Circuit numbering confusion?

[nicebutdim]

Just watched this and can't argue with his logic, but I'm yet to see a board numbered in this way...

Anyone do this?

 

[buzzlightyear]

I dont matter what he says he's not doing the job, what ever makes you happy.

 

[Risteard]

I also don't understand his argument about not numbering a single phase board from the main switch.

And I wouldn't consider his suggestion for TPN DBs to be the "norm".

But what's more important is that it's clearly labelled so that there is no room for confusion.

 

[nicebutdim]

I also don't understand his argument about not numbering a single phase board from the main switch.

And I wouldn't consider his suggestion for TPN DBs to be the "norm".

But what's more important is that it's clearly labelled so that there is no room for confusion.

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.

 

[littlespark]

Could he not have put his point across without all the swearing?
I stopped watching after the 10th F


Yes, I see his point, IF you’re putting in a bigger board/more circuits… you can add them in without messing with the numbering so far.
(Was that the only positive?)

What’s grinding my gears is his labels
He has “L1” then phases 1,2,3
Should it not be “1” then L1, L2, L3??



And why are you lot up in the middle of the night? 3:33am!!

 

[Eddy Currents]

Should it not be “1” then L1, L2, L3??

I agree
I was taught L stands for Line / what phase it was on so there is no confusion on circuit number or what phase a circuit is on
so 1L1,1L2,1L3,2L1,2L2,2L3,3L1....

 

[littlespark]

Was easier to understand when it was R,Y,B for phases.

Just saying.

 

[Midwest]

Doesn't the manufacturer already label the DB? So even if the board is partially populated, a newly installed ocpd already has a circuit number.

PS perhaps those members up late have just come back after be out all night clubbing. If so, they shouldn't be sober enough to post?

 

[Pretty Mouth]

I can't think of any modern-ish single phase CU that doesn't have some sort of numbering system. Not always on the cover, but usually on the N and E bars.

 

[westward10]

The neutral and earth bars are marked like this in the old Memshield 1/Bill triple boards are marked like this.

 

[Julie.]

Could he not have put his point across without all the swearing?
I stopped watching after the 10th F


Yes, I see his point, IF you’re putting in a bigger board/more circuits… you can add them in without messing with the numbering so far.
(Was that the only positive?)

What’s grinding my gears is his labels
He has “L1” then phases 1,2,3
Should it not be “1” then L1, L2, L3??



And why are you lot up in the middle of the night? 3:33am!!

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!

 

[cliffed]

Just watched this and can't argue with his logic, but I'm yet to see a board numbered in this way...

Anyone do this?

I would go with the wrong version TBF

 

[buzzlightyear]

It's up to the manufacturer to label the three boardsin the beginning L1 right L2 left and so on
Us minions just wire them bloody in.
It should have been done years ago..
With out some body shouting S££t out of the mouth.

 

[ipf]

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

 

[nicebutdim]

Doesn't the manufacturer already label the DB? So even if the board is partially populated, a newly installed ocpd already has a circuit number.

PS perhaps those members up late have just come back after be out all night clubbing. If so, they shouldn't be sober enough to post?

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.