[Phil Allison]

"David"

Wrong.

** The point is correct - it has no bearing on the question or my earlier
comments.

Wrong again. Unlike you, I am a fully licensed electrical contractor, so I
do know what I am on about.

** What you are is a fully qualified FUCKWIT.

Neither the current nor 20 year ago wiring rules have ANY bearing on the
OP's question or my reply.

Dickhead.



...... Phil

 

[Phil Allison]

"John Tserkezis"


** This loon posts straight out of a mental asylum - easy to see that.

Wot a psycho.

 

[Phil Allison]

"David"

Wrong again Phil,

** The point is 100% correct.

There are tens of millions of light fittings in Aussie homes with no earth
supply.

You are so autistic you CANNOT READ.

You really need to learn to *read* the Standard Phil. The rules clearly
state that any alterations or additions to an existing installation are
required to meet the relevant provisions of the current standard. Only
repairs to existing installations may be carried out using the standard
applicable at the time of the original installation.

Clearly a full re-wiring would be a new installation, and require RCDs.

** Replacing existing outlets, wiring and light fittings is not a new
installation.

RCDs are NOT fitted to millions of homes in NSW and that will still be the
case in several decades time.

NSW has the worst domestic electrical safety in the country and the
situation with appliance safety just gets worse every day - mainly due to
the actions of lunatic Green Nazis.



...... Phil

 

[David]

"David"

** The point is 100% correct.

There are tens of millions of light fittings in Aussie homes with no earth
supply.

You are so autistic you CANNOT READ.





** Replacing existing outlets, wiring and light fittings is not a new
installation.

I never said it was. You stated incorrectly that a full re-wiring of the
premises does not require fitting an RCD. A full re-wiring is indeed
treated as a new installation.

RCDs are NOT fitted to millions of homes in NSW and that will still be the
case in several decades time.

** BOLLOCKS.

Where did you pull that figure from Phil? I can guess...

The ABS quotes 76% of NSW homes have an electrical safety switch fitted.
(ACT 79%, Vic 75% and QLD 90%) as at Oct 2007. As the 2006 census data
shows just under 2,800,000 million dwellings in NSW, the actual number
without a safety switch is only around 700,000 dwellings, certainly not
"millions of homes in NSW"


David

 

[atec77]

"David L. Jones"
"Phil Allison"


** Too many Daves in this tread.




..... Phil

How about you pull your head in and be quite philthy befoer you get a
solution you wont like ?

 

[atec77]

"David"


** The point is correct - it has no bearing on the question or my earlier
comments.






** What you are is a fully qualified FUCKWIT.

Neither the current nor 20 year ago wiring rules have ANY bearing on the
OP's question or my reply.

of course it does you in denial penis puller
you are wrong..

 

[terryc]

Yes - physical location is valid - suspect teacher is looking for a more
technical reason. Fuse rating could be the answer however that would be
far in advance of what they have covered (yr 8). thanks

Go with fuse rating.
I don't see it as beyound Yr8. Really it is just applied resistor and they
usually cover resistance as one of the early parts of electrical circuits.

OTOH, I'm only guessing based on life experience.

 

[Phil Allison]

"Den"

Yes - physical location is valid - suspect teacher is looking for a more
technical reason. Fuse rating could be the answer however that would be
far in advance of what they have covered (yr 8).

** The problem is that teacher likely THINKS he or she knows the right
answer - when they do not.




...... Phil

 

[Davo]

Not true under current rules, and never has been.

The old rules strongly encouraged at least two power circuits in
domestic installations, by severely limiting the number of GPOs (as they
were called in those days) allowed for an installation with only one
circuit, but it was not compulsory.

New rules (AS/NZS3000:2007) leave it to the designer and cover it under
the General Design of an Electrical Installation : Rule 1.6.1 (d) -
minimize inconvenience in the event of a fault, and Rule 1.6.5 - Every
electrical installation shall be divided into circuits as necessary to -
(a) avoid danger and minimize inconvenience in the event of a fault; and
(b) facilitate safe operation, inspection, testing and maintenance.


There has never been a requirement for at least two lighting circuits.

David

You are correct about the Wiring Regulations. It's actually a state rule
for Western Australia, also for public buildings such as theatres and
halls the lighting can't all be off one phase.

 

[The Real Andy]

Wrong. The rule applies to any alterations and additions as well as new
installations. This applies to new *AND EXISTING* premises. The earthing
of luminares has been in the rules for a long time.

Whilst totally irrelevant, when I learned the SAA wiring rules as an
apprentice IIRC there was no requirement for any light fixture to be
earthed if it was over a certain height, metal or not.

Your comment in clearly wrong and very misleading. Typical lighting
circuits would have earth conductors. Only very old circuits would not.

Exactly, and the rules are not retrospective.

 

[Phil Allison]

"The Real Andy"

Exactly, and the rules are not retrospective.

* Which proves MY point EXACTLY !!

Because the wiring rule changes are NOT retrospective they CANNOT
have anything to do with wiring practices that PRE - DATE their
introduction.

