On 24/03/2015 08:23, wrote:
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 at 8:22:50 AM UTC, wrote:
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 at 7:58:26 AM UTC, Chris J Dixon wrote:
Andrew Gabriel wrote:

PAT is a nickname - "portable" doesn't appear in the real name.
The testing applies to all appliances, except the wiring installation
and any lighting which is part of the wiring installation, and also
excludes anything else which has its own testing regime defined in other
legislation (such as a passenger lift).

I was once checking an office for PAT validity dates, and noticed
an untested plug-in air freshener. We were a little unsure
exactly what could or should have been done with it.

relabel it as an air polluter? New goods don't need PAT testing AIUI.

but if PAT testing is done in bulk every so often, better to test now so it won't exceed its test interval later.


NT


By why PAT anyway? You don't need to do it at all.
You should train the users to give it a visual check before use if there
is any chance of damage being dangerous leaving it every year or two is
going to be against H&S laws. I get the idea that PAT is just an excuse
for inadequate training.

On 24/03/15 09:11, Dennis@home wrote:
armour that was used to connect the machine my father accidentally drove over in the '60s and got a 440V shock from it.


The 'it' at the end is bad grammar and redundant, since the 'armours' is
already the subject of the sentence.

"...armour that was used to connect the machine my father accidentally
drove over in the '60s, and got a 440V shock from."

Is enough, or if you want to look erudite and eliminate that trailing
preposition...

"...armour that was used to connect the machine my father accidentally
drove over in the '60, from which he got a 440V shock."

--
Everything you read in newspapers is absolutely true, except for the
rare story of which you happen to have first-hand knowledge. €“ Erwin Knoll

In article . com,
Dennis@home wrote:
On 24/03/2015 08:23, wrote:
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 at 8:22:50 AM UTC, wrote:
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 at 7:58:26 AM UTC, Chris J Dixon wrote:
Andrew Gabriel wrote:

PAT is a nickname - "portable" doesn't appear in the real name. The
testing applies to all appliances, except the wiring installation
and any lighting which is part of the wiring installation, and also
excludes anything else which has its own testing regime defined in
other legislation (such as a passenger lift).

I was once checking an office for PAT validity dates, and noticed an
untested plug-in air freshener. We were a little unsure exactly what
could or should have been done with it.

relabel it as an air polluter? New goods don't need PAT testing AIUI.

but if PAT testing is done in bulk every so often, better to test now
so it won't exceed its test interval later.


NT


By why PAT anyway? You don't need to do it at all. You should train the
users to give it a visual check before use if there is any chance of
damage being dangerous leaving it every year or two is going to be
against H&S laws. I get the idea that PAT is just an excuse for
inadequate training.

You obviously don't understand PAT testing

The visual part is actually the most important part. But to check that the
metalwork of an appliance is actually earthed you need a megger or a device
disguised as one.

--
From KT24 in Surrey

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18

On 24/03/15 00:22, Nightjar "cpb"@ wrote:
On 23/03/2015 22:46, Tim Watts wrote:
On 23/03/15 21:48, Nightjar "cpb"@ wrote:

I have had a tester claim that a 2 ton lathe needed PAT as it was
connected to the 3-phase supply with a plug and socket.



Well, it would not do any hard to check the flex over and ensure
earthing continuity (I assume it was a Class I appliance)...

All equipment got a visual check from me every week and earth continuity
checking was part of the routine maintenance for both fixed and portable
equipment. It was only plugged in because it might, every few years,
need to be moved, to make getting other equipment past it easier. A plug
and socket meant that could be done without needing me to be present to
do the wiring. The armoured flex was protected by the same heavily
armoured flexible conduit I used for the final connection to all 3-phase
machines and that could withstand a fork truck driving over it.


Sounds like you've got that covered - and you haven't disagreed with me

As the customer I assumed you told the PAT bloke that it was covered
under another inspection regime and he needn't bother with it...

On 24/03/2015 09:11, Dennis@home wrote:
On 24/03/2015 00:22, Nightjar "cpb"@ wrote:

All equipment got a visual check from me every week and earth continuity
checking was part of the routine maintenance for both fixed and portable
equipment. It was only plugged in because it might, every few years,
need to be moved, to make getting other equipment past it easier. A plug
and socket meant that could be done without needing me to be present to
do the wiring. The armoured flex was protected by the same heavily
armoured flexible conduit I used for the final connection to all 3-phase
machines and that could withstand a fork truck driving over it.


