Err... No.
Given that the OP was having problems understanding how loading is assumed, and voltage drop calculated, in ring finals, discussion of that topic is NOT hijacking.
Confused over electrical cable length and size - hijack?
- Thread starter ban-all-sheds
- Start date
Given that the OP was having problems understanding how loading is assumed, and voltage drop calculated, in ring finals, discussion of that topic is NOT hijacking.
Sponsored Links
For once, I agree with BAS - the discussion, although perhaps more detailed an tedchnical than the OP had expected/wanted, it would all seem to have been very much 'on-topic'
MOD as the OP had left the thread after the first page, you were invited to continue your debate in a thread that was of interest to yourselves.
MOD as the OP had left the thread after the first page, you were invited to continue your debate in a thread that was of interest to yourselves.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Joined
- 27 Jan 2008
- Messages
- 23,661
- Reaction score
- 2,665
- Location
- Llanfair Caereinion, Nr Welshpool
- Country
Did not see orignal thread, loading as far as I am conserned is what I was told at an IET meeting, and not a clue why they came up with it. I calculate volt drop from the loop impedance, but could just as easy be worked out from prospective short circuit current, as to the actual calculation I used the formula given in BS7671 which is quite complex, by time you work out the correction for volt drop.
However after building a java script program to work it out, I realised the error measuring loop impedance means it is not very accurate. If you take 0.01 +/- reading you realise it is only some where near. Then the 20 amp from centre and 12 amp even spread is also rather approximate so although 106 meters is quoted it is really +/- 20 meters.
Until you reach around 130 meter it would be hard to show non compliance, and with a B32 MCB you would reach the tripping limit at about same point where you could claim it was too long for volt drop. So hardly worth worrying about.
However after building a java script program to work it out, I realised the error measuring loop impedance means it is not very accurate. If you take 0.01 +/- reading you realise it is only some where near. Then the 20 amp from centre and 12 amp even spread is also rather approximate so although 106 meters is quoted it is really +/- 20 meters.
Until you reach around 130 meter it would be hard to show non compliance, and with a B32 MCB you would reach the tripping limit at about same point where you could claim it was too long for volt drop. So hardly worth worrying about.
I have to say that I did not see any such invitation, and I still cannot find one.
It seems a little ironic that you locked this particular thread which remained very much 'on-topic', even after the OP had stopped contributing, whereas (with the exception of most of your flurry of 'lockings' today) you so often allow threads to go on and on with bickering about very off-topic tangents.
Kind Regards, John
MOD Its called having full time jobs and a life outside of these forums. So modding can come in flurries.
Last edited by a moderator:
Sponsored Links
There is really never an issue of 'non-compliance' in relation to VD since, unless you come across a situation in which excessive VD causes a load to 'not function safely', all there is in BS7671 is guidance (the oft-quoted 3% and 5% figures).
Kind Regards, John
Why not try adding a bit of common sense, subject knowledge, and ability and willingness to think into that mix?
MOD yes getting permanently banned from this forum would mean you having to find a life. Referred for permanent ban. Not reflected on his previous suspension.
Last edited by a moderator:
Fair enough, but in the 7+ years I've been participating in this forum, I think today is the first time I've witnessed such a flurry. Anyway, as you will realise, that was not my point. I mentioned today's 'flurry' only because it was an exception to the rule that seriously off-topic (and often 'silly') threads are so often allowed to persist for ages, yet today you locked one which had remained very much on-topic and, ironically, on a day when someone resurrected that thread to point out what he thought was a previously undetected error on my part (which, had that been the case, could have been misleading for any forum m embers who read it).
By the way, believe it or not, I also have a full time job and a life outside of these forums, and even my posting tends to come in flurries (with the occasional absence of a few weeks or months when those other aspects of my life become more demanding)!
Kind Regards, John
You've got to be right now and again.
https://www.diynot.com/diy/threads/...le-length-and-size.507578/page-4#post-4227393
Bas even quoted it at the top of this page
Oh, I hadn't thought of that 'invitation', which was written at the time the thread was locked today. Yes, I obviously saw that one.
I thought that the mod was talking about some 'invitation' that had been issued in the past, and that the thjread was being l;ocked because we had ignored that 'invitation'. Don't forget that, prior to today, the mot recent post in that thread was about 5 weeks ago and that today Sunray brought it back to life because he thought he had found an unnoticed error in what I had written back then.
Kind Regards, John
I offer my apologies, it make me wonder how I got onto an older thread.
No need to apologise. I obviously don't know how you came across the thread but my 'flaw' was a pretty fundamental one, and had it not been picked up at the time would have remained there to confuse and mislead people who read it for evermore - so I am grateful to you for having noticed (even though you didn't notice the correction
).Kind Regards, John
- Joined
- 27 Jan 2008
- Messages
- 23,661
- Reaction score
- 2,665
- Location
- Llanfair Caereinion, Nr Welshpool
- Country
Having now read the thread I can't see why it was locked, it did not seem to be off subject, locking threads can be dangerous where some one has made an error they can't then correct it, to delete a thread OK as no danger of anyone reading erogenous entries, but locking it is very different, and the modulator locking a thread has to be very certain there is nothing in it which could cause danger.
That is the whole idea of a forum, we all check each other, so if there is an error some one will it is hoped spot it and raise the point.
To ban some one, is also a problem, as they then can't correct errors, only if all their threads are deleted is it safe to ban them.
There is another forum were some one called "ban all sheds" had written a report about Part P, since writing the law has changed, and the poster has been banned, so now you have a pinned report which is wrong, and no one can amend or delete the post. All because some likely well meaning sysop has locked, pinned and banned the writer.
Sysop do a reasonable job, and must understand the dangers involved locking any thread.
That is the whole idea of a forum, we all check each other, so if there is an error some one will it is hoped spot it and raise the point.
To ban some one, is also a problem, as they then can't correct errors, only if all their threads are deleted is it safe to ban them.
There is another forum were some one called "ban all sheds" had written a report about Part P, since writing the law has changed, and the poster has been banned, so now you have a pinned report which is wrong, and no one can amend or delete the post. All because some likely well meaning sysop has locked, pinned and banned the writer.
Sysop do a reasonable job, and must understand the dangers involved locking any thread.
DIYnot Local
Staff member
If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.
Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.
Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local
Sponsored Links