YOU IMBECILES !!



.... Phil

 

[David]

Whilst totally irrelevant, when I learned the SAA wiring rules as an
apprentice IIRC there was no requirement for any light fixture to be
earthed if it was over a certain height, metal or not.

This rule only applies to lighting points where the luminare is
installed on an non-conductive pole where the luminare is not in an
earthed situation. Not your typical domestic installation.

David

 

[David]

"The Real Andy"


* Which proves MY point EXACTLY !!

Because the wiring rule changes are NOT retrospective they CANNOT
have anything to do with wiring practices that PRE - DATE their
introduction.

PHIL IS AN IMBECILE !!

True, the wiring rules are not retrospective, but if you do *any*
alterations or additions to an old installation, then the new wiring
rules do apply to the part of the installation to which you have done
the alterations or additions.

If you add a new power point, or indeed technically change a single
power point to a double, on an existing circuit, then under the current
wiring rules, that final circuit has to be be protected by an RCD.
Similarly if you add a new lighting point to an existing light circuit,
you have to protect the circuit with an RCD. Note the 2007 wiring rules
require that the *circuit* be protected by and RCD, rather than the
*outlets*, which is a change from the old rules.

David

 

[Den]

"McKavity"



** The reasons are partly historical, partly practical and partly human
safety.

1. When homes were first supplied with mains electricity, circa 100 years
ago, the ONLY purpose was lighting - as appliances came along (
radios, vacuum cleaners, room heaters etc) they were plugged into the
light sockets.

2. Appliances typically draw far more power than lighting does, so will
easily exceed the capacity of the cables fitted in the ceiling for
ghting - means a separate ( higher capacity) power circuit for
appliances is needed, preferably fitted at floor level.

3. If the ( now independent) power circuit is over-loaded and causes the
fuse to blow, it does not plunge the house into darkness - which would be
very unsafe for the people inside at night.

Then there is the issue of safety grounding, essential for appliances but
not required for ordinary lighting fixtures. So power circuits have three
pin sockets and 3 wire conductors, unlike typical lighting.


BTW:

Is your Christian name " Phil " by any chance .................

Are you a dentist ?

Yes I possess the unfortunate name of Phil McKavity, I wish I was a dentist
as then I'd probably own a nice Porsche

 

[Phil Allison]

"David"

True, the wiring rules are not retrospective,

** So have nothing to do with this thread.

You PEDANTIC LUNATIC !!!



....... Phil

 

[Phil Allison]

"Den"

"Phil Allison"



Yes I possess the unfortunate name of Phil McKavity, I wish I was a
dentist as then I'd probably own a nice Porsche

** Do you realise you CHANGED your ID after the first post ???

If you MUST do something as stupid as that again

- then let us all know.



...... Phil

 

[David]

"David"


** So have nothing to do with this thread.

They have plenty to do with this thread, and your incorrect answers and
comments to the OP's question in this thread. To quote your exact response:

Then there is the issue of safety grounding, essential for appliances but
not required for ordinary lighting fixtures.

Safety grounding *IS* required for ordinary lighting fixtures, and is
certainly not a reason why lights and GPO's are on different circuits.

Please do us all favour, and actually go and *READ* the standards before
you go off half cocked, giving what you imagine might be an answer. When
I see your name in the Dept of Fair Trading list of licensed electrical
contractors, then I might possibly have a little respect for your answers.

David

 

[MisterE]

Kid's school science question as per subject line.

Anyone got any answers - google's not co-operating and other than
spreading
the load when we used to have 3ph into houses or to separate ELCB loads
which is a much more recent thing.

Ideas?

The reason is just so that if something shorts out/dies you don't loose your
lights. This goes back to the 1800's when motors and heaters would routinely
short out.

 

[Phil Allison]

"David the Utter Fuckwit "

They have plenty to do with this thread,

** Only in your demented, pig ignorant fantasy world.

Safety grounding *IS* required for ordinary lighting fixtures,

** But was not the case back even 20 years ago, let alone more than 50 years
ago.

Even now, the VAST MAJORITY of residences do not have it.

So it is a MAJOR reason why the MAJORITY of lighting circuits are and
have been for decades kept seperate.

No go eat a big packet of Ratsak -

you rediculous, bloody TROLLING PEDANT !!



...... Phil




...... Phil

 

[atec77]

"David the Utter Fuckwit "


** Only in your demented, pig ignorant fantasy world.

in reality you got the wrong answer again , any alteration to the
circuit requires compliance , even a dick toucher like you should be
able to recognise the truth in this matter philthy

** But was not the case back even 20 years ago, let alone more than 50 years
ago. irrelevent

Even now, the VAST MAJORITY of residences do not have it.

here in Qld they do as a compliance with the law

So it is a MAJOR reason why the MAJORITY of lighting circuits are and
have been for decades kept seperate.

No go eat a big packet of Ratsak -

how about the next time someone comes to the gate to "speak " to you
they gain entry

you rediculous, bloody TROLLING PEDANT !!

you sick drug taking meat pipe smoking retarded goose