I wonder if that's the same sort of armour that was used to connect the
machine my father accidentally drove over in the '60s and got a 440V
shock from it.

Lots of different armouring out there and I know this one survived being
driven over, so probably not.

--
Colin Bignell

On 24/03/15 01:09, Andrew Gabriel wrote:
In article ,
writes:
On Monday, March 23, 2015 at 8:46:56 PM UTC, Tim Watts wrote:

I notice it is notionally fixed equipment. I would fail it for having a
non standard plug with no nearby suitable socket.

If it is fixed equipment, then it is not subject to PAT testing anyway
as it is not portable. .

PAT is a nickname - "portable" doesn't appear in the real name.

To be fair, it used to:

http://www.theiet.org/factfiles/health/hsb34c-page.cfm

But now they've renamed it to

In-service Inspection and Testing of Electrical Equipment IIRC...

The testing applies to all appliances, except the wiring installation
and any lighting which is part of the wiring installation, and also
excludes anything else which has its own testing regime defined in other
legislation (such as a passenger lift).

Think of "portable" as applying to the tester, i.e. the tester should
be carried around to where the appliance is used, and appliances should
not normally be moved out of their normal use situation for testing.

On 24/03/15 07:45, wrote:
On Monday, March 23, 2015 at 7:59:06 PM UTC, ARW wrote:
I never thought I would get paid to do a H&S electrical report.

However can anyone else justify this as anything other than a
fail?

http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php?...e:PAT_test.jpg

http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php?title=File:PAT1.jpg

There's plenty one could say about PAT testing on the wiki, but is it
diy... well, some folk diy their own PAT testing. There's also no
lack of sites covering PAT testing out there.

I did the PAT course with the IET. One of the main things that was
banged into our heads was that there was a LOT the ordinary users could
and should be told to check on a frequent basis and it was mostly the
state of the flex and looking out for broken plugs and similar visual
defects.

I do occasionally use my Megger to check an item at home that I am
suspicious of - gives me a quick earth continuity test (but without a
decent current pulse though) but is just as good as a dedicated PAT unit
for doing insulation testing.

We have a tester somewhere round here that's passing class 1 stuff
wired with speaker wire and so on. Probably just plugs things into a
tester, and if it says ok out it goes.

Another case of missing the point

On 24/03/15 08:22, wrote:
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 at 7:58:26 AM UTC, Chris J Dixon wrote:
Andrew Gabriel wrote:

PAT is a nickname - "portable" doesn't appear in the real name.
The testing applies to all appliances, except the wiring installation
and any lighting which is part of the wiring installation, and also
excludes anything else which has its own testing regime defined in other
legislation (such as a passenger lift).

I was once checking an office for PAT validity dates, and noticed
an untested plug-in air freshener. We were a little unsure
exactly what could or should have been done with it.

relabel it as an air polluter?


New goods don't need PAT testing AIUI.

This is the conclusion my last lot came to.

Except my then boss did find some exceptions - moulded IEC leads that
had bad connections, so he insisted that we tested all new leads if not
the actual equipment. At least he had a verifiable reason to be concerned.

On 24/03/15 09:16, Dennis@home wrote:
On 24/03/2015 08:23, wrote:
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 at 8:22:50 AM UTC, wrote:
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 at 7:58:26 AM UTC, Chris J Dixon wrote:
Andrew Gabriel wrote:

PAT is a nickname - "portable" doesn't appear in the real name.
The testing applies to all appliances, except the wiring installation
and any lighting which is part of the wiring installation, and also
excludes anything else which has its own testing regime defined in
other
legislation (such as a passenger lift).

I was once checking an office for PAT validity dates, and noticed
an untested plug-in air freshener. We were a little unsure
exactly what could or should have been done with it.

relabel it as an air polluter? New goods don't need PAT testing AIUI.

but if PAT testing is done in bulk every so often, better to test now
so it won't exceed its test interval later.


NT


By why PAT anyway? You don't need to do it at all.
You should train the users to give it a visual check before use if there
is any chance of damage being dangerous leaving it every year or two is
going to be against H&S laws. I get the idea that PAT is just an excuse
for inadequate training.

