From google news

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...-after-5398069

On 25/03/15 21:20, newshound wrote:
From google news

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...-after-5398069


Eeew. Poor *******.

The way this is handled in large mines (opencast at least with monster
trucks) is:

1) There is a master isolator on each vehicle;

2) The first man on the job shuts the isolator off then inserts a
locking device through the isolator lever and frame - this device whilst
in place prevents the isolator from being moved;

3) He them inserts his own personal padlock onto one of the many
positions on the locking device - this prevents the locking device from
being removed;

4) When he is done, he removes his own padlock;

5) If another man needs to work on the truck whilst someone else is, he
inserts his own padlock into another position on the locking device;

6) When the last padlock is removed, the locking device may be removed.


Also I noticed a lot of things like jacks and wheel chocks were painted
obscene colours like dayglo purple and pink. Not yellow - the trucks
were yellow.

A very effective and foolproof system. Clearly the oven above needed a
lockable isolator and a procedure - problem I suspect is that whilst the
mine always have trucks in the workshed, so the procedure is constantly
practised, going into the oven might have been such a rare event that
noone thought about it.

On Wed, 25 Mar 2015 21:20:28 +0000, newshound wrote:

From google news

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...-after-5398069

Nasty things industrial
ovens:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...tyre-factory-w
orker-died-seconds-inside-150-C-industrial-oven-police-question-collea
gues.html

tiny url isn't playing, link might need reassembly

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Wed, 25 Mar 2015 22:21:56 +0000 (GMT), Dave Liquorice wrote:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...tyre-factory-w
orker-died-seconds-inside-150-C-industrial-oven-police-question-collea
gues.html

tiny url isn't playing, link might need reassembly

http://tinyurl.com/czwvtte

But is now ...

--
Cheers
Dave.

Tim Watts wrote:

going into the oven might have been such a rare event that
noone thought about it.

If *I* was going into an oven I'd damned well think about it (not to
excuse a system that allowed it to happen) similar story about workers
going into a long conveyor bread oven a few years back.

I was speaking to a fire investigator the other week who had to go
inside a cremator* to see how it had managed to burn the building down!


* a pet one, not a human one.

On 25/03/2015 22:12, Tim Watts wrote:
On 25/03/15 21:20, newshound wrote:
From google news

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...-after-5398069



Eeew. Poor *******.

The way this is handled in large mines (opencast at least with monster
trucks) is:

1) There is a master isolator on each vehicle;

2) The first man on the job shuts the isolator off then inserts a
locking device through the isolator lever and frame - this device whilst
in place prevents the isolator from being moved;

3) He them inserts his own personal padlock onto one of the many
positions on the locking device - this prevents the locking device from
being removed;

4) When he is done, he removes his own padlock;

5) If another man needs to work on the truck whilst someone else is, he
inserts his own padlock into another position on the locking device;

6) When the last padlock is removed, the locking device may be removed.


Also I noticed a lot of things like jacks and wheel chocks were painted
obscene colours like dayglo purple and pink. Not yellow - the trucks
were yellow.

A very effective and foolproof system. Clearly the oven above needed a
lockable isolator and a procedure - problem I suspect is that whilst the
mine always have trucks in the workshed, so the procedure is constantly
practised, going into the oven might have been such a rare event that
noone thought about it.

Very interesting. Somewhat similar interlocking systems are used in
power stations.

I guess this might have been a business which started as a bloke laying
up strand glass and resin in a garage, and a safety culture which didn't
keep pace with the increasing amount of technology.

"newshound" wrote in message
o.uk...
From google news

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...-after-5398069

Bloody awful.
Amazing how it took four years to find out what happened and how it could be
prevented.
Some ******* made a pile of cash out of that.

Surprised the manufacturers of the oven weren't also taken to court.
But the isolator would have means of locking out.
We used to remove fuses and pocket them.

Dave Liquorice wrote:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...tyre-factory-w
orker-died-seconds-inside-150-C-industrial-oven-police-question-collea
gues.html

tiny url isn't playing, link might need reassembly

But is now ...

