Rahsia 3rd Grade Degree Dapat Pinjaman PTPTN Percuma

Salam sejahtera..

Hari ini saya nak bercerita sedikit berkaitan hutang PTPTN. Ramai beranggapan hutang PTPTN ini amat membebankan. Tetapi, jika kita renungkan kembali tanpa pinjaman PTPTN ini mungkin kita tidak dapat untuk meneruskan pengajian ke peringkat yang lebih tinggi lagi.

Kalau dibandingkan antara pinjaman PTPTN dan pinjaman kenderaan, kadar faedah yang dikenakan untuk peminjam PTPTN ini amatlah kecil iaitu sebanyak 1% sahaja (berbanding faedah pinjaman kereta yang mencecah 3%).

Para peminjam haruslah sedar bahawa pinjaman merupakan kemudahan dan para peminjam haruslah bertanggungjawab terhadap pinjaman yang telah mereka lakukan.

Apakah perassan anda jika seseorang meminjam duit anda dia tidak menjelaskan hutangnya kepada anda kembali? Marah, geram, menyesal dan bermacam-macam lagi yang terlintas difikiran…bukan?

Anda meminjam untuk menuntut ilmu, ia merupakan suatu niat yang murni tetapi adakah anda mendapat keberkatan terhadap ilmu yang anda perolehi? Renung-renungkan.

Anda sebenarnya mangalami MASALAH dan saya ada cara untuk menyelesaikan MASALAH anda!

Disini, saya ingin berkongsi rahsia bagaimana anda dapat menjelaskan segala pinjaman PTPTN anda malah teknik yang bakal saya terangkan nanti mamapu menjadikan segala pinjaman PTPTN anda menjadi percuma walaupun anda hanya mendapat 3^rd grade degree.

Ya betul…3^rd grade degree masih lagi dapat pinjaman PTPTN percuma.

Untuk keterangan lanjut, anda boleh layari www.freeptptn.com untuk keterangan yang lebih lanjut.

Teknik ini telah saya praktikkan selama lebih dari 6 tahun dan hasilnya keseluruhan pinjaman PTPTN saya telah dilunaskan. 

Apa yang paling menarik adalah, segala pinjaman PTPTN saya adalah PERCUMA.

Jadi, luangkan masa anda untuk melayai www.freeptptn.com untuk mengetahui kaedah terbaik untuk menyelesaikan masalah pinjaman PTPTN anda.

Transmission Characteristic for Structured Cabling Cable

Structure Cabling for horizontal and backbone cabling normally used the balance cable pairs. These cables shall conform to one of the following transmission performance categories depending on the application required to be supported;

Category 3: Transmission characteristics specified up to 16MHz for 100 ohm balance cables.

Category 4: Transmission characteristics specified up to 20MHz for 100 ohm balance cables.

Category 5e: Transmission characteristics specified up to 100MHz for 100 ohm balance cables.

Category 6: Transmission characteristics specified up to 250MHz for 100 ohm balance cables.

Category 7: Transmission characteristics specified up to 600MHz for 100 ohm balance cables.

What Is Skin Effect?

Skin effect is a condition where A.C (alternating Current) tents to travel on the surface of the conductor, as frequency increases.

It is easy to explain by comparing the resistance between these 3 scenarios DC Resistance, AC Resistance in Low-frequency and AC Resistance in High-frequency.

Photo Credit to www.allaboutcircuits.com/

At high frequencies the AC current avoids travel through most of the conductor's cross-sectional area. Therefore, the conductor might as well to be hollow for transmitting current at high frequencies.

At some point, using the high frequencies in transmitting current might reduce the cost of conductor since the conductor itself is not a solid conductor. 

Types Of Earthing System

Generally, there are 3 types of Earthing Systems namely TN System, TT System and IT System.

TN System: A system having one or more points of the source of energy directly earthed, the exposed conductive parts of the installation being connected to that point by protective conductors. TN systems however are sub-divided into 3 main categories which are;

TN-C System: A system in which neutral and protective functions are combined is a single conductor throughout the system.

All exposed conductive parts of an installation are connected to PEN conductor.

TN-S System: A system that having separate neutral and protective conductors throughout the system.

The protective conductor (PE) is the metallic covering of the cable supplying the installations or a separate conductor.

All exposed conductive parts of an installation are connected to this protective conductor via the main earth terminal of the installation.

TN-C-S System: A system in which neutral and protective functions are combined in a single conductor in part of the system.