PAT has become just another admin chore in many places. No one cares if
the kit is safe - just that it has a little green label with an in-date
date scribbled on it.

charles wrote:

In article . com,
Dennis@home wrote:
On 24/03/2015 08:23, wrote:
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 at 8:22:50 AM UTC, wrote:
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 at 7:58:26 AM UTC, Chris J Dixon wrote:

I was once checking an office for PAT validity dates, and noticed an
untested plug-in air freshener. We were a little unsure exactly what
could or should have been done with it.

relabel it as an air polluter? New goods don't need PAT testing AIUI.

but if PAT testing is done in bulk every so often, better to test now
so it won't exceed its test interval later.

By why PAT anyway? You don't need to do it at all. You should train the
users to give it a visual check before use if there is any chance of
damage being dangerous leaving it every year or two is going to be
against H&S laws. I get the idea that PAT is just an excuse for
inadequate training.

You obviously don't understand PAT testing

The visual part is actually the most important part. But to check that the
metalwork of an appliance is actually earthed you need a megger or a device
disguised as one.

But in the case of the air freshener, there was no metal, apart
from that which was energised.

Chris
--
Chris J Dixon Nottingham UK


Plant amazing Acers.

On 23/03/2015 19:58, ARW wrote:
I never thought I would get paid to do a H&S electrical report.

However can anyone else justify this as anything other than a fail?

http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php?...e:PAT_test.jpg

http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php?title=File:PAT1.jpg



The real issue is the missing fuse.
Looks unprofessional and lays the manager wide open to all sorts of
complaints should a t-what play with it.

This ebay item number:
351230698108

Black Euro Converter Adaptor Convert EU 2 Pin Plug to UK 3 Pin Power
Connections

Solves the problem, is easy to fit (1) (2)

(1) yes I know some organisations will only only let "competent persons"
touch tools - I "work" for one.....)

(2) assuming the lead isn't a standard "figure of 8" lead that can't be
swapped out.


--
Blow my nose to email me

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com

in article , Chris J Dixon
wrote:
charles wrote:

In article . com,
Dennis@home wrote:
On 24/03/2015 08:23, wrote:
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 at 8:22:50 AM UTC,
wrote:
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 at 7:58:26 AM UTC, Chris J Dixon wrote:

I was once checking an office for PAT validity dates, and noticed
an untested plug-in air freshener. We were a little unsure exactly
what could or should have been done with it.

relabel it as an air polluter? New goods don't need PAT testing
AIUI.

but if PAT testing is done in bulk every so often, better to test
now so it won't exceed its test interval later.

By why PAT anyway? You don't need to do it at all. You should train
the users to give it a visual check before use if there is any chance
of damage being dangerous leaving it every year or two is going to be
against H&S laws. I get the idea that PAT is just an excuse for
inadequate training.

You obviously don't understand PAT testing

The visual part is actually the most important part. But to check that
the metalwork of an appliance is actually earthed you need a megger or a
device disguised as one.

But in the case of the air freshener, there was no metal, apart from that
which was energised.

so, it passed the visual test. What's the problem?

--
From KT24 in Surrey

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18

On 24/03/2015 09:38, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 24/03/15 09:11, Dennis@home wrote:
armour that was used to connect the machine my father accidentally
drove over in the '60s and got a 440V shock from it.


The 'it' at the end is bad grammar and redundant, since the 'armours' is
already the subject of the sentence.

"...armour that was used to connect the machine my father accidentally
drove over in the '60s, and got a 440V shock from."

Is enough, or if you want to look erudite and eliminate that trailing
preposition...

"...armour that was used to connect the machine my father accidentally
drove over in the '60, from which he got a 440V shock."

Prat

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com

On 24/03/2015 02:34, Andrew Gabriel wrote:
In article ,
John Rumm writes:
On 23/03/2015 22:04, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
En el artículo , ARW adamwadsworth@blueyond
er.co.uk escribió:

How do you get the 2 round pins into the two rectangular holes without the
plastic earth pin?

You use a convenient 13A plug upside-down

Thus highlighting one of the ways in which those multi socket strips do
not actually meet BS1363 - which stipulates there must be sufficient
area around the holes to prevent a plug being inserted in that way,

I was not aware of such a requirement and I can't see any such
statement in BS1363-2 (sockets) or BS1363-3 (adaptors).