Just chopping the rewrite crap off the end works, remove the hostname
for bonus marks

http://dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2212300

On 25/03/15 22:38, newshound wrote:

Very interesting. Somewhat similar interlocking systems are used in
power stations.

The locking device was a bigger version of the one here, in the top left:

http://thumbs4.ebaystatic.com/d/l225...G1wfqgcq3g.jpg

I guess this might have been a business which started as a bloke laying
up strand glass and resin in a garage, and a safety culture which didn't
keep pace with the increasing amount of technology.

"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
On 25/03/15 21:20, newshound wrote:
From google news

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...-after-5398069


Eeew. Poor *******.

Bit hard on his son too.

The way this is handled in large mines (opencast at least with monster
trucks) is:

1) There is a master isolator on each vehicle;

2) The first man on the job shuts the isolator off then inserts a locking
device through the isolator lever and frame - this device whilst in place
prevents the isolator from being moved;

3) He them inserts his own personal padlock onto one of the many positions
on the locking device - this prevents the locking device from being
removed;

4) When he is done, he removes his own padlock;

5) If another man needs to work on the truck whilst someone else is, he
inserts his own padlock into another position on the locking device;

6) When the last padlock is removed, the locking device may be removed.


Also I noticed a lot of things like jacks and wheel chocks were painted
obscene colours like dayglo purple and pink. Not yellow - the trucks were
yellow.

A very effective and foolproof system. Clearly the oven above needed a
lockable isolator and a procedure - problem I suspect is that whilst the
mine always have trucks in the workshed, so the procedure is constantly
practised, going into the oven might have been such a rare event that
noone thought about it.

On Wed, 25 Mar 2015 22:38:17 +0000, newshound wrote:

I guess this might have been a business which started as a bloke laying
up strand glass and resin in a garage, and a safety culture which didn't
keep pace with the increasing amount of technology.

My father died of oesophagal cancer, probably caused by laying up glass
and resin in a confined space. I wonder how good they were about the
ventilation aspect.



--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £30a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

On 26/03/2015 08:50, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 07:56:48 +0000, Nightjar "cpb"@ wrote:

We used to remove fuses and pocket them.

Difficult if you have circuit breakers

Aren't all circuit breakers removable ? Our (domestic) ones are. Surely
they're meant to be replaceable ?


On the distribution boards in my factories, that would have involved
turning off the three-phase supply to the entire factory, which would
allow the front cover to be removed. That would give access to the
screws holding the circuit breakers in place and then they could be
removed. It is not something you would do to permit safe working on a
particular machine.

In any case, all industrial equipment should have a local method of
isolation and those can always be padlocked in the off position. You
shouldn't really need more than that, possible with the multiple padlock
devices Tim Watts describes if more than one person might be working on
the protected equipment at one time.

--
Colin Bignell

On 26/03/15 08:50, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 07:56:48 +0000, Nightjar "cpb"@ wrote:

We used to remove fuses and pocket them.

Difficult if you have circuit breakers

Aren't all circuit breakers removable ? Our (domestic) ones are. Surely
they're meant to be replaceable ?


No, in the majority case - if you mean "can you just unplug them". But
they are replaceable, jut just have to unwire them.

However, there are lock shields that can be purchased and used to lock
the toggle in the off position for many makes.

On 26/03/15 08:49, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Wed, 25 Mar 2015 22:50:56 +0000, harryagain wrote:

We used to remove fuses and pocket them.

Electrician who fitted a few lights for us a few years ago inspected the
circuit, went to the fusebox, pulled the fuse, and pocketed it. He saw me
watching and commented *never* leave the fuse next to the fusebox. He
told a story of a lad who was an apprentice with him (must have been
1960s) who was up a ladder when someone replaced the fuse which had been
left on top of the fusebox. He didn't die of electrocution, but from the
fall from the ladder


In my yoof when I worked in Radar, the cabinets containing EHT for the
magnetrons etc, had microswitches on the doors to cut the power when the
doors were open. Of course this made them impossible to test 'live' but
it was discovered that a 1960s sixpenny bit provided the exact
dimensions necessary to wedge the microswitch and allow full doors open
operation...

