If you think that sound electrical design and installation hinges on semantic segues from BAS, follow his advice.
I believe that all I have done is to repeatedly explain to you, in as simple and direct ways as I can, what the definition of a spur is and therefore what the context of the OSG section on spurs is.
You seem to think that if you ignore that often enough then somehow it won't be true.
You seem to think that if you ignore everybody else who is telling you the same thing, including indirectly someone from the IET who is involved with writing the regulations, then somehow they won't be right either.
How many people have to tell you you are wrong, and how many times, before you realise that you are?
If you do, then join him and his Code 2's and possibly Code 1's, justify their existence by any means you choose and be happy.
So if I've understood your argument, it's like this:
I have an earth cable with bends that are a little tighter than they should be, and a vertical run of 420mm with no support, therefore I can't be right about what a spur is.
Do you really not see the complete lack of logic there?
And can you please show me where I, or anybody else who thinks you're wrong has tried to use the definition of a spur as a way to justify my less than perfectly installed earth cable? Or was that just another failed attempt to distract people from the fact that you are wrong?
If you can't think of any serious practical flaws in BAS's persistent pedantry, you probably shouldn't extend yourself past the Reader's Digest.
Persistent pedantry? The only thing I have persisted in is attempting to get you to read a very simple sentence consisting of of 7 plain and easily understood words: "
A branch from a ring final circuit" and to realise that it means what it says. Perhaps you regard anybody who disagrees with you when you are plainly wrong about something as a pedant, is that it? Anybody who treats the truth as important must be a pedant?
As far as I recall, the Highway Code and the various Road Traffic/Vehicles/Safety Acts don't explicitly and specifically prohibit hand brake turns.
What does that have to do with whether you are right about the definition of a spur?
Knock yourself out BAS. But if I were you, I would sort out the serious defects in your installation rather than waste time ekeing out pedanty.
Serious defects? An earth cable with bends that are a little tighter than they should be, and a vertical run of 420mm with no support.
And you class those as serious defects?
But be that as it may, I am still waiting for you, as are many of us, despite you having been asked several times, to explain logically why any defects that may exist in my installation mean that I am unable to understand what a spur is, and to what the OSG section on spurs refers.
So by your efforts you have now got yourself to the point where not only are you being told by more than one person here that you are wrong about spurs, you've got more than one person recognising that you realise you've lost that argument and are resorting to ad hominem fallacies in a desperate attempt to appear to have won something.
Do you feel good about that?
Are you successfully fooling yourself, because you're fooling nobody here.
When is it going to sink in that you are wrong, and you always have been?
