I know a few people on here that have done PAT testing courses.

Anything wrong on this web page?

http://www.intersafe.co.uk/news/What...o-PAT-Testing/




--
Adam

On 20/07/2018 19:42, ARW wrote:
I know a few people on here that have done PAT testing courses.

Anything wrong on this web page?

http://www.intersafe.co.uk/news/What...o-PAT-Testing/


Do you mean other than the constant use of "PAT Testing" where the T =
Testing?

The assumption that anything with a plastic case is double insulated?


--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

Do people usually wire inside mains gear using bare wire then?
I remember an old Decimo clock with bare wire neons, but that was a long
time ago now!
Brian

--
----- --
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"alan_m" wrote in message
...
On 20/07/2018 19:42, ARW wrote:
I know a few people on here that have done PAT testing courses.

Anything wrong on this web page?

http://www.intersafe.co.uk/news/What...o-PAT-Testing/

Do you mean other than the constant use of "PAT Testing" where the T =
Testing?

The assumption that anything with a plastic case is double insulated?


--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On 20/07/18 19:42, ARW wrote:
I know a few people on here that have done PAT testing courses.

Anything wrong on this web page?

http://www.intersafe.co.uk/news/What...o-PAT-Testing/


I have, though about 10 years ago:

Metal = Class I - ********

3 core cable = Class I- A strong indicator but not proof

Plug metal earth pin = Class I - ********

Plastic case = Class II - No. eg Kettle.

Double box symbol = Class II - this is the only bit that is correct as
far as I can see.


OK - I know who not to use for PAT now....

Ring them up and ask them what might be a Class 0 appliance

On 20/07/18 19:42, ARW wrote:
I know a few people on here that have done PAT testing courses.

Anything wrong on this web page?

http://www.intersafe.co.uk/news/What...o-PAT-Testing/


I have, though about 10 years ago:

Metal = Class I - ********

3 core cable = Class I- A strong indicator but not proof

Plug metal earth pin = Class I - ********

Plastic case = Class II - No. eg Kettle.

Double box symbol = Class II - this is the only bit that is correct as
far as I can see.


OK - I know who not to use for PAT now....

Ring them up and ask them what might be a Class 0 appliance

Code for Southampton is 023 not 02380!
--

Graham.
%Profound_observation%

On 21/07/2018 13:04, Graham. wrote:
On 20/07/18 19:42, ARW wrote:
I know a few people on here that have done PAT testing courses.

Anything wrong on this web page?

http://www.intersafe.co.uk/news/What...o-PAT-Testing/


I have, though about 10 years ago:

Metal = Class I - ********

3 core cable = Class I- A strong indicator but not proof

Plug metal earth pin = Class I - ********

Plastic case = Class II - No. eg Kettle.

Double box symbol = Class II - this is the only bit that is correct as
far as I can see.


OK - I know who not to use for PAT now....

Ring them up and ask them what might be a Class 0 appliance

Code for Southampton is 023 not 02380!

You've now lost me!

On 21/07/2018 13:04, Graham. wrote:
On 20/07/18 19:42, ARW wrote:
I know a few people on here that have done PAT testing courses.

Anything wrong on this web page?

http://www.intersafe.co.uk/news/What...o-PAT-Testing/


I have, though about 10 years ago:

Metal = Class I - ********

3 core cable = Class I- A strong indicator but not proof

Plug metal earth pin = Class I - ********

Plastic case = Class II - No. eg Kettle.

Double box symbol = Class II - this is the only bit that is correct as
far as I can see.


OK - I know who not to use for PAT now....

Ring them up and ask them what might be a Class 0 appliance

Code for Southampton is 023 not 02380!

You've now lost me!


https://www.ringcentral.co.uk/local-...-areacode.html

Moreover, like most places you can omit the STD code when dialling
another subscriber within the same code from a fixed line. Within
Southampton you can optionally omit 023, not 0238 or 02380.
--

Graham.
%Profound_observation%

On 21/07/2018 13:04, Graham. wrote:
On 20/07/18 19:42, ARW wrote:
I know a few people on here that have done PAT testing courses.

Anything wrong on this web page?

http://www.intersafe.co.uk/news/What...o-PAT-Testing/


I have, though about 10 years ago:

Metal = Class I - ********

3 core cable = Class I- A strong indicator but not proof

Plug metal earth pin = Class I - ********

Plastic case = Class II - No. eg Kettle.

Double box symbol = Class II - this is the only bit that is correct as
far as I can see.


OK - I know who not to use for PAT now....

Ring them up and ask them what might be a Class 0 appliance

Code for Southampton is 023 not 02380!

You've now lost me!


https://www.ringcentral.co.uk/local-...-areacode.html

Moreover, like most places you can omit the STD code when dialling
another subscriber within the same code from a fixed line. Within
Southampton you can optionally omit 023, not 0238 or 02380.

This covers it rather well, surly you were aware of the London issue?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_tel...misconceptions
--

Graham.
%Profound_observation%

On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 19:42:20 +0100, ARW
wrote:

I know a few people on here that have done PAT testing courses.

Anything wrong on this web page?

http://www.intersafe.co.uk/news/What...o-PAT-Testing/


Anything right would be more appropriate. Pat testing does not fulfil
a business's health and safety requirements, it no more grants
immunity from prosecution than a complete failiure to PAT anything
guarantees prosecution.