--
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 ,
Jethro_uk wrote:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 07:56:48 +0000, Nightjar "cpb"@ wrote:

We used to remove fuses and pocket them.

Difficult if you have circuit breakers

Aren't all circuit breakers removable ? Our (domestic) ones are. Surely
they're meant to be replaceable ?

The Wylex ones which fit older boxes are plug in. Most others have the
wires directely connected. Yes, replaceable, but not without tools.

--
From KT24 in Surrey

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18

I can confirm the radar story, or something very like it at Decca in the old
days, it involved an end off a biro suitably bent as i recall, so the system
could be energised with its top removed. i never heard of any fatalities
though.
Brian

--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 26/03/15 08:49, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Wed, 25 Mar 2015 22:50:56 +0000, harryagain wrote:

We used to remove fuses and pocket them.

Electrician who fitted a few lights for us a few years ago inspected the
circuit, went to the fusebox, pulled the fuse, and pocketed it. He saw me
watching and commented *never* leave the fuse next to the fusebox. He
told a story of a lad who was an apprentice with him (must have been
1960s) who was up a ladder when someone replaced the fuse which had been
left on top of the fusebox. He didn't die of electrocution, but from the
fall from the ladder


In my yoof when I worked in Radar, the cabinets containing EHT for the
magnetrons etc, had microswitches on the doors to cut the power when the
doors were open. Of course this made them impossible to test 'live' but it
was discovered that a 1960s sixpenny bit provided the exact dimensions
necessary to wedge the microswitch and allow full doors open operation...

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

On Thursday, 26 March 2015 10:22:27 UTC, Brian Gaff wrote:
I can confirm the radar story, or something very like it at Decca in the old
days...

Were you at Hersham or Malden Way? Or even Tolworth?

John

On Thursday, 26 March 2015 10:22:27 UTC, Brian Gaff wrote:
I can confirm the radar story, or something very like it at Decca in the old
days...

Were you at Hersham or Malden Way? Or even Tolworth?

John

On 26/03/2015 10:06, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 09:15:34 +0000, Nightjar "cpb"@ wrote:

On 26/03/2015 08:50, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 07:56:48 +0000, Nightjar "cpb"@ wrote:

We used to remove fuses and pocket them.

Difficult if you have circuit breakers

Aren't all circuit breakers removable ? Our (domestic) ones are. Surely
they're meant to be replaceable ?


On the distribution boards in my factories, that would have involved
turning off the three-phase supply to the entire factory, which would
allow the front cover to be removed. That would give access to the
screws holding the circuit breakers in place and then they could be
removed. It is not something you would do to permit safe working on a
particular machine.

In any case, all industrial equipment should have a local method of
isolation and those can always be padlocked in the off position. You
shouldn't really need more than that, possible with the multiple padlock
devices Tim Watts describes if more than one person might be working on
the protected equipment at one time.

All I can say is this was the 60s ...


Even the switch fuses that were common then usually had handles that
could be padlocked in the off position.

--
Colin Bignell

On 26/03/15 12:03, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 11:00:53 +0000, Tim Streater wrote:

In article , Brian Gaff
wrote:

I can confirm the radar story, or something very like it at Decca in the
old days, it involved an end off a biro suitably bent as i recall, so
the system could be energised with its top removed.

Bits of biro can be useful. In Tsavo national park in 1976, Mrs Elephant
was on her way over to us to have a word because we'd looked funny at
her offspring. Our rented Alpha Sud was, however, immobilised because
the radiator fan was not running. Using the metal clip from a biro I was
able to effect a repair by bypassing the thermostat - fan came on and
stayed on.

Panic over and we made our escape. Back at the lodge it transpired that
another wire had earlier become detached, i.e. had a less pressured
diagnosis been possible I could have fixed it without recourse to a thin
flat bit of metal.

Isn't there a story that the launch switch on the Apollo 11 Eagle broke,
and Buzz Aldrin used a biro top ?


It would have been a NASA approved and certified Biro to special order
and would have cost $10000

On 26/03/2015 12:03, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 11:00:53 +0000, Tim Streater wrote:

In article , Brian Gaff
wrote:

I can confirm the radar story, or something very like it at Decca in the
old days, it involved an end off a biro suitably bent as i recall, so
the system could be energised with its top removed.

