Loop Impedance Test

Status
Not open for further replies.
mbrooke said:
Inductive heating, power quality, voltage gradients, EMF, shock hazards...

Anyone with real world experience will tell you conduit heats up when the net current isnt zero.
Click to expand...
One of our regular service accounts has some branch circuit hots and neutrals scrambled between conduits. No smoke, no fire, no shocks. Sure it needs to taken care of, but it has been that way longer than I have been alive.
 
mbrooke said:
Anyone with real world experience will tell you conduit heats up when the net current isnt zero.
Click to expand...

Hmm, but if I recall correctly the CEC does not worry about net current until the circuits are over 200 amps.

Does that mean they do not have any real world experience or does that mean it's not that big of a deal?
 
You continue the claim all my facts are opinions. I have proof the back them up, but you refuse to accept it.
Click to expand...

I refuse to accept the need for the things you want.

I refuse to believe the fact an item or test procedure exists is a reason to mandate into code


When Tony brought up RCDs you fled because you knew he would discredit your statement regarding nuisance tripping.
Click to expand...

Tony asked me the exact same question not more than a couple of weeks ago, he asked I answered and then he asked again in this thread. I am not going to keep answering the same question.




Ditto when I posted docs to back up my statement magnetic trip provides arc fault protection from an NRTL standpoint.
Click to expand...


I did not disagree with that view.

Part of the problem is you make your posts so damn long and covering so many topics in one post makes it very difficult to respond via moble.

I do see a lot of ego driven behavior on your part, however assuming so on my part is a mistake as that is not my intent. I am not driven by ego,
Click to expand...

Perhaps you should do some more self examination. :D

Do I need to go back and quote how many times someone has said X will never work only to then post documentation proving it does?
Click to expand...

For example, main RCDs you will tell me that the fact they use them in Europe is all the proof we need to justify main or sub main GFP here. That's your proof, that and your personal feelings.

When people point out that sub main GFP at the trip levels you advocate would cost the consumers more you simply ignore that or try to say troubleshooting won't be needed.



As I said, the statistics of tripping GFP and open EGC are out there.
Click to expand...

That is not proof of a need for sub main GFP, I know you are sure it is but many of us experienced folks disagree.
 
For example, main RCDs you will tell me that the fact they use them in Europe is all the proof we need to justify main or sub main GFP here. That's your proof, that and your personal feelings.

When people point out that sub main GFP at the trip levels you advocate would cost the consumers more you simply ignore that or try to say troubleshooting won't be needed]
Click to expand...

2 or 3 50-60A 2 pole AFCI's would be far more economical than 30-40 individual AFCI's , providing the same protection

That this obviously flys completely over your head says you're not now, nor will probably ever view an install from an EC or consumer stance

~RJ~
 
I refuse to believe the fact an item or test procedure exists is a reason to mandate into code
Click to expand...

No, you simply refuse to acknowledge code, no matter how many times it is posted here Iwire

Inasmuch as unsubstantiated contrarians may abundantly proliferate the asci-sphere, i find it lowers the bar when a moderator engages in such behavior , especially in a premiere educational site....

~RJ~
 
peter d said:
Of course. Our system was not so broken as to require AFCI's in the first place.

Nor do we need:

-Insulation testing
-Ground loop impedance testing
-Whole house GFP
-Gimmicky devices that detect heating at splices and wiring devices

We have a good, safe and reliable system that has worked for a long time now. The trouble starts when people invent and legislate products that are a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.
Click to expand...

My ears are ringing!!! The problem does exists plenty as stated by professional who have replied to this post. Where's the proof that the current system is safe and reliable ???A fire developed in a panel just last week in my neighboor. The cause determined was loose breaker jaws. Anyone who has worked in the trade a long time has seen this problem happen countless times. ELit testing would pick out this problem before it occurs.
 
iwire said:
Tony asked me the exact same question not more than a couple of weeks ago, he asked I answered and then he asked again in this thread. I am not going to keep answering the same question.
Click to expand...

For the simple reason you can’t answer the question.

During my years of study, if I couldn’t answer a theoretical question I’d do some research and find an answer.

Design work isn’t a matter of joining the dots with wire of a certain size.

