New CU question.

The length is not to protect the cable, but to ensure the spd is able to do its job.
Indeed (as we have discussed) - although, as I said, the 'requirement' is pretty meaningless if that 'length' is measured from arbitrary point (such as entry into the CU/DB, which could be a long distance from the origin of the installation (and, I suspect, in practice rarely less than 0.5m). My comments were, as I presume you understand, in response to scousespark's suggestion ...
The length of cable comes from BS7671, regulation 534.4.8 which states the total length of the cables (live + PE) should preferably be no longer than 0.5 metres, but should never be longer than 1 metre. I assume this is based on research to ensure the cables are not damaged during the spike.
As I said before, if the concern which has led to the 'length requirement' is in relation to high frequency (rapid rise-time) transients, then electrical consideration might suggest that the connection from the origin of the installation to the SPD (and everything else) should perhaps be as long as possible (i.e. with a minimum, not maximum length requirement) - since it would surely be better to attenuate the transients before they get to the SPD (and everything else), rather than make it easier for them to get to the SPD (and hope that it can 'deal with them'), isn't it?

Kind Regards, John
 
Sponsored Links
Fair enough. Do you know whether that means that some have built-in over-current protection and others don't, rather than that some manufacturers are happy to rely on protection by the cutout fuse, but others aren't?

Apparently some have fuses in.
Flameport has a few You tube videos about them.

 
Apparently some have fuses in. Flameport has a few You tube videos about them.
Those would be fuses to prevent the SPD 'doing its job' in situations in which it was perhaps most 'needed', would they??

The more I hear, read and learn about SPDs ...... :) :)

Kind Regards, John
 
Sponsored Links
For the non believers and some regs stuff...
The thing which rather intrigues me is that one does not have to look back all that far in the archives of this forum (and many others like it) to be reminded of the days when any mention of "surge suppression" resulted in amusement, disparaging comments, and all sorts of talk about "charlatans" and "snake oil" (and things like "solutions looking for problems") :). It seems that 'times' sometimes change surprisingly rapidly - but I wonder if any of the underlying electrical considerations have actually changed?

Kind Regards, John
 
For the non believers and some regs stuff


This is one of those insanely rare cases where I stick 2 fingers up to the regs.

There is no point in introducing a reg (and yes I am aware of the existance and have been in consultation with IET) if the very reg is totally pointless.


Let me attempt to offer some education please.

The flow of water in a pipe and current in an electrical conductor follow fairly similar laws of physics and as water can be seen it's easier to demonstrate the point that way.

Lets get a standard garden hose of some random length, let's assume 20m as that seems to be quite common. Connect one end to a tap and plug the distant end, drill holes in the pipe at 1m intervals, say 5mm diameter.

Now turn the tap on full and observe the water flowing from the holes.

I'm sure we'll all accept water will initially flow from only the hole closest to the tap and increasing one by one it will eventually flow from all holes.


Comparing that with a CU we have a conductor (hose pipe vs busbar) with periodic current outlets (holes vs copper branches) and we have a current flowing (water vs electrons)... Yes all very simplistic isn't it.

Let's put some timings on the hose pipe and come up with a figure of say 1 second delay between the time the water takes to flow from each hole, assuming we have 19 holes the current has been flowing from the first hole for 19 seconds before the last gets wet. In the case of the surge protection being on the end of the hose that's 19 seconds of surge/excess pressure before the protection device can even begin to think about doing any work.


Now we drain the hose out and set up just as before. We now apply water pressure for only 5 seconds (as surges are usually time limited), current flows from the first 4 or 5 holes but no further, it doesn't even reach the protection device.


Those who are now getting very confused, my apoligies however the very simplistic comparison has validity as electrical current flows in a conductor at a finite speed. Just in case there are non believers, look it up on Google etc and while there look up 'coax stub' and find out where this detail is actually used in the real world.




For the benefit of the tape I have found myself looking at vapourised radio equipment where the correct practices have been ingored (And by vapourised I mean big chunks of electronic equipment being turned into molten blobs and hurled against walls etc) and only a few feet away similar equipment being still serviceable where the protection procedures have been correctly implemented.


Regs or not... pointless if incorrect.
 

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
Back
Top