often have only one "Installation earthing conductor" for an entire installation , one point of failure but again...

You would also have the option of using the Brown and the Black as two independently switched L of a two gang switch arrangement (for instance one light lit leaving some lighting to assist you whilst changing the duff lamp from the other light in a safe manner), if that has any use for you and...

Actually, joking aside, things wre made to last longer because thet were more robust and better made - "they " used to say that we over - engineered stuff. Who were "they" and were they correct? Lots of things today are cheaper in real terms but more of a "throw away" ???