Circuit numbering confusion?

ipf said:

Get the foul mouthed sod to label this beauty....

View attachment 105525

Click to expand...

Julie. said:

Agree totally (well almost)

The swearing didn't bother me, but the f******g overall manner of his f*****g presentation makes him f****g come across as a f*****g arrogant f******g p***k

Err, perhaps back to normal now...

The point is there isn't one standard, but 100s introduced by various people, all of whom believe their system is better than others! Yes there is one merit to his system, but there are also issues just like everyone else's standard.

I do take issue with labeling a circuit with L , this I think is an absolute danger.

It may look OK on the board, but round the plant you have a single phase circuit labeled L3 - so it is automatically believed to be on the L3 phase, - well actually with his system the three circuits all marked L3 each on seperate phases L3 on one piece of kit is on phase L1, another L3 is on phase L2...

If he had used some other arbitrary circuit designator such as "Circuit" or "D" or whatever (avoiding the standard phase designators ABC, RST, RYB L1L2L3...) then it would be fine.
Even just a circuit number as per littlespark
1 = circuit No
L = phase label
2 = phase No

Or Circuit1/L1, or D1/L2 etc even C4/L3 would avoid the confusion and potential danger his system generates.

And yes you are all up too early - it's Sunday!

Click to expand...

Julie. said:

Agree totally (well almost)

The swearing didn't bother me, but the f******g overall manner of his f*****g presentation makes him f****g come across as a f*****g arrogant f******g p***k

Err, perhaps back to normal now...

The point is there isn't one standard, but 100s introduced by various people, all of whom believe their system is better than others! Yes there is one merit to his system, but there are also issues just like everyone else's standard.

I do take issue with labeling a circuit with L , this I think is an absolute danger.

It may look OK on the board, but round the plant you have a single phase circuit labeled L3 - so it is automatically believed to be on the L3 phase, - well actually with his system the three circuits all marked L3 each on seperate phases L3 on one piece of kit is on phase L1, another L3 is on phase L2...

If he had used some other arbitrary circuit designator such as "Circuit" or "D" or whatever (avoiding the standard phase designators ABC, RST, RYB L1L2L3...) then it would be fine.
Even just a circuit number as per littlespark
1 = circuit No
L = label phase
2 = phase No

Or Circuit1/L1, or D1/L2 etc even C4/L3 would avoid the confusion and potential danger his system generates.

And yes you are all up too early - it's Sunday!

Click to expand...

nicebutdim said:

Neutral and earth bars are numbered 1,2,3,4,5... for each side of 3ph boards, but most don't provide circuit numbers. The only numbering convention I ever see is left top to bottom, then right top to bottom.

As for your second comment? Well I'm not sure what you hope to achieve. If you don't want to discuss the subject, then feel free to not do so. If you feel unable to discuss the subject, then the same applies.

I'm not sure why anyone should have to justify the hour at which they post, but I'll do so on this occasion as more than one member felt it was in some way relevant. I had to work yesterday evening until quite late. Upon my return I watched a few videos on Youtube as a means of relaxing before bed. This video raised, what I considered to be, an interetsing point and one that I'd never previously heard. I asked if anyone numbered boards in this way and most certainly didn't ask for anyone to provide opinions on what they believe is a suitable time for bed - nor did I ask for anyone's opinion on whether or not someone can have a drink of a Saturday evening (I hadn't).

On valid point raised is the language used in the video and I apologise for not mentioning this at the time of posting.

Click to expand...

nicebutdim said:

I took his argument about the numbering of single phase boards to be due to the fact that a main switch can be found left, right or centre.

What really caused me to think was his reasoning behind 3ph numbering - if a board is replaced with something bigger, then existing circuit numbers remain unchanged. Of course, you might aim to keep those circuit numbers the same anyway, but there may not be enough length to allow it.

I've not seen 3ph boards numbered in this way and wondered if it was convention anywhere. While I think there some merit to it, I see no point in changing the convention used everywhere I work as that's bound to lead to some confusion, regardless of how clearly a board is numbered.

Click to expand...

Midwest said:

I can only comment on the recent DB‘s I’ve seen in my place of work, Eaton I think, all pre labelled. Not having done any commercial/industrial work in over 40 years, hence my question mark.

On your second point, I was only picking up on, tongue in cheek, about what somebody else pointed out. Perhaps you should raise it with them?

Click to expand...

Risteard said:

Ironically, his insistence on how single phase boards should be numbered, i.e. not based on position of main switch, contradicts his system for TPN in that the single phase won't keep the same position in a bigger board if you number from the other side.

Click to expand...

ipf said:

He's also confusing himself by saying 'reading top to bottom then left to right' suggests you read down first and then across.
He should be saying you read across first and then down.......not that I agree with him, at all.

Click to expand...