0 members (),
161
guests, and
16
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 127
OP
Member
|
I am strongly considering the purchase of a good-quality circuit tracer for a number of reasons and am looking at the Amprobe AT-2005 and Ideal 61-958 as possible candidates.
Any field experiences with the aforementioned tracers- pro and con- would be greatly appreciated. Experiences with other makes/models are fine too...
I am a very firm believer in "you get what you pay for" so I am willing to fork out a bit more $$ for something useful.
Thank you very much in advance.
No wire bias here- I'm standing on neutral ground.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 7,335 Likes: 7
Member
|
I owned an Amprobe AT and was relatively happy with it.
That said, what are you intending to trace? I found that for tracing underground feeds (site lighting) The AT was 'second best'. I used a Ditch Witch unit from an irrigation contractor, and that had to be first choice for underground.
Just my two cents
John
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 127
OP
Member
|
I plan on tracing mainly de-energized electrical and communications circuits (energized would of course be a truly last resort); reasonably good (but nondestructive!) underground locatability would be a real plus.
No wire bias here- I'm standing on neutral ground.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 362
Member
|
I havew the amprobe and its Ok. It can find circuits in the ground but not very well. I don't however have the wand for it. I just hold it down close and sweep.
Ob
Choose your customers, don't let them choose you.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 127
OP
Member
|
By "not very well" WRT underground tracement, do you mean it has difficulty finding the desired circuit at all, or does it indicate an unduly wide, i.e., less accurate, or hit-or-miss area where it could be?
I do know a large percentage of successful locates- I presume above-ground as well- lies in the skill of the user (I'm talking about myself here). For example, this is undoubtedly true when a seasoned surveyor is using a Schonstedt ferrous metal detector for finding survey monuments, etc. versus a greenhorn...
No wire bias here- I'm standing on neutral ground.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 7,335 Likes: 7
Member
|
Results from the Amprobe for site lighting UG fault locations (opens/breaks) can be good, but....practice & patience are required. A few long phone calls to the factory tech helped. Like I said 2nd best. Managed to track a UG burnout to a 2' wide X 4' area, cut the blacktop, dug down & it was almost dead center. Using the Ditch Witch wand, narrowed a similar break to an 12" x 18" area. Both jobs were #4 & #6 AL conductors in PVC & energized.
Last edited by HotLine1; 08/28/08 10:15 AM.
John
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,370 Likes: 1
Cat Servant Member
|
I have used tracers, up to $800 in cost, with mixed results. Maybe it's our local soil, maybe it's my technique (or lack of it), but all of them seem to require a lot more 'art' than 'science.'
That said, they are a valuable tool, a real help, in figuring out what is going on.
I've also found it a help to use marking paint to indicate solid 'hits' .... sometimes, the pattern of dots will help you to see a pattern, and find your problem. I found a paved-over, faulted junction box this way. (Also - in true "Murphy's Law" fashion ... I was parked right over the box!)
Still, the best help is 'additional information.' That is, first-hand knowledge of the installation, or photos of things during construction. For example, I once was chipping the concrete around a pool in order to bond to the rebar - and was not finding it! Watching a video the customer had made of the pour, I was able to see - you guessed it - that I was chipping right where the helper had stood - pushing the steel to one side. Murphy again!
Still, I am able to sort out 90% of my tracing issues using a $30 'circuit breaker finder' on hot circuits, and the $130 Progressive/Tempo unit on dead ones.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 127
OP
Member
|
Thank y'all for the replies so far. I do appreciate it. I have done some more research and now I realize that Ditch Witch makes subsite equipment as well as excavators... at first I thought Hotline1 was referring to a trencher for locating cable  Sure, they work extremely well at finding them but not exactly the most wire-friendly. Seems also that particular company is geared toward rental as opposed to purchase but maybe that's just my perception. Of course, I would not expect a multi-purpose tool (above- and below-ground) to be equal in accuracy to one strictly suited for the mole's eye view kind of work. Makes me wonder if I could build an oscillator circuit that my Schonstedt could pick up down the line... That thing will "warble" when 60Hz is near. Maybe I could change the warble signature with an oscillator of a unique frequency. Nothing better than the Schonstedt IMO for finding ferrous metal pipes, etc. etc. etc... It sounds like the Amprobe- though not cheap- works well for its intended purposes. Apparently the Ideal 61-958 is fairly new and perhaps not a lot of members here have had a chance to use it in the field. Replies still appreciated. Thanks again folks.
No wire bias here- I'm standing on neutral ground.
|
|
|
Posts: 4,086
Joined: October 2000
|
|
|
|