On Thursday, 23 November 2017 18:43:22 UTC, T i m wrote:
On Thu, 23 Nov 2017 07:51:17 -0800 (PST), whisky-dave
wrote:



Everything like that mate. *If* something went wrong and you knew
about a potential issue but failed to do anything about it ...

But there was NO issue, an imaginged issue perhaps.

That's why I said 'potential' there. Only *today* have you found out
that there is no issue afa the supplier is concerned.

So why has it now changed to a 'potential' issue ?
There will always be 'potential' issues about everything.
There's a potential' issue that a student might headbut the heater or fall over it.
There was a potential' issue where we''d have to close the lab for perhaps weeks putting all the courses back and the studetns complaining that they hadnt covered the work needed for the exams and tests.



shrug See how much help they 'don't give' if you suggest there could
be a safety issue and therefore a potential threat to life.

which I can only do after I have checked them all.

Even one faulty one could be an issue ...

If it were faulty it might be, depending on the fault.

Quite.

But as there wasn't a fault it's a bit like moving every single resident out of all tower blocks that have any form of cladding out of their homes, where would you put them all considering they haven't found homes for the majority of those still homeless from grenfell.
Sometimes you have to ignore the 'potential' issues and sort out the real issues.




I did a quick check on 3 of them when I found ONE to be giving 700W when I thought it should be around 1.7KW consumption.

No, you repeatedly asked why it wasn't actually 2000W. Then you added
that it dropped down to 700W and not zero.

No that isn't the case.


That's why I asked
"So how much power does an oil filled radiator actually use"

What, you previously said they were all acting identically?

Pretty much identically within my chosen parameters.



It's not denial

Of course it is as you would have done something sooner rather than
arguing with me why there was no need and why you shouldn't?

I did the right thing it seems.

Really? How did you come to that conclusion (other than with
hindsight)?

By thinking it through unlike you or the tech support that you contacted, maybe you should email the person you got tech support and tell them that they could have been resaponsable for the unnessary recall of 100s or 1000s of heaters.


I'm the one testing these things out, who else has done this.

You said you had a testing guy come in and do it any you were happy he
found them safe?

I was happy with the PAT tester who tests the equipment for electric safety.

And I never had any thoughts regarding their electrical safety.

So why contact tech support if there wasn't a problem ?

What happened to this 'potentail' issue you were refering to.




Unless equipment has been checked I'm not allowed to use it unless it's new of course.

And you told us these were new and had just had 5 delivered. Then it
turns out the one you tested was a 2016 model?

we have had issues heating this lab since the 1970s.
Over the years various ideas and solutions have been found and implemented.
Around 10 years ago the 1st was convection heaters were allowed in all offices but NOT in labs unless they were fixed to a wall.
Then all convection heaters had to be fixed to the wall, then H&S banned al convection heaters and they were replaced with oil filled radaitors at that time we didn't have any walls that we could mount radiators on. Then only offices were allowecd to have oil radiators and that is when I got mine in about ~2015.
It seemd to work OK,. The about a month ago after the building work disconnected all 'central' heating from the whole of the engineering building. When we asked what are they doing about the heating as it's 14C , they told us that they had ordered 20 x 2KW convenction heaters, it was then we informed them that they were banned by H&S years ago, so they cancellled that order and told us they ordered oil filled rads.
A few days later 5 of the 2KW heaters arrived YES 5 (the same as the ONE I've had in my office for 2 years) As I unpacked them I started to put them out switching each one on in turn. I placed them out across the whole of lab 253 on 2 seperate phases. My manager then said lets put them all on
one MCB to check to see what happens, lets see if the MCB is working and will cut out.



But I hadn't eliminated the impossible.

So, what do you know today that you didn't know last week?

That's there's nothing wrong with the heaters

Supposedly, other than they aren't actually 2kW heaters etc.

well that depends on what yuo want from a 2KW heater doesnt it.
It says on the label 2000W at 220V and 2000W at 240V, which to me seemed unlikey. So I would have suspected that the 2KW was for 240V and that it;s be abaout 1.8KW at 220V.
Would you have expected they would be 2KW at 200V how about 110V unlikkey you I didn't expected them to be 2KW whatever the voltage applied.
ONly yuo and a few of our worse students would expect 2KW if you connect a 9V battery between L-N because ity says it;s a 2KW heater.


and that if the 2KW was used as an indication of teh amount of heat they give off anyone using that in a calculation would get the wrong result if they were trying to calculate how many of these heaters would be required to perform the task of heating.

Quite.

and this is why I was asking the original Q .



Ere, a test I suggested and I don't think you have conducted yet is to
see how it performs (or works at all) just the high power element (No2
/ II) enabled?

Why that's doewsnt; give 2KW.
If you want 2KW both II and I need to be on.

My thinking is that it might not overtemp cycle (or do
so as quickly) and so you would get more heat for a longer period,
maybe even continuously until the main thermostat cuts it out.

the main thermostat shouldn't cut out until the room temerature is what yuo want it to be that's how the manual tells you to set up the heater, did you NOT read the instruction manual.



for some strange reason yuo say yuo used the email address for sales where as I clicked on the link Log a Technical Query, which is what I have..

You accused me of contacting sales rather than TS. I contacted TS via
the email they offer for TS shrug.

yuo must have as you will NOT get technical support unless you enter your account code it's one of the red stared boxes that is compulsury,
* Required, account number and phone number.

*Unless* you email the address given it seems ...

I also DID NOT have a working phone both the office phone wa sout of action and so was teh so called emrgency phone.

So? I emailed Tech Support without requiring any account information
and without needing to use a phone.

and the person you contacted said said them back .....


