On another forum about an high ZS reading about a fused spur feeding a boiler, someone replied that in the new 18th regs if the RCD breaks the circuit within time under test you do not need to check ZS, just R2 continuity test for CPC continuity would be good enough. You just put N/A on the test form for Zs. He even posted an article from Stroma.
This was a response to a question about the Zs reading with his Instrument was 100 ohms higher than his calculation.
Does anybody know more about this, and is it because of rcds and rcbos causing high reading on live ZS redings ?

42806519_1911455935588038_6381880673786920960_n.jpg
 
It's no different from Measuring Ze then using measured R1+R2 to confirm the circuit complies to satisfy disconnection times.

To say you do not need to check Zs is wrong, you still need to confirm that the OCPD will operate within the required times either by measurement or calculation.
 
On another forum about an high ZS reading about a fused spur feeding a boiler, someone replied that in the new 18th regs if the RCD breaks the circuit within time under test you do not need to check ZS, just R2 continuity test for CPC continuity would be good enough. You just put N/A on the test form for Zs. He even posted an article from Stroma.
This was a response to a question about the Zs reading with his Instrument was 100 ohms higher than his calculation.
Does anybody know more about this, and is it because of rcds and rcbos causing high reading on live ZS redings ?

View attachment 44579
This is in regards to a TT system where the regulations now state a continuity test of the cpc and any applicable exposed conductive parts and an rcd test is acceptable and a zs test is not applicable
 
But I have

Because it’s pointless verifying the zs of the circuit when the OCPD offers no fault protection and is reliant on the rcd for earth fault protection
The Ra must be measured, or an external earth fault loop impedance test carried out and the effectiveness of the rcd for ads
On TN systems, if there is a high Zs, Is it ok because it is protected by RCDS. Can it apply here as well ?
I would think so.
 
I can't see where any new regulation states that max Zs figures do not have to be reached on a TN system?

I have thought on occasion 'why' is an RCD not deemed acceptable on TN system for fault protection when it is fine for a TT, but I came to conclusion that I was thinking about it in the wrong way.....

I'm pretty rubbish at analogies but lets say a TT system is like a classic car without a seat belt (pre 1966) and a TN system is a modern car.

Sticking to the speed limit is the RCD and wearing a seatbelt is ADS (i.e meeting max Zs figures).

Both cars can stick to the speed limit (have RCD) but that's no reason not to wear a seatbelt (ADS). The only reason you don't wear a seatbelt legally is if you don't have one fitted and it's pre 1966, but that's no excuse to not wear one in a modern car.

Yep, that all makes perfect sense o_O:confused::)
 
Best EV Chargers by Electrical2Go! The official electric vehicle charger supplier.

OFFICIAL SPONSORS

Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Electrician Courses Green Electrical Goods PCB Way Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Pushfit Wire Connectors Electric Underfloor Heating Electrician Courses
These Official Forum Sponsors May Provide Discounts to Regular Forum Members - If you would like to sponsor us then CLICK HERE and post a thread with who you are, and we'll send you some stats etc

Advert

Daily, weekly or monthly email

Thread starter

Joined
Location
WEST MIDLANDS

Thread Information

Title
Does anybody know of this new regulation that omits the ZS test.
Prefix
N/A
Forum
UK Electrical Forum
Start date
Last reply date
Replies
36
Unsolved
--

Advert

Thread statistics

Created
sham,
Last reply from
sham,
Replies
36
Views
5,166

Advert

TrueNAS JBOD Storage Server

Back
Top