In TN-C-S system, the supply is TN-C and the arrangement in the installations is TN-S. this is also known as Protective Multiple Earthing and the PEN conductor is referred to as the combined neutral and earth (CNE) conductor.

The supply system PEN conductor  is earthed at several points and an earth electrode may be necessary at or near the consumer’s installation.

All exposed conductive parts of an installation are connected to the PEN conductor via the main earthing terminal and the neutral terminals being linked together.

TT System: A system having one point of the source of energy directly earthed, the exposed conductive parts of the installation being connected to earth electrodes electrically independent of the earth electrodes of the source.

All exposed conductive parts of an installation are connected to an earth electrode which is electrically independent of the source earth.

IT System: A system having no direct connection between live parts and Earth, the exposed conductive parts of the electrical installation being earthed.

All exposed conductive parts of an installation are connected to an earth electrode.

The source is either connected to Earth through deliberately introduced earthing impedance or is isolated from Earth.  

The IT system is commonly used in hospital’s operation theatre.

Arbitration! Lesson Learnt

Okay....I want to discuss on the arbitration issue. For those who involve in construction, you should know what arbitration is!

This is a case where the Developer practicing arbitration to Contractor.

The Scenarios;
The Landscape Contractor has stopped work since end October 2000. The percentage of work done is 95%. By October 2001, the Contractor was terminated on grounds of default.

Commencement of arbitration started on March 2008 and the final award given by the Arbitrator are on September 2013.

The Verdict!
Contractor wins.

Legal issues being address;

• “Regularly and Diligently”;
• Coordination of the Works;
• Care of the Works;
• Time at large and impact on retrospective Extension of Time (EOT) and
• Liquidated Ascertained Damages (LAD)

Detailing of Legal Issues

           “Regularly and Diligently”;

Developer’s Submission
Developer claims that since starting of the project, the Contractor failed to proceed regularly and diligently with the Works.

Contractor’s Reply
Contractor submitted that the various causative delaying events were due to the obstructions, acts of preventions and omissions by Developer and that Developer was in breach of contract for having hindered or prevented Contractor from executing the Works in a regular and orderly fashion.

Arbitrator’s Decision
“The words "regularly and diligently" are not defined in the Contracts.

“I find that the delay in obtaining statutory approvals, defects, internal design revisions and the change of sub-contractors cannot be attributed to Contractor and caused it not to proceed diligently and regularly. On the other hand, I find and hold that Developer was in breach of contract for having hindered or prevented the Claimant from executing the Works in a regular and orderly fashion. I have already concluded that it was Developer conduct that caused the delay to the Works and contributed to the slow work progress in the affected areas.

It stands to reason that Developer cannot capitalize to say that Contractor did not proceed with the Works regularly and diligently when it had in fact caused the delay.  

Coordination of the Works;
Developer’s Submission
Contractor is deemed to have made adequate allowance in the schedules for its obligations to coordinate and for any interference with the progress of Works caused by the concurrent and sequential work by others.

Contractor’s Reply
Contractor submitted that Contractor’s obligations was carried out by way of submitting their progress reports regularly and that it was not possible for Contractor to truly coordinate the works since all Developer’s contractors will have to coordinate with each other.

Contractor also submitted that the business common sense construction of the contract must be that the Project Manager ought to be and in fact was at all material times the proper coordinator of the overall works under all Developer’s contract.

Arbitrator’s Decision
“My reading of the contract suggest that it is being the Project Manager for the overall project is best placed to see the progress and impact of the various activities. In this instance, it was the Project Manager who was designated as such….. Developer's contractors are only required to coordinate and accommodate with each other.”

Care of the Works;
Developer’s Submission
Developer submitted that Contractor was obliged as stipulated in contract to take full responsibility for the care of the works and to rectify any damage from any cause whatsoever at its own cost.

Contractor’s Reply
Contractor’s obligations pursuant to Clause (that stipulated in contract) does not extend to rectifying loss and damage caused by 3rd party contractors engaged by Developer.

Arbitrator’s Decision
“I disagree. I find that the Claimant is not obliged under Clause (as stipulate in the Conditions of Contract) to rectify damage or to carry loss caused by third party contractors engaged by the Respondent.”

Time at large and impact on retrospective EOT; and
Developer’s Submission
Developer submitted that the events of delay have been assessed and particulars of the assessment and submissions on each event of delay were set out in Appendix A to Respondent’s Submission. Developer emphasized that based on this assessments, the extension of time granted in the Certificates of Delay and Extension of Time were more than Contractor was entitled to in fact and law.

