On Fri, 24 Nov 2017 04:05:22 -0800 (PST), whisky-dave
wrote:

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 ?

It was always a potential issue ...

There will always be 'potential' issues about everything.

No there won't.

There's a potential' issue that a student might headbut the heater or fall over it.

Grow up.

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.

Or putting it all back longer if the lab caught fire.

snip

But as there wasn't a fault

How do you know?

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.

No, so they take the cladding off the buildings eh.

Sometimes you have to ignore the 'potential' issues and sort out the real issues.

Quite.




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.

All there in black and white mate.


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.

Whoosh.



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

Bwhahaha ...

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.

Or saving a few lives ... only time will tell now eh.

snip

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 ?

To make sure there wasn't.

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

It's still there mate.

snip

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)

Yes, I got that at the beginning.

snip

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.

2k I would have though, assuming a 240V supply?

It says on the label 2000W at 220V and 2000W at 240V,

No it doesn't.

which to me seemed unlikey.

'Impossible' is the word you were looking for (for that sort of
device).

So I would have suspected that the 2KW was for 240V and that it;s be abaout 1.8KW at 220V.

Yup.

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.

Would I? No, because I'm not stupid.

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.

Why would *I* expect that when I was the one (along with several
others) explaining it to you (over and over)?


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 .

No you weren't because if you were you would have had the thermal
calculations for the space.



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.

What?

If you want 2KW both II and I need to be on.

I know, I'm not you. Read it again.

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

I know, I'm not you.

the manual tells you to set up the heater, did you NOT read the instruction manual.

I didn't need to mate, I'm not you.

snip

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 .....

No they didn't, stop making stuff up.

"Many thanks for your email and my apologies for this error.
Our technical team have advised that they believed this to be faulty.

If you can advise of the order details for this order this can be
logged for you."


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.

Whoosh.

1/ I didn't have a working phone

Whoosh.

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.

You didn't want it at all until I recommended you ask them.

snip

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

that IS NOT tech support that is product info.

You are one *very* confused man.

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

I've told you loads of times now and am not your wet nurse. Look it up
yourself.

Can you answer that ?

Yes (but see above).


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 ?

See above (and the previous explanations of how the world works).

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

And what did TS allegedly say ?

I've told you loads of times now and am not your wet nurse. Look it up
yourself (and there is no allegedly about it, it's in black and
white).

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.

So why did you type 'which they have done proving I was right' when
they hadn't at that point in our conversation.

I gave the times that I got a reply.

I know.


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 ;-)

Yes, we know you think you are.

snip

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

what do you mean worked as it should ?

Like the other more expensive radiators do (as you told us yourself).
How difficult is all this for you?

How would yuo expect a heater like this to work. ?

I've told you loads of times now and am not your wet nurse. Look it up
yourself.

Don't forget the subject title of this post, like you have been.

Grow up.


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.

Ok.

Remember mine currently costs about £160 these here are about 1/4 the cost.

So? Are you saying no cheaper product can work properly?


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 ?

No you didn't and I don't think you do now. You don't even know what
an overtemp stat is!

Not you for sure it seems.

Grow up.

It was my first thought.

Liar.

But you still haven't explained what you mean by cycling and what do you expect ?

And I'm not going to again as I have done so many times already.


(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. ?

What, because the overtemp function isn't in circuit on the low power
setting? You work it out.

snip

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.

Because a properly designed oil filled rad is very reliable and safe.

I had a 500W version at home and I managed to only have that on when I was present or at home.

Whoosh.


snip

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.

Doesn't look like it from reading what you wrote ...


So like you I thought 'faulty heater',

No, I never actually considered them 'faulty'

So why suggest I contact tech support

To have their functionality confirmed / checked in principal.

to send them back.

Stop making stuff up.

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.

Or incorrect wiring. *You* explain how not also running the 700W
element through the upper limit stat is 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.

But didn't know why.

Or perhaps I expected to much from a 2KW heater that it should deliever 2KW of heat, again due to cheapness.

But it does deliver 2kW of heat.


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 ?

Because I believe they could be.

Why did you contact tech support ?

To see if they thought they were.



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.

I wouldn't have said initial.


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.

How many times did I suggest you run it past their TS and have you
argue and question why you should.


"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.

As you have no way of proving that, once again you are like a sniper
using bollox for ammunition. ;-(

All you can say with any certainty is that they are working as they
are working. You have *no idea* if they are working as originally
designed.

Cheers, T i m