Bits of biro can be useful. In Tsavo national park in 1976, Mrs Elephant
was on her way over to us to have a word because we'd looked funny at
her offspring. Our rented Alpha Sud was, however, immobilised because
the radiator fan was not running. Using the metal clip from a biro I was
able to effect a repair by bypassing the thermostat - fan came on and
stayed on.

Panic over and we made our escape. Back at the lodge it transpired that
another wire had earlier become detached, i.e. had a less pressured
diagnosis been possible I could have fixed it without recourse to a thin
flat bit of metal.

Isn't there a story that the launch switch on the Apollo 11 Eagle broke,
and Buzz Aldrin used a biro top ?

Yes. He retold it on Stargazing live last week I think in the first program.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 12:03:11 +0000 (UTC), Jethro_uk
wrote:

On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 11:00:53 +0000, Tim Streater wrote:

In article , Brian Gaff
wrote:

I can confirm the radar story, or something very like it at Decca in the
old days, it involved an end off a biro suitably bent as i recall, so
the system could be energised with its top removed.

Bits of biro can be useful. In Tsavo national park in 1976, Mrs Elephant
was on her way over to us to have a word because we'd looked funny at
her offspring. Our rented Alpha Sud was, however, immobilised because
the radiator fan was not running. Using the metal clip from a biro I was
able to effect a repair by bypassing the thermostat - fan came on and
stayed on.

Panic over and we made our escape. Back at the lodge it transpired that
another wire had earlier become detached, i.e. had a less pressured
diagnosis been possible I could have fixed it without recourse to a thin
flat bit of metal.

Isn't there a story that the launch switch on the Apollo 11 Eagle broke,
and Buzz Aldrin used a biro top ?

You obviously haven't watched this year's Stargazing LIVE or you'd
have heard the story from the man himself.
--
J B Good

"Nightjar .me.uk" "cpb"@ insert my surname here wrote in message
...
On 26/03/2015 08:50, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 07:56:48 +0000, Nightjar "cpb"@ wrote:

We used to remove fuses and pocket them.

Difficult if you have circuit breakers

Aren't all circuit breakers removable ? Our (domestic) ones are. Surely
they're meant to be replaceable ?


On the distribution boards in my factories, that would have involved
turning off the three-phase supply to the entire factory, which would
allow the front cover to be removed. That would give access to the screws
holding the circuit breakers in place and then they could be removed. It
is not something you would do to permit safe working on a particular
machine.

In any case, all industrial equipment should have a local method of
isolation and those can always be padlocked in the off position. You
shouldn't really need more than that, possible with the multiple padlock
devices Tim Watts describes if more than one person might be working on
the protected equipment at one time.

Why would all the factory have to be powered down? Did your DBs not have
their own main switch?



--
Adam

On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 08:50:33 +0000, Jethro_uk wrote:

On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 07:56:48 +0000, Nightjar "cpb"@ wrote:

We used to remove fuses and pocket them.

Difficult if you have circuit breakers

Aren't all circuit breakers removable ? Our (domestic) ones are. Surely
they're meant to be replaceable ?

I've only ever seen the old Wylex ones do that.



--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £30a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

On 26/03/2015 21:37, ARW wrote:
"Nightjar .me.uk" "cpb"@ insert my surname here wrote in message
...
On 26/03/2015 08:50, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 07:56:48 +0000, Nightjar "cpb"@ wrote:

We used to remove fuses and pocket them.

Difficult if you have circuit breakers

Aren't all circuit breakers removable ? Our (domestic) ones are. Surely
they're meant to be replaceable ?


On the distribution boards in my factories, that would have involved
turning off the three-phase supply to the entire factory, which would
allow the front cover to be removed. That would give access to the
screws holding the circuit breakers in place and then they could be
removed. It is not something you would do to permit safe working on a
particular machine.

In any case, all industrial equipment should have a local method of
isolation and those can always be padlocked in the off position. You
shouldn't really need more than that, possible with the multiple
padlock devices Tim Watts describes if more than one person might be
working on the protected equipment at one time.

