Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+220V\s+wiring\:\s+Was\s+Question\s+about\s+safety\s+ground\s+connection\s*$/: 58 ]

Total 58 documents matching your query.

21. Re: [Amps] 220V wiring: Was Question about safety ground connection (score: 1)
Author: Peter Chadwick <g3rzp@g3rzp.wanadoo.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 10:08:43 +0100 (CET)
can not become a shock hazard if the safety-ground wire is severed by an anomaly.< But an open neutral in such a case leaves the enclosure at some undetermined voltage above ground. Depending on how
/archives//html/Amps/2005-11/msg00263.html (9,167 bytes)

22. Re: [Amps] 220V wiring: Was Question about safety ground connection (score: 1)
Author: R.Measures <r@somis.org>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 04:05:59 -0800
Are you advocating a second grounding/a.k.a. earthing/ of the neutral at the receptacle? Perhaps a third safety-ground wire might be advisable? Richard L. Measures, AG6K, 805.386.3734. www.somis.org
/archives//html/Amps/2005-11/msg00264.html (9,673 bytes)

23. Re: [Amps] 220V wiring: Was Question about safety ground connection (score: 1)
Author: "Mike McCarthy, W1NR" <lists@w1nr.net>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 07:11:02 -0500
And if you are so concerned about ground-neutral faults then use ground fault breakers. However, ham radio is not too friendly to GFI's. Any RF that floats on the ground will trip the breakers. I hav
/archives//html/Amps/2005-11/msg00265.html (12,436 bytes)

24. Re: [Amps] 220V wiring: Was Question about safety ground connection (score: 1)
Author: R.Measures <r@somis.org>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 04:22:01 -0800
Good point. Letting those in the business decide the national code virtually assures that more business will result. I would not be surprised that - in the next 50-yrs - it will be determined by the
/archives//html/Amps/2005-11/msg00266.html (12,809 bytes)

25. Re: [Amps] 220V wiring: Was Question about safety ground connection (score: 1)
Author: "Paul Christensen" <w9ac@arrl.net>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 08:10:30 -0500
I believe there's some validity to Rich's point, although I'm a firm believer in 4-wire 240VAC circuits, and both of my older Alpha amplifiers are configured as such. But what bothers me about codes
/archives//html/Amps/2005-11/msg00267.html (10,656 bytes)

26. Re: [Amps] 220V wiring: Was Question about safety ground connection (score: 1)
Author: Bill Turner <dezrat1242@ispwest.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 07:32:56 -0800
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Yes, I'm sure that is the reason the four-wire circuit is permitted. I still maintain the safest and best approach for future equipment would be two
/archives//html/Amps/2005-11/msg00268.html (9,932 bytes)

27. Re: [Amps] 220V wiring: Was Question about safety ground connection (score: 1)
Author: Bill Turner <dezrat1242@ispwest.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 07:47:27 -0800
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I'm afraid it actually is more complicated than you think. First of all, if your fan stops running that itself is a safety hazard, but the complicati
/archives//html/Amps/2005-11/msg00269.html (10,691 bytes)

28. Re: [Amps] 220V wiring: Was Question about safety ground connection (score: 1)
Author: "Paul Christensen" <w9ac@arrl.net>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 11:07:04 -0500
Good point, Bill. That's the potential danger of sharing one neutral conductor between two separate phases. Hey, perhaps an addendum to the NEC is in order to limit the use of all 120VAC current dev
/archives//html/Amps/2005-11/msg00270.html (10,600 bytes)

29. Re: [Amps] 220V wiring: Was Question about safety ground connection (score: 1)
Author: Gudguyham@aol.com
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 12:37:26 EST
Perhaps 120VAC devices were more prevalent then or the tap arrangement was too complex? Recent amps designed for use with either 120VAC or 240VAC do not appear to share this issue. Anyone know what t
/archives//html/Amps/2005-11/msg00272.html (9,710 bytes)

30. Re: [Amps] 220V wiring: Was Question about safety ground connection (score: 1)
Author: Gudguyham@aol.com
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 12:40:58 EST
I still maintain the existing NEC code allowing use of a neutral is an attempt to placate some powerful special interests in the electrical industry. It is NOT the safest approach to the issue. 73, B
/archives//html/Amps/2005-11/msg00273.html (9,497 bytes)