It was in one of the diagrams IIRC - I will have a look later see if I
can find it.

Some people have been pushing for such a requirement, but in my
view it's completely pointless as you could use something else
to open the shutters instead, possibly causing more harm in the
process (e.g. permanently spreading the earth pin contacts so
they don't make a good contact in the future).




--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On Monday, 23 March 2015 21:22:23 UTC, Capitol wrote:
ARW wrote:
"Adrian" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 19:58:57 +0000, ARW wrote:

I never thought I would get paid to do a H&S electrical report.

However can anyone else justify this as anything other than a fail?

Round peg/square hole apart, is it really any different to a plastic
"earth pin" on so much kit?


How do you get the 2 round pins into the two rectangular holes without
the plastic earth pin?

That's why you need a screwdriver.

A nails just as good. ;-)

On Tuesday, 24 March 2015 09:20:21 UTC, Dennis@home wrote:
On 24/03/2015 08:23, wrote:
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 at 8:22:50 AM UTC, wrote:
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 at 7:58:26 AM UTC, Chris J Dixon wrote:
Andrew Gabriel wrote:

PAT is a nickname - "portable" doesn't appear in the real name.
The testing applies to all appliances, except the wiring installation
and any lighting which is part of the wiring installation, and also
excludes anything else which has its own testing regime defined in other
legislation (such as a passenger lift).

I was once checking an office for PAT validity dates, and noticed
an untested plug-in air freshener. We were a little unsure
exactly what could or should have been done with it.

relabel it as an air polluter? New goods don't need PAT testing AIUI.

but if PAT testing is done in bulk every so often, better to test now so it won't exceed its test interval later.


NT


By why PAT anyway? You don't need to do it at all.
You should train the users to give it a visual check before use if there
is any chance of damage being dangerous leaving it every year or two is
going to be against H&S laws. I get the idea that PAT is just an excuse
for inadequate training.

It's a good way of passing along the responsibility of who to blame should something go wrong. We get everything tested every year.

In article o.uk,
Dave Liquorice wrote:
The socket strip is *probably* fused, ...

Doesn't look as if it is. No space at the right hand. Left end
appears to have the cable entry but not obvious fuse holder. If it
isn't fused that is a fail.

Wouldn't have thought many would hardwire such a device into a ring? So
the plug will have a fuse.

--
*Frustration is trying to find your glasses without your glasses.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 24/03/15 12:43, whisky-dave wrote:

It's a good way of passing along the responsibility of who to blame
should something go wrong. We get everything tested every year.


Nail, head, hit
We've simply all lost sight of how to do the right thing (ie make the
workplace safe as far as practical) and are more worried about who to
blame when it goes wrong.

I dare say some don't even care if the workplace is unsafe, as long as
someone else gets fingered...

On Tuesday, 24 March 2015 10:02:04 UTC, Tim Watts wrote:
On 24/03/15 09:16, Dennis@home wrote:
On 24/03/2015 08:23, wrote:
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 at 8:22:50 AM UTC, wrote:
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 at 7:58:26 AM UTC, Chris J Dixon wrote:
Andrew Gabriel wrote:

PAT is a nickname - "portable" doesn't appear in the real name.
The testing applies to all appliances, except the wiring installation
and any lighting which is part of the wiring installation, and also
excludes anything else which has its own testing regime defined in
other
legislation (such as a passenger lift).

I was once checking an office for PAT validity dates, and noticed
an untested plug-in air freshener. We were a little unsure
exactly what could or should have been done with it.

relabel it as an air polluter? New goods don't need PAT testing AIUI.

but if PAT testing is done in bulk every so often, better to test now
so it won't exceed its test interval later.


NT


By why PAT anyway? You don't need to do it at all.
You should train the users to give it a visual check before use if there
is any chance of damage being dangerous leaving it every year or two is
going to be against H&S laws. I get the idea that PAT is just an excuse
for inadequate training.

PAT has become just another admin chore in many places. No one cares if
the kit is safe - just that it has a little green label with an in-date
date scribbled on it.