Why would all the factory have to be powered down? Did your DBs not have
their own main switch?

Most of the factories only needed one distribution board; much of the
work was hand work or used single phase equipment. One of them needed
two boards, so there only about half the factory would have needed to be
shut down.


--
Colin Bignell

On 26/03/15 23:32, Nightjar "cpb"@ wrote:
On 26/03/2015 21:37, ARW wrote:
"Nightjar .me.uk" "cpb"@ insert my surname here wrote in message
...
On 26/03/2015 08:50, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 07:56:48 +0000, Nightjar "cpb"@ wrote:

We used to remove fuses and pocket them.

Difficult if you have circuit breakers

Aren't all circuit breakers removable ? Our (domestic) ones are. Surely
they're meant to be replaceable ?


On the distribution boards in my factories, that would have involved
turning off the three-phase supply to the entire factory, which would
allow the front cover to be removed. That would give access to the
screws holding the circuit breakers in place and then they could be
removed. It is not something you would do to permit safe working on a
particular machine.

In any case, all industrial equipment should have a local method of
isolation and those can always be padlocked in the off position. You
shouldn't really need more than that, possible with the multiple
padlock devices Tim Watts describes if more than one person might be
working on the protected equipment at one time.

Why would all the factory have to be powered down? Did your DBs not have
their own main switch?

Most of the factories only needed one distribution board; much of the
work was hand work or used single phase equipment. One of them needed
two boards, so there only about half the factory would have needed to be
shut down.



Most DB boards I've seen in industrial settings could have the door
locked and the key removed - so even if the breaker cannot easily be
locked off for one circuit, it could be switched off and the DB door
locked with a warning sticker.

On 27/03/2015 09:28, Tim Watts wrote:
On 26/03/15 23:32, Nightjar "cpb"@ wrote:
On 26/03/2015 21:37, ARW wrote:
"Nightjar .me.uk" "cpb"@ insert my surname here wrote in message
...
On 26/03/2015 08:50, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 07:56:48 +0000, Nightjar "cpb"@ wrote:

We used to remove fuses and pocket them.

Difficult if you have circuit breakers

Aren't all circuit breakers removable ? Our (domestic) ones are.
Surely
they're meant to be replaceable ?


On the distribution boards in my factories, that would have involved
turning off the three-phase supply to the entire factory, which would
allow the front cover to be removed. That would give access to the
screws holding the circuit breakers in place and then they could be
removed. It is not something you would do to permit safe working on a
particular machine.

In any case, all industrial equipment should have a local method of
isolation and those can always be padlocked in the off position. You
shouldn't really need more than that, possible with the multiple
padlock devices Tim Watts describes if more than one person might be
working on the protected equipment at one time.

Why would all the factory have to be powered down? Did your DBs not have
their own main switch?

Most of the factories only needed one distribution board; much of the
work was hand work or used single phase equipment. One of them needed
two boards, so there only about half the factory would have needed to be
shut down.



Most DB boards I've seen in industrial settings could have the door
locked and the key removed - so even if the breaker cannot easily be
locked off for one circuit, it could be switched off and the DB door
locked with a warning sticker.

These were just pull to open. The only reason this bit of the thread
arose at all is because Harry mentioned pulling fuses and I pointed out
that was not particularly easy with circuit breakers. In any case, some
circuit breakers served more than one machine, so it wouldn't have been
an ideal solution. I simply had local isolators that could be padlocked
off and safety procedures that I always applied, like standing on a
piece of switchboard matting when working on electrical circuits. That
proved to be very useful in a newly acquired factory which did have
fuses which were in my pocket, when I was working on terminals on a
three-phase supply, which I later discovered were fed from two different
sources and had been live all the time.


--
Colin Bignell

On Friday, 27 March 2015 09:51:27 UTC, Nightjar wrote:
...
fuses which were in my pocket, when I was working on terminals on a
three-phase supply, which I later discovered were fed from two different
sources and had been live all the time.

