r2 testing | Page 2 | on ElectriciansForums

Discuss r2 testing in the Periodic Inspection Reporting & Certification area at ElectriciansForums.net

This is mathematically sound provided the T&E is not 2.5/1.0 (which a lot is) but to my mind totally defeates the object of the exercise which is to detect any faults in the circuit. What if the measured value of R2 was 0.46 and R1 was 1.8. Wiould this be detected? Would the fault be detected? Would the fire be prevented?

Shorly it would be better to measure Zs to be certain there was no fault, then if desired calculate R1 and R2.

If only R2 can be measured, eg no time / facility / money to errect scaffolding then let this be an agreed limitation.

Geoff

I have just re-read the original question and note there is an implication that Zs testing is done seperately and in addition to R2 testing. Personally I cannot see the need for R2 testing if there is a satisfactory Zs test. The Zs test confirms the continuity of both the phase and cpc conductors and also the polarity of the supply. The only other test that should be needed is the phase - nutral loop test which is not even called for in BS7671, since this is what controls the current when there is a short circuit and which causes the MCB to switch off. (I am assuming the fault loop is protected by an RCD and it is the RCD that will switch off if an earth fault develops). The only excuse for not doing a phase - nutral loop test is that the Zs test (assuming no faults) would give at least the same and normally a larger value. -- I would be interested in comments on this theory.


Just thought I had to mention this but the r2 test is essential and the ZS test cannot be carried out before you have verified you have a good earth path before energising the circuit. Regarding the original issue its hard to accurately work out the r2 value without further details especially if single cables.

Hi.

As it's a PIR then a limitation can be agreed where you only measure Zs to verify an earth path and not R1+R2 or R2.

I would still measure the continuity of ring final conductors, a blanket IR test (again as a lim) and RCD function.

I wouldn't use the transposed formula of Zs = Ze+(R1+R2) to calculate the R1+R2 as the reading may not be totally accurate due to any parallel paths that may exist.


I agree , I forgot the fact it was a pir, not normally required as long as your clear with the client that you will not be performing the test as its un likely you can garantee no other earth paths.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
On the NIC test forms there are columns for R1+R2 or R2, it says at least one column to be completed. So either you do R1+R2 and Zs OR R2 and Zs.
 
Can I just clear something up here, I apologise if I have missed it all through the threads, you only use R1 and R2 for ZS calculations. Not r1 and r2. This may be some of the confusion in the OP.
And thanks to leny I think for answering a question of mine which would of been why the measured ZS never adds up to the calculated ZS, because the measured zs Includes the Paralell paths. We canot disconnect them because the test is alive test and earths must not be disconnected.

Quick tip to the op, dont put a link in the phase to the earth, its dangerous !! even though its shown in all the books. Take the phase wire out and stuff it in the earth bar !! if it wont reach, connector block.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Reply to r2 testing in the Periodic Inspection Reporting & Certification area at ElectriciansForums.net

News and Offers from Sponsors

  • Article
Join us at electronica 2024 in Munich! Since 1964, electronica has been the premier event for technology enthusiasts and industry professionals...
    • Like
Replies
0
Views
709
  • Sticky
  • Article
Good to know thanks, one can never have enough places to source parts from!
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Article
OFFICIAL SPONSORS These Official Forum Sponsors May Provide Discounts to Regular Forum Members - If you would like to sponsor us then...
Replies
0
Views
3K

Similar threads

I have a question i hope someone can just give me a little clarification on . When carrying out preliminary cable design for a given circuit we...
Replies
0
Views
303
Often, but not always: 543.2.9 Except where the circuit protective conductor is formed by a metal covering or enclosure containing all of the...
2
Replies
23
Views
815

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

YOUR Unread Posts

This website was designed, optimised and is hosted by untold.media Operating under the name Untold Media since 2001.
Back
Top