Few questions on the PIR form

[Sparky Ninja]

Widdler,
I have just gone through the definitions section of the brb, there is NO R[SUB]N[/SUB] defined, nor is there an R[SUB]n[/SUB].
Allowing for the fact that I have tried to use the subscripts, though it does not always work, and I'm not querying or criticising on the lack or otherwise of the subscript in your post, I understand the terms you use, but they are not defined in BS7671, or its associated guidance as I can remember.

In GN3 the term r[SUB]n[/SUB] is defined.

There is a big difference between r1+r2 & R1+R2.

Perhaps I did not explain myself when it comes to the way I used the term measured.

For a radial circuit, as installed, you can directly measure the R1+R2 values at the electrically extreme point of the circuit.

For a ring circuit, you can not directly measure the R1+R2 value as installed, you have to to some trickery with the wiring to get you this value do you not, which will always give the highest value at a spur.

You can only ever get r1, r2 & rn on a ring circuit by the way they are defined in GN3.

They don't appear any of them in the definitions section of BS7671, nor do they appear on the associated model forms.

Excluding Amd1 for the moment.

Does that clarify my post and standpoint?

I think you are making mountains out of mole hills on this one.
I really don't want to start explaining the differences between BS 7671, GN3 and best working practices and the reasons for them. I was simply giving the answers to the OP, as to weather I consider the data required on a schedule of test results to be gospel is not on debate here.
My answer to the OP still stands as far as I am concerned, please feel free to answer the OP yourself then maybe we can see where this difference of opinion is coming from.

 

[netblindpaul]

Des,
I am on about the circuit having to be altered for R1+R2 for a ring final to be entered onto the Schedule of test results.

Widdler,
I am not trying to be awkward, I have recently heard a debate between 2 well educated and apparently competent people over r's & R's.
It made me think and look back through notes and things, especially as I had just delivered a 2391.
I re-visited the info, GN3 & the brb in detail along with several other of the GN's, my own 2391-10 course notes from when I did it, & my 2391-20 (2400) course notes.
I also emailed one of my ex-lecturers, and spoke to the senior at the training establishment I delivered the 2391-10 at.
All references pointed to the fact that case, units etc. are very important.

Can you indulge me, so I can "try" to "take the mickey out of you", all in the best possible taste as Jasper Carrot would say, and, further more, this is a bit OT to the OP, but IMHO it is relevant.

There is a question I read that illustrates the point I am trying to make I think.

Please remember I am not trying to be nasty or horrid, it is just after the debate I heard, I took stock as it were and thought that this is quite important really.

So Widdler, IF you are "game for a laugh", and this is NOT a nasty thing I promise, I have immense respect, I am just lost for a way to illustrate my concern & the question I have I "think" does illustrate it.

Please let me know, I'm a bit short of time at the moment as I am quite busy.

 

[netblindpaul]

Widdler/All,
Perhaps my terms in my last post are not perfect, but they are the first ones to come to mind.
Widdler is a very well respected and valuable asset to the forum, and please rest assured that I am not trying to make a fool of him.
It is just that I came across an issue like this and a question to illustrate it and I am hoping Widdler will play along with me for the benefit of all.

 

[Sparky Ninja]

I've read your messages Paul and am trying to see as to where your concern is coming from.
Could you maybe quote my prior posts and your corrections on them then we can see if we can solve this.

Thanks.

 

[netblindpaul]

This means that you have successfully carried out the R1&R2 and R1&RN test with the cross connection "figure 8" method included.

Live/Live means between Line and Neutral or between Lines (L1 to L2 for example), your interpretation of Live/Neutral and Live/Earth are incorrect because we now use the term Line for the Line conductor (not Live)

You would put it down as a limitation, and Live/Live column would likely be filled in as "Lim" in this scenario.

First one then, the term RN is not defined in the brb or associated literature for example.
Whilst I appreciate your definition, and it does have a colloquial use, it is not specifically defined in the brb or associated guidance.
What you have described is a valuable test and is one I would recommend.
However, should it not be pointed out that the term is "not" a brb, GN3, or thus 2391 term?