Main bondage

[ultinator]

Does main bonding in every circumstance always need to be under 0.05. main bonding in a house where the main water was moved has 10mm cable but resistance of 0.25 ohms!!>>

 

[Geoffsd]

my point being that if you do need to achieve a 0.05ohms reading between gas and water pipes

But you don't, that is not a requirement.

All that is required is that each service is MAIN bonded to the MET with a conductor of negligible impedance (0.05Ω or less is deemed to satisfy this).

To verify this we have to measure the resistance from bonding point to MET, i.e. the conductor path.

The resistance between each service is not considered.

 

[Gavin A]

But you don't, that is not a requirement.

All that is required is that each service is MAIN bonded to the MET with a conductor of negligible impedance (0.05Ω or less is deemed to satisfy this).

To verify this we have to measure the resistance from bonding point to MET, i.e. the conductor path.

The resistance between each service is not considered.

ok, so you're saying that Voltzelectrical and KUS1 are wrong to have made or agreed with that statement?

 

[LlandrilloSpark]

Can somebody enlighten me as to what this thread is about please?

 

[monkeyelectric]

I lost track a while back but originally it was about tieing someone up

 

[Geoffsd]

Candidates are still incorrectly stated that the maximum value for the resistance of a main protective bonding conductor is 0.05 ohms.

No, that is the correct statement.

This value is applicable where access to the bonding connection is not possible

It must be accessible.

and a test is made between two extraneous conductive parts (GN3 Page 35).

Not for MAIN bonding.
Connections between e-c-ps are supplementary bonding which is not required between services and e-c-ps such as structural parts.

This value is not the maximum permitted resistance of the main protective bonding conductor.

Yes, it is.
For a part with no other connection to the MET, what else can it be?

THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST FAILED QUESTIONS IN TEST AND INSPECTION EXAMS when the question has been asked state the maximum value of resistance of a main protective bonding conductor...................I REST MY CASE END OF FINISH

What is the question?

 

[Geoffsd]

Can somebody enlighten me as to what this thread is about please?

If you're not interested, don't read it.

 

[KAS1]

What is the maximum value for resistance of a main protective bonding conductor ??? If you think it's 0.05 ohms you are wrong, if you can't understand why, well I'm sorry if I can't explain it more clearly for any of you but that's it, you'll have to just except it, perhaps someone else on this site can explain it better than me.

 

[LlandrilloSpark]

Geoff who's rattled your cage, I have read it but there is so many contradicting opinions the whole thread has just lost its point

 

[Geoffsd]

Geoff who's rattled your cage, I have read it but there is so many contradicting opinions the whole thread has just lost its point

Please tell me which is the correct view, then.

 

[KAS1]

My statement is correct, many thanks

 

[LlandrilloSpark]

I'm not interested in petty arguments like you Geoff

 

[Geoffsd]

What is the maximum value for resistance of a main protective bonding conductor ??? If you think it's 0.05 ohms you are wrong,

Ok. What is the correct answer, then?
If not a specific value then the definition or means of determination.

All the regulations state is that it shall be sized appropriately with no regard to length and therefore resistance.
This is to handle fault current without damage.
Within reason, the resistance will obviously be very low.

if you can't understand why, well I'm sorry if I can't explain it more clearly for any of you but that's it, you'll have to just except it, perhaps someone else on this site can explain it better than me.

I don't think you have.
You keep mentioning the resistance between the service pipes which is not required with regard to Mian bonding.

I should be grateful if someone would.

 

[Gavin A]

What is the maximum value for resistance of a main protective bonding conductor ???

What is the right answer to this question then?

 

[Geoffsd]

I'm not interested in petty arguments like you Geoff

It's not petty argument. Definitely not petty.

I genuinely thought I was right and it is said I'm not. I would like to know why.


I will deduce you don't know the correct answer, either.

 

[LlandrilloSpark]

Geoff, I don't know the correct answer, are you sure you do?

How would anybody prove it?, how can you prove it?