andynic07
Very Well-Known Member
Whilst the water pipe method is still used as it is a legacy way of doing things the new standard AS 3000 does state that a dedicated earth electrode buried at a certain depth in the ground must be used. I have seen first hand the problems of an insufficient earth electrode, this electrode is there to limit the rise in potential by providing a path for current to flow in the event that there is damage to the any part of the neutral circuit and if there is a piece of corroded galvanised pipe in the ground this can provide a very high resistance, generally the primary fuse on a house will be between 30 amps and 80 amps so if the earth to electrode resistance is any more than 10 ohms the electrode will not blow the primary fuse. I do not have access to an actual AS 3000 at the moment but here is an extract that refers to the AS 3000 which I believe is right "The majority of the electrical distribution systems in Australia require a connection between thesupply neutral and the customer’s earth system at each property, known as the Multiple EarthNeutral (MEN). This provides a safety back up to protect the electrical installation should acustomers earthing system become defective. In NSW, MEN bonding became the preferentialsystem in the 1960’s based on the metallic water reticulation system.
Prior to July 1976 most properties depended on their metallic water service pipes as part of theproperty’s electrical main earthing system. Properties built after 1976 are required to conform toAustralian Standards AS/NZS 3000 (Electrical Wiring Rules) and generally have a 1.2 mvertically buried earth rod that serves as the primary earth electrode. ". As for this statement "I understand that the current from the secondary coil in the step-down transformer can be effectively short-circuited by grounding it, thereby allowing work on power lines. The electricity does not return to coil, in which it was induced, not the earth" I am not 100% sure what you are referring to but I have the feeling that you may be confusing the permanent star point placed on the secondary side of a power transformer with what I call "line earths" which are a set of temporary wires short circuiting all three wires and bonds them to earth either through the LV neutral on a bonded earthing system or through a tested earth electrode on a separate earthing system which is put in place on a de-energised high voltage line to limit the rise in potential of that line and operate protection whilst it is being worked on in the event that the line is inadvertently energised. I think that you may be right in the fact that we are both getting caught up in industry lingo which may be confusing the intent of our statements, I know that I am guilty of this because it has been a long time since I have completed my apprenticeship so the main literature that I read now is Energex specific.
Thanks
Andrew
Prior to July 1976 most properties depended on their metallic water service pipes as part of theproperty’s electrical main earthing system. Properties built after 1976 are required to conform toAustralian Standards AS/NZS 3000 (Electrical Wiring Rules) and generally have a 1.2 mvertically buried earth rod that serves as the primary earth electrode. ". As for this statement "I understand that the current from the secondary coil in the step-down transformer can be effectively short-circuited by grounding it, thereby allowing work on power lines. The electricity does not return to coil, in which it was induced, not the earth" I am not 100% sure what you are referring to but I have the feeling that you may be confusing the permanent star point placed on the secondary side of a power transformer with what I call "line earths" which are a set of temporary wires short circuiting all three wires and bonds them to earth either through the LV neutral on a bonded earthing system or through a tested earth electrode on a separate earthing system which is put in place on a de-energised high voltage line to limit the rise in potential of that line and operate protection whilst it is being worked on in the event that the line is inadvertently energised. I think that you may be right in the fact that we are both getting caught up in industry lingo which may be confusing the intent of our statements, I know that I am guilty of this because it has been a long time since I have completed my apprenticeship so the main literature that I read now is Energex specific.
Thanks
Andrew