But of course you'd tested all the terminals for dead before working anyway :-)

Owain

On 27/03/2015 10:14, wrote:
On Friday, 27 March 2015 09:51:27 UTC, Nightjar wrote:
...
fuses which were in my pocket, when I was working on terminals on a
three-phase supply, which I later discovered were fed from two different
sources and had been live all the time.

But of course you'd tested all the terminals for dead before working anyway :-)

Careless of me, I know, but I couldn't be bothered to go back for the
test gear and, as I was working in a unit with a single incomer, which
was in front of me, I had pulled the (unsealed, honest gov') company
fuses and was disconnecting tails from a connector block after the
meter, so I could fit a new distribution board, that I didn't need to
check. Fortunately, that didn't stop me working, as I always do, as if
the circuits were still live. It was only when I opened up the
distribution board and found an unexpected connection that I realised it
was also being fed from the unit next door, which the previous owners
had also occupied.

--
Colin Bignell

In article , Huge
scribeth thus
On 2015-03-27, wrote:
On Friday, 27 March 2015 09:51:27 UTC, Nightjar wrote:
...
fuses which were in my pocket, when I was working on terminals on a
three-phase supply, which I later discovered were fed from two different
sources and had been live all the time.

But of course you'd tested all the terminals for dead before working anyway
:-)


S.I.D.E.!!!



Remember it well...


3:59 In..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2RPu4Hs_qo
--
Tony Sayer

On Fri, 27 Mar 2015 19:27:32 +0000, tony sayer
wrote:


But of course you'd tested all the terminals for dead before working anyway

S.I.D.E.!!!

Remember it well...

3:59 In..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2RPu4Hs_qo

Interesting socket glimpsed briefly at 4.32

G.Harman

On 27/03/15 20:26, wrote:
On Fri, 27 Mar 2015 19:27:32 +0000, tony sayer
wrote:


But of course you'd tested all the terminals for dead before working anyway

S.I.D.E.!!!

Remember it well...

3:59 In..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2RPu4Hs_qo

Interesting socket glimpsed briefly at 4.32

Yes - never seen one of those before

(13A format, normal earth, neutral at 45 degrees and what looks like a
15A gauge round pin for the live)

Tim Watts wrote:
On 27/03/15 20:26, wrote:
On Fri, 27 Mar 2015 19:27:32 +0000, tony sayer
wrote:


But of course you'd tested all the terminals for dead before
working anyway

S.I.D.E.!!!

Remember it well...

3:59 In..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2RPu4Hs_qo

Interesting socket glimpsed briefly at 4.32

Yes - never seen one of those before

(13A format, normal earth, neutral at 45 degrees and what looks like
a
15A gauge round pin for the live)

It was actually 5-A gauge.
The plugs had fuses in both poles.
Made by Wandsworth.
They were used for the 110-V C.T.E. supply, and were being replaced by
a similar type of the same make, like a standard BS1363 but with a
right-angled R.H pin that was reduced to BS1363 size, at the end when
I was a student assistant at Culham Lab. in 1983.

Jethro_uk wrote:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 07:56:48 +0000, Nightjar "cpb"@ wrote:

We used to remove fuses and pocket them.

Difficult if you have circuit breakers

Aren't all circuit breakers removable ? Our (domestic) ones are. Surely
they're meant to be replaceable ?

No,but you can usually lock them off.

On Thursday, March 26, 2015 at 7:56:55 AM UTC, Nightjar wrote:
On 25/03/2015 22:50, harryagain wrote:
"newshound" wrote in message
o.uk...

Surprised the manufacturers of the oven weren't also taken to court.
But the isolator would have means of locking out.

Precisely. It was the method of use that was at fault, not the
manufacture of the oven.

Imho the oven shouldnt prevent escape from inside unless its a pressure vessel. This principle has been in use with domestic cookers & fridges for many decades.


NT

On 29/03/2015 11:45, wrote:
On Thursday, March 26, 2015 at 7:56:55 AM UTC, Nightjar wrote:
On 25/03/2015 22:50, harryagain wrote:
"newshound" wrote in message
o.uk...

Surprised the manufacturers of the oven weren't also taken to court.
But the isolator would have means of locking out.

Precisely. It was the method of use that was at fault, not the
manufacture of the oven.