I have to guarantee:
The volt drop due to impedance won’t affect the operation of the circuit protection
The circuit protection is capable of performing its function
The protection will operate within specified times
 
sparks1 said:
The problem does exists plenty as stated by professional who have replied to this post.
Click to expand...

OK, so if someone agrees with you they are a professional, if they do not what are they?


Where's the proof that the current system is safe and reliable ???
Click to expand...

The millions of installations that have not had fires.

A fire developed in a panel just last week in my neighboor. The cause determined was loose breaker jaws.
Click to expand...

A fire? really? Or just some melted plastic?

Anyone who has worked in the trade a long time has seen this problem happen countless times. ELit testing would pick out this problem before it occurs.
Click to expand...

Actually it would not unless you are doing this testing monthly or weekly or daily.
 
sparks1 said:
My ears are ringing!!! The problem does exists plenty as stated by professional who have replied to this post. Where's the proof that the current system is safe and reliable ???A fire developed in a panel just last week in my neighboor. The cause determined was loose breaker jaws. Anyone who has worked in the trade a long time has seen this problem happen countless times. ELit testing would pick out this problem before it occurs.
Click to expand...


Are you another engineer pretending to be an electrician? You know, like Mbrooke is doing.
 
Tony S said:
I have to guarantee:
The volt drop due to impedance won’t affect the operation of the circuit protection
The circuit protection is capable of performing its function
The protection will operate within specified times
Click to expand...

Thankfully I don't have to guarantee those things, and I'm happy that I don't.
 
Tony S said:
The volt drop due to impedance won’t affect the operation of the circuit protection

The circuit protection is capable of performing its function

The protection will operate within specified times
Click to expand...

All of these can be read into our NEC Tony, however you'll find they go unacknowledged UNTIL a problem occurs

After which you'll find 20 page threads in pro forums berating those individuals who in fact did just that....

~RJ~
 
Tony S said:
For the simple reason you can’t answer the question.

During my years of study, if I couldn’t answer a theoretical question I’d do some research and find an answer.

Design work isn’t a matter of joining the dots with wire of a certain size.

I have to guarantee:
The volt drop due to impedance won’t affect the operation of the circuit protection
The circuit protection is capable of performing its function
The protection will operate within specified times
Click to expand...

There's is no way that you can guarantee or even confirm that the circuit protection device even functions to trip. Since there is no ELit test
performed after the device has been installed to see if it's operating within manufacture specified time limits
 
sparks1 said:
There's is no way that you can guarantee or even confirm that the circuit protection device even functions to trip. Since there is no ELit test
performed after the device has been installed to see if it's operating within manufacture specified time limits
Click to expand...

You are aware of the fact that you can perform a deliberate l>g test by simply tapping a hot and egc together aren't you? Short testing breakers that way isn't supposed to be done but if you must absolutely must know........

Despite some egregious and rare examples (FPE, Zinsco etc) most standard residential ocpds will quickly open in the advent of a l>g fault. The standard mag breakers are proven and get tested to the hilt-the science behind them is well established.
 
sparks1 said:
A fire developed in a panel just last week in my neighboor. The cause determined was loose breaker jaws. Anyone who has worked in the trade a long time has seen this problem happen countless times.
Click to expand...


Is the sky really falling or is this just a bird taking a dump.

For this example to have any meaning at all more information would be needed.

1. What is the age of the panel, when was it installed. New, 20 years ago, 40 years ago?
2. Was the breaker the correct size an type for the panel and conductor to be protected?
3. What was the extent of the damage?
 
iwire said:
Hmm, but if I recall correctly the CEC does not worry about net current until the circuits are over 200 amps.

Does that mean they do not have any real world experience or does that mean it's not that big of a deal?
Click to expand...


Can you post what section you are referring to?
 
Tony S said:
Design work isn’t a matter of joining the dots with wire of a certain size.

I have to guarantee:
The volt drop due to impedance won’t affect the operation of the circuit protection
The circuit protection is capable of performing its function
The protection will operate within specified times
Click to expand...


Tony the thing to understand is that the NEC is not a design manual. The NEC is a set of Minimum safety standards.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top