In the hope that no one gets sued if something should go wrong.
Although I'm not sure if it'd actaully work I've seen something pass the PAT test (well it had a sticker on it) that should or would have failed my visual inspection.

On 24/03/2015 09:42, charles wrote:
In article . com,
Dennis@home wrote:
On 24/03/2015 08:23, wrote:
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 at 8:22:50 AM UTC, wrote:
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 at 7:58:26 AM UTC, Chris J Dixon wrote:
Andrew Gabriel wrote:

PAT is a nickname - "portable" doesn't appear in the real name. The
testing applies to all appliances, except the wiring installation
and any lighting which is part of the wiring installation, and also
excludes anything else which has its own testing regime defined in
other legislation (such as a passenger lift).

I was once checking an office for PAT validity dates, and noticed an
untested plug-in air freshener. We were a little unsure exactly what
could or should have been done with it.

relabel it as an air polluter? New goods don't need PAT testing AIUI.

but if PAT testing is done in bulk every so often, better to test now
so it won't exceed its test interval later.


NT


By why PAT anyway? You don't need to do it at all. You should train the
users to give it a visual check before use if there is any chance of
damage being dangerous leaving it every year or two is going to be
against H&S laws. I get the idea that PAT is just an excuse for
inadequate training.

You obviously don't understand PAT testing

Want a bet?


The visual part is actually the most important part. But to check that the
metalwork of an appliance is actually earthed you need a megger or a device
disguised as one.


A megger tests the insulation its the wrong tool to measure earth
connectivity (unless its two tools together).

On 24/03/2015 12:43, whisky-dave wrote:
On Tuesday, 24 March 2015 09:20:21 UTC, Dennis@home wrote:
On 24/03/2015 08:23, wrote:
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 at 8:22:50 AM UTC, wrote:
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 at 7:58:26 AM UTC, Chris J Dixon wrote:
Andrew Gabriel wrote:

PAT is a nickname - "portable" doesn't appear in the real name.
The testing applies to all appliances, except the wiring installation
and any lighting which is part of the wiring installation, and also
excludes anything else which has its own testing regime defined in other
legislation (such as a passenger lift).

I was once checking an office for PAT validity dates, and noticed
an untested plug-in air freshener. We were a little unsure
exactly what could or should have been done with it.

relabel it as an air polluter? New goods don't need PAT testing AIUI.

but if PAT testing is done in bulk every so often, better to test now so it won't exceed its test interval later.


NT


By why PAT anyway? You don't need to do it at all.
You should train the users to give it a visual check before use if there
is any chance of damage being dangerous leaving it every year or two is
going to be against H&S laws. I get the idea that PAT is just an excuse
for inadequate training.

It's a good way of passing along the responsibility of who to blame should something go wrong. We get everything tested every year.



I doubt if you will get away with passing on the problem.

On 23/03/2015 21:23, Capitol wrote:
ARW wrote:
"Adrian" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 19:58:57 +0000, ARW wrote:

I never thought I would get paid to do a H&S electrical report.

However can anyone else justify this as anything other than a fail?

Round peg/square hole apart, is it really any different to a plastic
"earth pin" on so much kit?


How do you get the 2 round pins into the two rectangular holes without
the plastic earth pin?

That's why you need a screwdriver.

You don't need one on those cr@p power strips, you just put a plug in
upside down and it opens the shutters.
They should fail the PAT but never do.
I wouldn't have one anywhere kids can get to it as having shuttered
sockets is a really good idea IMO.

On 24/03/15 14:27, Dennis@home wrote:
On 24/03/2015 09:42, charles wrote:
In article . com,
Dennis@home wrote:
On 24/03/2015 08:23, wrote:
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 at 8:22:50 AM UTC, wrote:
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 at 7:58:26 AM UTC, Chris J Dixon wrote:
Andrew Gabriel wrote:

PAT is a nickname - "portable" doesn't appear in the real name. The
testing applies to all appliances, except the wiring installation
and any lighting which is part of the wiring installation, and also
excludes anything else which has its own testing regime defined in
other legislation (such as a passenger lift).

I was once checking an office for PAT validity dates, and noticed an
untested plug-in air freshener. We were a little unsure exactly what
could or should have been done with it.

relabel it as an air polluter? New goods don't need PAT testing AIUI.

but if PAT testing is done in bulk every so often, better to test now
so it won't exceed its test interval later.