31. Re: [Amps] 220V wiring: Was Question about safety ground connection (score: 1)
Author: <johna8119-amps@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 09:44:43 -0800 (PST)
The discussion about codes reminds me of what I have faced, working in hospitals for the past 35 years. Every three years, the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO) su
/archives//html/Amps/2005-11/msg00274.html (10,699 bytes)

32. Re: [Amps] 220V wiring: Was Question about safety ground connection (score: 1)
Author: TexasRF@aol.com
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 12:47:07 EST
Perhaps 120VAC devices were more prevalent then or the tap arrangement was too complex? Recent amps designed for use with either 120VAC or 240VAC do not appear to share this issue. Anyone know what t
/archives//html/Amps/2005-11/msg00275.html (9,765 bytes)

33. Re: [Amps] 220V wiring: Was Question about safety ground connection (score: 1)
Author: Gudguyham@aol.com
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 12:53:51 EST
And, it also allows the equipment to work in foreign countries with two wire 240v -0 or three wire 240v -0 -0 service. 73/k5gw Good Point _______________________________________________ Amps mailing
/archives//html/Amps/2005-11/msg00276.html (8,507 bytes)

34. Re: [Amps] 220V wiring: Was Question about safety ground connection (score: 1)
Author: Gudguyham@aol.com
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 13:02:55 EST
Maybe the NEC is run by the same type of folks. John w4kv ________________________________ If anyone would like the address to where you can write the NEC for a code change or ammendment, I would be
/archives//html/Amps/2005-11/msg00277.html (9,394 bytes)

35. Re: [Amps] 220V wiring: Was Question about safety ground connection (score: 1)
Author: "Paul Christensen" <w9ac@arrl.net>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 13:12:35 -0500
OT, but I could not resist -- The effectiveness of JCAHO is little. What most people do not realize is that the majority of the U.S. medical facilities are safe for the patient one month out of the
/archives//html/Amps/2005-11/msg00278.html (10,982 bytes)

36. Re: [Amps] 220V wiring: Was Question about safety ground connection (score: 1)
Author: Ian White GM3SEK <gm3sek@ifwtech.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 18:47:59 +0000
You mean the USA is building homes without glitch resistors? -- 73 from Ian GM3SEK _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/m
/archives//html/Amps/2005-11/msg00279.html (8,745 bytes)

37. Re: [Amps] 220V wiring: Was Question about safety ground connection (score: 1)
Author: Gudguyham@aol.com
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 13:58:20 EST
You mean the USA is building homes without glitch resistors? -- 73 from Ian GM3SEK _______________________________________________ They were, but now they will be. :-) _______________________________
/archives//html/Amps/2005-11/msg00280.html (8,484 bytes)

38. Re: [Amps] 220V wiring: Was Question about safety ground connection (score: 1)
Author: Colin Lamb <k7fm@teleport.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 13:29:54 -0800 (GMT-08:00)
Ian asked: "You mean the USA is building homes without glitch resistors?" Response: Not exactly. It seems rather circuitous to use the heaviest house wire you can find to the amp, then use a glitch r
/archives//html/Amps/2005-11/msg00281.html (9,947 bytes)

39. Re: [Amps] 220V wiring: Was Question about safety ground connection (score: 1)
Author: Steve Thompson <g8gsq@eltac.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 22:20:10 +0000
Hmmm - maybe you jest, but it sounds very like the 'Part P' building regulations recently imposed in Blighty. There are a few exceptions for the time being, but the aim appears to be to stamp out any
/archives//html/Amps/2005-11/msg00282.html (9,502 bytes)

40. Re: [Amps] 220V wiring: Was Question about safety ground connection (score: 1)
Author: Colin Lamb <k7fm@teleport.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 14:46:54 -0800 (GMT-08:00)
I am often embarassed when, trying to be funny, I propose something outrageous - only to learn that it has already been adopted. I guess the legislators have a more warped sense of humor than I do. O
/archives//html/Amps/2005-11/msg00283.html (10,122 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu