G
Geordie Spark
don't really think it's an issue though, not heard of any petrol stations blowing up in the UK.
Don't start giving these ISIS Jihad types any ideas for fooks sake!!!
don't really think it's an issue though, not heard of any petrol stations blowing up in the UK.
Do you mean Ra
As silly as it sounds it has been taken in to account. Many chemical plants and gas facilites do have a police presence, as is in the Grimsby area.Don't start giving these ISIS Jihad types any ideas for fooks sake!!!
As silly as it sounds it has been taken in to account. Many chemical plants and gas facilites do have a police presence, as is in the Grimsby area.
Don't start giving these ISIS Jihad types any ideas for fooks sake!!!
should do, although it can be quite sandy in placesCheers. Do you think I would get down on my Armstrong? (off-road bike, road legal though)
That's what happens when the old bugger doesn't put his glasses on.
Many thanks for correcting me kind sir.
Just wish they could come up with some decisive information or even come to a reliable conclusion as to what makes a max value stable and then at what point its not.
I have corrected TT system readings above 400 ohms.
And yet the 30ma rcd's protecting those circuits have, under test, operated within 40ms/200ms no problems.
If un-stability is a science it needs practical clarification so that we have a definitive cut off value that all adhere to with no grey areas.
In the mean time I will continue to go with 100 ohms purely because logic dictates its a safer bet than 200 ohms.
No other reason, and if someone proved conclusively that below 200 is still a safe option then so be it.
Thats got to be one of the most illogical statements I've ever seen on this forum. You might as well go with 1000 because it's safer than 1667!
We should have a poll to find out the answerDoes everything need to be a poll?
We'll be having designs put to a poll soon!
Thats got to be one of the most illogical statements I've ever seen on this forum. You might as well go with 1000 because it's safer than 1667!
"In the mean time I will continue to go with 100 ohms purely because logic dictates its a safer bet than 200 ohms".
In context with the rest of the quote it seems logical to me !!
Where a TT system is used I will always attempt to get sub 100 ohm readings as opposed to 200 ohms because its a safer bet.
Is not the whole point to reduce the resistance of the earth return path to a point where stability issues are minimised.
Technically we can often go much higher than that, but I prefer not to always rely on what's technically correct.
Otherwise we can bring into play your own analogy of 1667 or even 1000 which I agree would lack logic, but on paper !!
BS 7671 are looking at values below 200 ohms.
NICEIC have quoted below 100 ohms, as does BS 7430.
Actually BS 7430 is a very interesting read so here's a link,
http://jack.nazwa.pl/doc/UK.17th/BS/BS 7430 Earthing.pdf
With reference to Skelts 200 mph vs 190 mph,
If its a Ferrari, with decent brakes, on a traffic free autobahn !!
GO FOR ITunk:
Wasn't having a go mate,the whole Ra value thing is a lottery. As I've argued before,i just cant get my head around a view that pitches ANY high Ra value as 'better' than any other high Ra value.The end result will be the same whether it's 20 ohms or 1000 ohms. Tn values or you may as well go twiggy IMO lol.
You there Eng?
Its quite simple, if the soil is a poor then a 200 ohm reading may be considered stable, if you have good soil then you would consider it to be unstable.
Now unless your going to survey the ground resistance, your hitting and hoping. If this is the case use good methods and remember the first meter is open to seasonal variation so drive deep if you can.
Cheers
well in theory these do have the joule/watt energy to ignite some types of flammable vapours. And you don't want to be around when a 100M3 vessel goes up.This has happened in the past, a few been in the US, but there was one explosion in the north of England can't remember the sites name at the moment.
Flixborough in 74
A quick Google search will give you an in depth report and changes in management of change at hazardous area sites.The main cause of Flixborough was an incorrect repair on a pipe bridge. The wrong grade of steel pipe was used to try and keep the plant running. The pipe fractured due to the substance being carried.
Despite appearances it's actually an awful long time since I used a twig,SOP these days is two coupled rods,perhaps a result of the discussions on this forum!....although TT's are an increasingly rare job. I recall using two coupled rods for a small fairground supply and barely hitting the fabled 200 ohm mark,but mostly in my area anywhere between 12 and 150 ohms is the expected result. Cant help wondering whether a twig would do the same job though!!!