NT


By why PAT anyway? You don't need to do it at all. You should train the
users to give it a visual check before use if there is any chance of
damage being dangerous leaving it every year or two is going to be
against H&S laws. I get the idea that PAT is just an excuse for
inadequate training.

You obviously don't understand PAT testing

Want a bet?


The visual part is actually the most important part. But to check
that the
metalwork of an appliance is actually earthed you need a megger or a
device
disguised as one.


A megger tests the insulation its the wrong tool to measure earth
connectivity (unless its two tools together).

No - most modern Meggers (being multifunction machines) will measure
earth continuity.

What they cannot do is the so called "bang test" where they whack a
decent current through. I am not even sure if PAT testers do that
anymore - it's been a while.

On 24/03/2015 09:52, Tim Watts wrote:
On 24/03/15 00:22, Nightjar "cpb"@ wrote:
On 23/03/2015 22:46, Tim Watts wrote:
On 23/03/15 21:48, Nightjar "cpb"@ wrote:

I have had a tester claim that a 2 ton lathe needed PAT as it was
connected to the 3-phase supply with a plug and socket.



Well, it would not do any hard to check the flex over and ensure
earthing continuity (I assume it was a Class I appliance)...

All equipment got a visual check from me every week and earth continuity
checking was part of the routine maintenance for both fixed and portable
equipment. It was only plugged in because it might, every few years,
need to be moved, to make getting other equipment past it easier. A plug
and socket meant that could be done without needing me to be present to
do the wiring. The armoured flex was protected by the same heavily
armoured flexible conduit I used for the final connection to all 3-phase
machines and that could withstand a fork truck driving over it.


Sounds like you've got that covered - and you haven't disagreed with me

As the customer I assumed you told the PAT bloke that it was covered
under another inspection regime and he needn't bother with it...

It was an all-in price for the whole factory, so I didn't feel it
necessary. As it was, after he discovered his test equipment didn't have
an IEC 60309 3P+E 32A socket he quietly ignored the lathe.

--
Colin Bignell

En el artículo o.uk,
Dave Liquorice escribió:

Doesn't look as if it is. No space at the right hand. Left end
appears to have the cable entry but not obvious fuse holder. If it
isn't fused that is a fail.

It'll be fused in the plug...

--
:: je suis Charlie :: yo soy Charlie :: ik ben Charlie ::

In article . com,
Dennis@home wrote:
On 24/03/2015 09:42, charles wrote:
In article . com,
Dennis@home wrote:
On 24/03/2015 08:23, wrote:
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 at 8:22:50 AM UTC, wrote:
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 at 7:58:26 AM UTC, Chris J Dixon wrote:
Andrew Gabriel wrote:

PAT is a nickname - "portable" doesn't appear in the real name.
The testing applies to all appliances, except the wiring
installation and any lighting which is part of the wiring
installation, and also excludes anything else which has its own
testing regime defined in other legislation (such as a passenger
lift).

I was once checking an office for PAT validity dates, and noticed
an untested plug-in air freshener. We were a little unsure exactly
what could or should have been done with it.

relabel it as an air polluter? New goods don't need PAT testing AIUI.

but if PAT testing is done in bulk every so often, better to test now
so it won't exceed its test interval later.


NT


By why PAT anyway? You don't need to do it at all. You should train
the users to give it a visual check before use if there is any chance
of damage being dangerous leaving it every year or two is going to be
against H&S laws. I get the idea that PAT is just an excuse for
inadequate training.

You obviously don't understand PAT testing

Want a bet?


The visual part is actually the most important part. But to check that
the metalwork of an appliance is actually earthed you need a megger or
a device disguised as one.


A megger tests the insulation its the wrong tool to measure earth
connectivity (unless its two tools together).

The one I had could also check for short circuits.

--
From KT24 in Surrey

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18

On Tuesday, 24 March 2015 14:32:11 UTC, Dennis@home wrote:
On 24/03/2015 12:43, whisky-dave wrote:
On Tuesday, 24 March 2015 09:20:21 UTC, Dennis@home wrote:
On 24/03/2015 08:23, wrote:
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 at 8:22:50 AM UTC, wrote:
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 at 7:58:26 AM UTC, Chris J Dixon wrote:
Andrew Gabriel wrote:

PAT is a nickname - "portable" doesn't appear in the real name.
The testing applies to all appliances, except the wiring installation
and any lighting which is part of the wiring installation, and also
excludes anything else which has its own testing regime defined in other
legislation (such as a passenger lift).