Imho the oven shouldnt prevent escape from inside unless its a pressure vessel. This principle has been in use with domestic cookers & fridges for many decades.

That wasn't prompted by accidents when they were in use, but was
introduced as a result of children playing in ones that had (often
illegally) been dumped. I can image cases where it could be quite
dangerous to allow an industrial oven to be opened whilst working.


--
Colin Bignell

Nightjar "cpb"@ insert my surname here wrote:
On 29/03/2015 11:45, wrote:
On Thursday, March 26, 2015 at 7:56:55 AM UTC, Nightjar wrote:
On 25/03/2015 22:50, harryagain wrote:
"newshound" wrote in message
o.uk...

Surprised the manufacturers of the oven weren't also taken to court.
But the isolator would have means of locking out.

Precisely. It was the method of use that was at fault, not the
manufacture of the oven.

Imho the oven shouldnt prevent escape from inside unless its a pressure
vessel. This principle has been in use with domestic cookers & fridges for many decades.

That wasn't prompted by accidents when they were in use, but was
introduced as a result of children playing in ones that had (often
illegally) been dumped. I can image cases where it could be quite
dangerous to allow an industrial oven to be opened whilst working.



What, from the inside? Surely if it's being opened from the inside whilst
in use a very dangerous situation already exists for at least one person.

Tim

On 30/03/2015 07:45, Tim+ wrote:
Nightjar "cpb"@ insert my surname here wrote:
On 29/03/2015 11:45, wrote:
On Thursday, March 26, 2015 at 7:56:55 AM UTC, Nightjar wrote:
On 25/03/2015 22:50, harryagain wrote:
"newshound" wrote in message
o.uk...

Surprised the manufacturers of the oven weren't also taken to court.
But the isolator would have means of locking out.

Precisely. It was the method of use that was at fault, not the
manufacture of the oven.

Imho the oven shouldnt prevent escape from inside unless its a pressure
vessel. This principle has been in use with domestic cookers & fridges for many decades.

That wasn't prompted by accidents when they were in use, but was
introduced as a result of children playing in ones that had (often
illegally) been dumped. I can image cases where it could be quite
dangerous to allow an industrial oven to be opened whilst working.



What, from the inside? Surely if it's being opened from the inside whilst
in use a very dangerous situation already exists for at least one person.

The answer is that nobody should be in an oven without proper safety
procedures. There should be a lock out procedure in place, both to
ensure that the door cannot be locked shut and to prevent it being
switched on, and, as it is a confined space, there should be a second
person outside, in case the person in the oven is overcome by fumes or
lack of oxygen.

If you do want an additional safety system, a simple clamp that fits
around the door frame would be enough to stop the door closing and it
would also make it obvious to anybody else that maintenance is going on
inside the oven. Against that, to be able to open an oven from the
inside, you would need a mechanism that could withstand regular cycling
to perhaps 1500C, not transmit heat to the outside of the oven while
still being able to disconnect the mechanical locks and over-ride any
electrical or electronic interlocks.

However, whatever you do, somebody would probably find a way to
circumvent the safety procedures.


--
Colin Bignell

On Monday, March 30, 2015 at 1:41:16 AM UTC+1, Nightjar wrote:
On 29/03/2015 11:45, wrote:
On Thursday, March 26, 2015 at 7:56:55 AM UTC, Nightjar wrote:
On 25/03/2015 22:50, harryagain wrote:
"newshound" wrote in message
o.uk...

Surprised the manufacturers of the oven weren't also taken to court.
But the isolator would have means of locking out.

Precisely. It was the method of use that was at fault, not the
manufacture of the oven.

Imho the oven shouldnt prevent escape from inside unless its a pressure vessel. This principle has been in use with domestic cookers & fridges for many decades.

That wasn't prompted by accidents when they were in use, but was
introduced as a result of children playing in ones that had (often
illegally) been dumped.

Indeed. It also means you can't shut someone in one, either unknowingly or deliberately. Given how kids can be that's a good thing.

I can image cases where it could be quite
dangerous to allow an industrial oven to be opened whilst working.

true. I guess it does depend. A food cooking oven is very different to a metal melting furnace.


NT