Hey, some info for you .... if you phone many companies with the
intention of talking to TS, guess what, you often have to speak to
admin first. Then they put you though to TS.

I had NO intention of phoning them.
1/ I didn't have a working phone
2/ I wanted it in writing so I could forward that on to whoever would need to send the heaters back and give the account details for remburment or a credit note or whatever.


Unless all those boxes are filled they won't or can't support you.

Quite (mug).

That is why I couldn't use tech support because I don't have the account code.

And that's why I could access TS because I used a method that didn't
require steps I couldn't answer. Simples Eh (even for you hopefully).

http://cpc.farnell.com/technical-support

I had to scroll down and use the Email technical support:

which is the product info email.

And I used the email given in the Technical Support field, so what?

that IS NOT tech support that is product info.

What email adress did you use to contact tech support. ?
Can you answer that ?


Online Query Form: Log a Technical Query
Email:

two seperate email adresses and you told me sales had contected you .

No, I contacted sales,

Just now yuo said yuo contacted tech supoport so which is it this time ?

they spoke to TS and sales replied to me,
quoting the TS team.

And what did TS allegedly say ?

They seem to be safe to use in the teaching lab as they are, so I'm not worried from a H&S POV.

But maybe you should be, until they give you a formal 'all clear' in
any case?

which they have done proving I was right.

Do you also have issues dealing with timelines? At this point in the
conversation you hadn't said you had a reply.

Because I hadn't.
I gave the times that I got a reply.


Quite possibly. How many people would plug one into a power meter?

same number of people that'd try to set fire to clading to see if it's safe as a building material I suspect.

You may well be right. ;-(

I always am ;-)


Quite and it may have been and then a wiring error crept in ...

snip

If no one noticed then perhaps it's not an error at all, but a feature.

Why would it need such a feature if it worked as it should?

what do you mean worked as it should ?
How would yuo expect a heater like this to work. ?
Don't forget the subject title of this post, like you have been.




You have
already stated the 'better quality' heater you have measured works
exactly as expected.

I sad my one at home works as I expect it to, didn't test it thoughly as I hadn't; found anything that I consider a bit weird/unusual or that I don't understand unlike those here.
Remember mine currently costs about £160 these here are about 1/4 the cost.


At best cycling the rad on an overtemp stat instead of the main stat
is a bodge.

Yes I thought that too a bodge from a cheap heater who'd have thought it ?
Not you for sure it seems.
It was my first thought.
But you still haven't explained what you mean by cycling and what do you expect ?



(Oh, what, with an 'overtemp stat', who would have thought! Lets hope
it still can't overheat when a student forgets they have left their
coat draped over it ...).

Well in that case I'd most likely notice

Let's hope then.

and even if I don't it's NOT a reason to return the heaters is it. ?



as I throw them at at 5pm, this is one reason we've always liked clearing the lab and before the £30k electrical upgrade at 4:45pm every 'night' I used to hit the main power emergency mushroom button switch ALL the electric OFF in the teaching labs in 251 & 253.

Ok.



Once the students knew there wasn't any power and couldn't find the trace on teh scope and the neons on the PSU had all gone out and when I started switching off the lights the studetns used to leave and there was NO power to the labs.

Ok.

So no problem existed in the past.



So for me this is now closed and I can re-install the heaters.

Even if that isn't actually the whole story at least you now have
something to cover your back etc.

That is my main aim yes, and teh reason I question managment when they told me to leave the heaters on over night when the datasheet/manual says do not leave them unattended.

Quite (however unrealistic for that sort of appliance).

I'm not sure why it is unrealistic.
I had a 500W version at home and I managed to only have that on when I was present or at home.


Now you just need to get them to answer your first question re why
they aren't actually a 2kW heater. ;-)

I know why, 2KW is the maximum at 240V it indicates that on the label.

Good boy!

Something you missed it seems.


which is hy I expected less KW with the 23V max we get in the lab and why I wasn;lt too concerned in getting only 1.6KW at 202V

You only seemed 'less concerned when it was explained to you 20 times.

NOT true.





Ok.

So like you I thought 'faulty heater',

No, I never actually considered them 'faulty'

So why suggest I contact tech support to send them back.

in a basic functionality
sense (as I explained why they were likely to be doing what you
observed), just that it was a questionable way to manage an overtemp
situation and therefore they *could* be faulty in how they had been
wired.

It could be, but after testing the 5 I considered such a thing unlikely it was far more likely that they did this down to cost.


so I tried the next one and that was almost 700W and so was the 3rd.

Ok. So you tested 3 and now have tested 5 and only when you tested 5
did you not consider it a batch problem?

I NEVER considered it a batch probem, I considered it a cheapness problem.
Or perhaps I expected to much from a 2KW heater that it should deliever 2KW of heat, again due to cheapness.


The heaters are NOT faulty they are design to do that accring to those working for productinfo@CPC.

Yes, I know,

So why do yuo suggest they are faulty ?
Why did you contact tech support ?



Which is why I tested them and from the results I got I concluded that rathter than there being a fault they were just cheap heaters, perhaps not up to the spec the datasheet might suggest.

So it seems.

So my intail interpretation I got from my tests was correct.


But in doing said tests you revealed an anomaly that I don't believe
has yet been resolved.

For me it has.

I know ... especially as you didn't seem interested in even looking
into it in the fist place.

I do you don't it's quite simple to see that.




"an internal thermostat designed to lower the temperature",

Yup ... spot the clue there, *internal*. (No, I don't suppose you
would spot the clue or admit you are just digging more holes for
yourself).

no mention of any cut-out

Yup, but you missed it eh. ;-(

No they are workign as designe dsomething you';ve missed completely.