I was once checking an office for PAT validity dates, and noticed
an untested plug-in air freshener. We were a little unsure
exactly what could or should have been done with it.

relabel it as an air polluter? New goods don't need PAT testing AIUI.

but if PAT testing is done in bulk every so often, better to test now so it won't exceed its test interval later.


NT


By why PAT anyway? You don't need to do it at all.
You should train the users to give it a visual check before use if there
is any chance of damage being dangerous leaving it every year or two is
going to be against H&S laws. I get the idea that PAT is just an excuse
for inadequate training.

It's a good way of passing along the responsibility of who to blame should something go wrong. We get everything tested every year.



I doubt if you will get away with passing on the problem.

It does by those instigating it otherwise they wouldn;t have bothered.
There is a little contention here as what happens if someone does get killed and the equipment had passed it's PAT test, no one seems to be sure what differnce a PAT test will make.

On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 at 10:10:22 AM UTC, snot wrote:
On 23/03/2015 19:58, ARW wrote:
I never thought I would get paid to do a H&S electrical report.

However can anyone else justify this as anything other than a fail?

http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php?...e:PAT_test.jpg

http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php?title=File:PAT1.jpg



The real issue is the missing fuse.
Looks unprofessional and lays the manager wide open to all sorts of
complaints should a t-what play with it.

This ebay item number:
351230698108

Black Euro Converter Adaptor Convert EU 2 Pin Plug to UK 3 Pin Power
Connections

Solves the problem, is easy to fit (1) (2)

£1.27, a proper plug is half that


NT

Think of "portable" as applying to the tester, i.e. the tester should
be carried around to where the appliance is used, and appliances should
not normally be moved out of their normal use situation for testing.

PAT is an acronym.
Portable Appliance Test.
And anything fitted with a plug is by definition portable. Even if it's
screwed down/heavy.
So Adam is right. It fails.

PAT testers were designed for idiots that didn't know how to test portable
equipment with ordinarily availble instruments.
And I suspect for job creation.



A "proper" PAT instrument will record the test details for logging in a
database and issuing certificates. Ideally each year's - or whatever
period - test should refer back to the logged data to check for
deterioration in the readings. These are aspects of the test I haven't
seen mentioned in the posts so far.

As far as testing new equipment goes it makes sense to do so. When I was
PATting at a Uni. we had a batch of OHP's delivered and not one had the
earth connected. I know the manufacturer was at fault but without the
test we wouldn't have known they were faulty.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com

In article ,
wrote:
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 at 10:10:22 AM UTC, snot wrote:
On 23/03/2015 19:58, ARW wrote:
I never thought I would get paid to do a H&S electrical report.

However can anyone else justify this as anything other than a fail?

http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php?...e:PAT_test.jpg

http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php?title=File:PAT1.jpg



The real issue is the missing fuse.
Looks unprofessional and lays the manager wide open to all sorts of
complaints should a t-what play with it.

This ebay item number:
351230698108

Black Euro Converter Adaptor Convert EU 2 Pin Plug to UK 3 Pin Power
Connections

Solves the problem, is easy to fit (1) (2)

£1.27, a proper plug is half that


but you will invalidate any warranty if you cut off the original plug.

--
From KT24 in Surrey

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18

En el artículo , snot
escribió:

This ebay item number:
351230698108

Black Euro Converter Adaptor Convert EU 2 Pin Plug to UK 3 Pin Power
Connections

Solves the problem, is easy to fit

Yes, I have several of those. Be warned some come with a tamperproof
screw that can only be done up, not undone, which is crazy. Actually,
it's hard to see as it's been obscured by a watermark, but the plugs in
that auction look of that type.

--
:: je suis Charlie :: yo soy Charlie :: ik ben Charlie ::

"John Rumm" wrote in message
news
On 24/03/2015 02:34, Andrew Gabriel wrote:
In article ,
John Rumm writes:
On 23/03/2015 22:04, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
En el artículo , ARW
adamwadsworth@blueyond
er.co.uk escribió:

How do you get the 2 round pins into the two rectangular holes without
the
plastic earth pin?

