Main bonding diagram

[EFLImpudence]

I have drawn this diagram which may be useful in future explanations and may be placed in the Wiki.
There is an entry in the Wiki registration page for 'URL'. What is this?

Can anyone see any errors or suggest additions?

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I think each example should be a discrete drawing.

Can't see the point of those branches in the pipe (not saying you are wrong to have them - could you explain?) Without them 2 & 4 are the same.

 

[John D v2.0]

Please could you make a mobile friendly version?

 

[EFLImpudence]

I think each example should be a discrete drawing.

Ok. Will separate.

Can't see the point of those branches in the pipe (not saying you are wrong to have them - could you explain?) Without them 2 & 4 are the same.

I just thought it would better resemble actual installations and show different parts have different requirements.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Please could you make a mobile friendly version?

How would that be achieved?

 

[John D v2.0]

Personally I think the whole appliance CPC thing is a red herring.
Perhaps it's relevant when you're testing whether something is an ecp to know what to disconnect, but for bonding it doesn't really matter.
On that topic, It might be worth having an explanation of how to test whether something Is rather than by inspection. This would always produce the correct answer regardless of whether incomers are metallic.

 

[John D v2.0]

How would that be achieved?

Basically separate it out as bas suggested, also make it more"portrait" rather than"landscape"
My screen is only small so I have to scroll left and right for each example.
Even in landscape mode on my phone I have to scroll because each example is long and thin.

 

[aptsys]

Personally I think the whole appliance CPC thing is a red herring.
Perhaps it's relevant when you're testing whether something is an ecp to know what to disconnect, but for bonding it doesn't really matter.
On that topic, It might be worth having an explanation of how to test whether something Is rather than by inspection. This would always produce the correct answer regardless of whether incomers are metallic.

I agree, get rid of the CPCs in the diagram - it just adds confusion

 

[EFLImpudence]

I don't agree about the CPCs.

This isn't for electricians but DIYers and to explain why it needs bonding and/or is already earthed.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Any better?

 

[EFLImpudence]

I will make it portrait when finished.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Portrait ?

 

[aptsys]

I don't agree about the CPCs.

This isn't for electricians but DIYers and to explain why it needs bonding and/or is already earthed.

Why do they care about if it's earthed? It would be irrelevant to the case for bonding

 

[EFLImpudence]

Well, they may care because they are trying to understand what is the situation and why measurements can vary and because that is how their installation is likely to be which is the purpose of my diagram.

As far as being irrelevant to bonding:
It will appear to indicate that a pipe is an extraneous-c-p when it might not be or that a pipe is bonded when it is not.
A true determination cannot be made without disconnecting any CPC connections, so not knowing that they may exist would presumably be a disadvantage.

But fundamentally just because that's how it is.

 

[John D v2.0]

I am not sure if it's worth showing the connection between true earth and the MET. Seems relevant to me, although it would be out if the control of the installation and complex in nature if it's a supplied earth.
Also true earth is a bit of a misnomer, as there's only local earth which may vary significantly from other local earths. But I'm not sure how you'd indicate that, maybe a brown resistor symbol between the supplied earth and the ecps?