Jimmie D. wrote"
"One way to determine the low frequency effectiveness of a ground is to
connect the hot side of the power mains to the ground through a fuse and
see how big of a fuse you can blow."

Replace the fuse with*a light bulb. If a high-wattage light bulb burns
brightly, the earth connection is good at the power frequency.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

(Richard Harrison) wrote in news:16641-470666E0-
:

....
Replace the fuse with*a light bulb. If a high-wattage light bulb burns
brightly, the earth connection is good at the power frequency.

Yet another calibrated screw driver approach. The undefined quantities
"high-wattage" and "burns brightly" characterise the accuracy of the
method.

There are simple and safe methods for passing a known or measurable current
through a ground system and measuring the ground system potential rise
above the general mass of earth... a bit of Googling will turn up far
better methods that some of those described in this thread.

Owen

Richard Harrison wrote:
Jimmie D. wrote"
"One way to determine the low frequency effectiveness of a ground is to
connect the hot side of the power mains to the ground through a fuse and
see how big of a fuse you can blow."

Replace the fuse with a light bulb. If a high-wattage light bulb burns
brightly, the earth connection is good at the power frequency.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

Tried that, I couldnt discern the difference between a 10 ohm ground
and a 25 ohm ground. The "blown fuse method" really works well and is
no where as dangerous as people make it to be. I Have a little deal
made up out of PVC pipe with a fuse holder and neon indicator to let
me know whether the fuse blew or not.

Please tell me, how is this any more dangerous that troubleshooting
under the chassis of a tube receiver.

Jimmie

On Sat, 06 Oct 2007 05:53:51 -0700, JIMMIE
wrote:

Please tell me, how is this any more dangerous that troubleshooting
under the chassis of a tube receiver.

You are holding one conductor, and standing on the other.

On Sat, 6 Oct 2007 15:45:49 -0400, "Jimmie D"
wrote:

Please tell me, how is this any more dangerous that troubleshooting
under the chassis of a tube receiver.

You are holding one conductor, and standing on the other.

You dont have to do it that way, You are assuming the worst possible
condition. It can be done safely.

Hi Jimmie,

Sounds like the passionate "Trust me" every teenage boy assures his
date in the back seat. "We can do this safely if I don't...."

With a nearly infinite amount of current behind the fuse (the part of
the wire you are closest too) and standing on an nearly infinite sink
of current; sure you can do it safely IF... (with a chain of
conditions that must be all met, with any one of which that fails
results in death).

You are not going to buy this device off the shelf, certainly no
vendor could afford the liability. You have to expend some effort
(however slight) to build it yourself. It then argues, with the same
effort, why don't you do it right?

An equally (possibly more) accurate method might be as simple as
digging up a spadeful of earth and counting the worms. If you can't
sink the shovel, you already know you have poor earth and you've saved
the cost of a fuse-blower.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC