Hi all!
So, I was filling out a test sheet for a number of 3-phase circuits we did an EICR on.
For years whenever a 3-phase circuit exists I have recorded them on a single line (eg. 1/TP or 1/L123) and recorded the highest or lowest value applicable to that particular test regardless of phase. Something the NIC has never taken issue with.
A friend of mine claimed that it was wrong and should in fact be recorded as individual lines per phase. This seemed unnecessary to me as we are only really interested in the most detrimental. His argument was that if there is a variable in one phase that might mean the high reading we record is due to possible degradation or loose connections then it will go unrecorded - I counter argued that you could only get the highest of three by testing all three and thus would be aware of the possibility and record it under an ‘observation’
Anyway - I can’t find a general consensus on the matter. Some say mine and some his.
Would love to have this cleared up whether I’m right or wrong!
Thanks!
So, I was filling out a test sheet for a number of 3-phase circuits we did an EICR on.
For years whenever a 3-phase circuit exists I have recorded them on a single line (eg. 1/TP or 1/L123) and recorded the highest or lowest value applicable to that particular test regardless of phase. Something the NIC has never taken issue with.
A friend of mine claimed that it was wrong and should in fact be recorded as individual lines per phase. This seemed unnecessary to me as we are only really interested in the most detrimental. His argument was that if there is a variable in one phase that might mean the high reading we record is due to possible degradation or loose connections then it will go unrecorded - I counter argued that you could only get the highest of three by testing all three and thus would be aware of the possibility and record it under an ‘observation’
Anyway - I can’t find a general consensus on the matter. Some say mine and some his.
Would love to have this cleared up whether I’m right or wrong!
Thanks!