You use a convenient 13A plug upside-down

Thus highlighting one of the ways in which those multi socket strips do
not actually meet BS1363 - which stipulates there must be sufficient
area around the holes to prevent a plug being inserted in that way,

I was not aware of such a requirement and I can't see any such
statement in BS1363-2 (sockets) or BS1363-3 (adaptors).

It was in one of the diagrams IIRC - I will have a look later see if I can
find it.


http://www.bs1363.org.uk/

the bit about loop holes.

Now would a normal socket on a PLASTIC SURFACE MOUNTED PATRESS:-) pass the
same test?



--
Adam

En el artículo , ARW adamwadsworth@blueyond
er.co.uk escribió:

Now would a normal socket on a PLASTIC SURFACE MOUNTED PATRESS:-) pass the
same test?

It's a fixed item, so doesn't qualify as "portable".

--
:: je suis Charlie :: yo soy Charlie :: ik ben Charlie ::

On Tuesday, 24 March 2015 17:04:34 UTC, whisky-dave wrote:
There is a little contention here as what happens if someone does get
killed and the equipment had passed it's PAT test, no one seems to be
sure what differnce a PAT test will make.

It means you have a defence and might escape prison.

Owain

"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
On 24/03/15 12:43, whisky-dave wrote:


I dare say some don't even care if the workplace is unsafe, as long as
someone else gets fingered...


That's usually the secretary on the Xmas party.

--
Adam

wrote in message
...
On Monday, March 23, 2015 at 7:59:06 PM UTC, ARW wrote:
I never thought I would get paid to do a H&S electrical report.

However can anyone else justify this as anything other than a fail?

http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php?...e:PAT_test.jpg

http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php?title=File:PAT1.jpg

I'd fail it because of the plug. AIUI 2 pin round pin plugs are only
permitted for items one would expect to use in the bathroom, or if an
adaptor is fitted that can only be opened with a tool. Suggest putting in
the contract that you can automatically carry out any necessary minor
repairs for an additional £1 or £1.50, which covers plugs, fuses & similar.



And who is going to sign for the minor additional repair cost? The Vogons?
This is a multi million pound complex and they need to account for every
penny they spend no matter how much it costs them to the to account for that
spent penny.


--
Adam

"Mike Tomlinson" wrote in message
news
En el artículo , ARW adamwadsworth@blueyond
er.co.uk escribió:

Now would a normal socket on a PLASTIC SURFACE MOUNTED PATRESS:-) pass the
same test?

It's a fixed item, so doesn't qualify as "portable".



So what is the loophole?

--
Adam

On 24/03/2015 18:45, wrote:
On Tuesday, 24 March 2015 17:04:34 UTC, whisky-dave wrote:
There is a little contention here as what happens if someone does get
killed and the equipment had passed it's PAT test, no one seems to be
sure what differnce a PAT test will make.

It means you have a defence and might escape prison.

Its no defence against having untrained (in checking the equipment)
operators.
It could have been PATed the day before and have had the cord pulled
enough to damage it. The PAT test won't save you.

On 24/03/15 18:53, ARW wrote:
"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
On 24/03/15 12:43, whisky-dave wrote:


I dare say some don't even care if the workplace is unsafe, as long as
someone else gets fingered...


That's usually the secretary on the Xmas party.


Our "secretary" is a bloke.

His actual title is something or the other project officer... No one's
allowed to be a secretary anymore.

"charles" wrote in message
...
In article ,
wrote:
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 at 10:10:22 AM UTC, snot wrote:
On 23/03/2015 19:58, ARW wrote:
I never thought I would get paid to do a H&S electrical report.

However can anyone else justify this as anything other than a fail?

http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php?...e:PAT_test.jpg

http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php?title=File:PAT1.jpg



The real issue is the missing fuse.
Looks unprofessional and lays the manager wide open to all sorts of
complaints should a t-what play with it.

This ebay item number:
351230698108

Black Euro Converter Adaptor Convert EU 2 Pin Plug to UK 3 Pin Power
Connections

Solves the problem, is easy to fit (1) (2)

£1.27, a proper plug is half that


but you will invalidate any warranty if you cut off the original plug.


********.

--
Adam