Developer also submitted that it was not possible for Developer, at the material time, to conduct a detailed analysis of Contractor’s purported applications for extension of time, as Contractor had failed, neglected and/or omitted to provide the scheduling documentation and other particulars in breach of clause 42.2 of the Contracts. In any event, Respondent emphasized that all the Certificates of Delay and Extension of time were signed and agreed by Contractor.

Contractor’s Reply
Contractor submitted that the E.R. is obliged under Clause 42.3 of the Contract to assess and make in writing a fair and reasonable extension of time for the completion of the Works for the respective packages as soon as he is able to estimate the delay, failing which the time for completion would also be set at large.

Contractor also submitted that the retrospective extension of time given by E.R. is bad and had rendered the time for completion to be at large.

Arbitrator’s Decision
“I have considered the opposing positions of the parties. Based on the above, I find and hold that the E.R.'s retrospective extension of time is bad in law. It had rendered the time for completion to be at large…..Arising from the aforesaid, I find and hold that Contractor is only bound to complete the Works within a reasonable time.”

Liquidated Ascertained Damages (LAD)
Developer’s Submission
Developer submitted that it is entitled to recover the Liquidated and Ascertained Damages stated in the Contracts.

Contractor’s Reply
Contractor submitted that the LAD deductions were wrongfully and excessively imposed upon Contractor and should be disregarded as time is at large and accordingly Developer had lost its right to any alleged LAD.

Contractor also submitted that Developer also had failed to prove its actual damage or loss.

Arbitrator’s Decision
“I find that the LAD deductions were wrongfully and excessively imposed upon Contractor. It should be disregarded as time is at large and accordingly Developer had lost its right to any of the LAD.…The subject matter in this arbitration is the construction of parks and promenade as part of the new Government Administrative Centre. I find that any delay to the completion of the same would clearly result in actual loss. In fact, I note that Developer has not sought to prove its actual losses by adducing evidence in the arbitration.”

“Contractor have per se challenged Developer to prove its actual losses whenever the latter wishes to deduct liquidated damages for delay. Developer to prove its loss suffered before the imposition of LAD…In the instant arbitration, Developer had failed to prove its loss for the alleged delay caused by Contractor in completing the Works.”


LESSONS LEARNT
“Regularly and Diligently”
It may be prudent to request from the contractor the work programme in carrying out his obligations under the contract. Generally, the required regular and diligent progression of the works by the contractor may be measured against the work programme.

Coordination of the Works
The Project Manager should enforce the contractor’s co-ordination of the works and may be done in the following manner:

a) to request from the contractor to incorporate a section on the extent of his 
co-ordination obligation in the Progress Reports;

b) the Project Manager is then to instruct and monitor the contractor’s

co-ordination obligation at the Site Meetings; and

c) if there are instructions from the Project Manager on the co-ordination 

obligations of the contractor which are yet to be executed by the contractor, the 

Project Manager may then follow up these instruction with reminders to the 

contractors.

Care of the Works

The Contracts should be amended to expressly cover damage caused by third 

party contractors engaged by Developer.

Time at large and impact on retrospective EOT; and

All contracts should expressly allow for retrospective extension of time.

Developer should enforce by issuing reminders to the contractor if the contractor failed to provide the written particulars and scheduling documentation of the effect upon the Works Schedule and the contractor’s proposals for reducing or preventing such delay as required.

An express agreement should be entered with the contractor to show that the Certificate of Delay and Extension of time have been agreed.

Liquidated Ascertained Damages (LAD)

Developer to maintain records of actual loss incurred and if no such loss occurred, Developer should be ready to compromise.

Flush Floor Trunking: The Wrong Things That Most People Do!

This is the things that engineers and site workers must avoid when installing flush floor trunking (FFT); cable congested in FFT.

FFT normally consist of single, 2 compartments and 3 compartments of internal trunking. These compartments are segregated between each other and each compartment shall not be shared together.

Based on IEE Wiring Regulation, cabling in enclose enclosure should comply with 40% space factor.

Meaning to say, all cables should only occupy only 60% of overall internal dimension of FFT.

However, designer must consider the internal flyover inside three compartments in FFT. This area can be considered as unused space in FFT. Therefore, the actual usable space is much lesser than 60%.

Calculating the space factor without considering this unused space will result congested cable in FFT (see figure below).

So..for all the designers, engineer as well as site personnel, do take note and ensure your FFT are well organize.