After that the website gets worse!

I would hope that whoever wrote the garbage has been separated from
his screwdriver!

AB

On Friday, 20 July 2018 20:30:42 UTC+1, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:
I would hope that whoever wrote the garbage has been separated from
his screwdriver!

His *neon* screwdriver?

Owain

On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 13:35:12 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Friday, 20 July 2018 20:30:42 UTC+1, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:
I would hope that whoever wrote the garbage has been separated from
his screwdriver!

His *neon* screwdriver?

Apparently now non-approved according to my source, on the basis that
a bulb failure would give a false negative. I always test mine at the
start of a job and (after using the neon screwdriver) touch the live
with a moving finger to be extra sure.

On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 14:51:34 +0100, Scott
wrote:

On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 13:35:12 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Friday, 20 July 2018 20:30:42 UTC+1, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:
I would hope that whoever wrote the garbage has been separated from
his screwdriver!

His *neon* screwdriver?

Apparently now non-approved according to my source, on the basis that
a bulb failure would give a false negative. I always test mine at the
start of a job and (after using the neon screwdriver) touch the live
with a moving finger to be extra sure.

I would assume that was the case with any instrument, hence those
proving devices that seem to be popular now.

I watched a young electrician at my previous place of employment
unpack a Volage tester that had arrived from RS components and use it
to test the Voltage on the three phases of the smashed socket he was
to replace, the disconnection was carried out by a.n other.

As he grabbed his terminal driver, I stopped him and asked if he
thought it might be a good idea to test a known live first. At this
point he stuck the index finger in the handholding the terminal driver
out and wiped it across the most exposed phase.

I am not sure if this is an accepted means of checking phase Voltages,
but the technique would have been my ticket off many construction and
manufacturing sites.

AB

On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 17:30:28 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp
wrote:

On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 14:51:34 +0100, Scott
wrote:

On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 13:35:12 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Friday, 20 July 2018 20:30:42 UTC+1, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:
I would hope that whoever wrote the garbage has been separated from
his screwdriver!

His *neon* screwdriver?

Apparently now non-approved according to my source, on the basis that
a bulb failure would give a false negative. I always test mine at the
start of a job and (after using the neon screwdriver) touch the live
with a moving finger to be extra sure.

I would assume that was the case with any instrument, hence those
proving devices that seem to be popular now.

I watched a young electrician at my previous place of employment
unpack a Volage tester that had arrived from RS components and use it
to test the Voltage on the three phases of the smashed socket he was
to replace, the disconnection was carried out by a.n other.

As he grabbed his terminal driver, I stopped him and asked if he
thought it might be a good idea to test a known live first. At this
point he stuck the index finger in the handholding the terminal driver
out and wiped it across the most exposed phase.

I am not sure if this is an accepted means of checking phase Voltages,
but the technique would have been my ticket off many construction and
manufacturing sites.

It would certainly not determine the voltage, but I suggest it must be
safer to find out under controlled conditions that a wire is live
rather than finding out later. I emphasise I would test with the neon
screwdriver first so the 'wipe' would be belt and braces. This is at
home where I decide the H&S rules!

Come on now, apprentices are a perfectly valid sacrificial piece of test equipment.

The funny thing is we occupy a council room, and every year till two years
ago a guy came around tested all the mains cables then plugged them in again
and plugged the plug into a pretty little box and pressed a button, if it
passed he stuck a label on the plug. Nobody has been near since the last one
two years ago and several devices have gone and some new ones arrived.

To be honest many of the mains wall warts that are supposed to be class 2,
ie no metal earth pin, seem to be flimsy with not even a fuse inside, just a
cheap Chinese switch mode module and an led poking out the top and a thin
lead or usb socket through the case I have already had one of these blow
itself apart at home despite an iec mark.
Quite how one is supposed to really know about what is inside these
beasties is not known!
I have in the meantime used a good quality switched and filtered mains
distribution device and only have it switched on when somebody is in the
room. We most certainly do not want to burn down a block of flats!
We are a charity, but one supposes that somebody might need to ask the
council of their intentions on this one. I think on the website, its too
tonka toy, ie it is a bit like looking at the world through a badly made
cheap telescope, a lot of the detail is fuzzy!
Brian

--
----- --
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"ARW" wrote in message
...
I know a few people on here that have done PAT testing courses.

Anything wrong on this web page?

http://www.intersafe.co.uk/news/What...o-PAT-Testing/




--
Adam

ARW explained on 20/07/2018 :
I know a few people on here that have done PAT testing courses.

Anything wrong on this web page?

http://www.intersafe.co.uk/news/What...o-PAT-Testing/

There are so many errors in that, I will not even bother listing them.
Did your apprentice write it?

On 20/07/2018 22:24, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
ARW explained on 20/07/2018 :
I know a few people on here that have done PAT testing courses.

Anything wrong on this web page?

http://www.intersafe.co.uk/news/What...o-PAT-Testing/


There are so many errors in that, I will not even bother listing them.
Did your apprentice write it?

We are doing writing next year, after he can do two way stitching.

--
Adam

On Sunday, 22 July 2018 09:39:01 UTC+1, ARW wrote:
Did your apprentice write it?
We are doing writing next year, after he can do two way stitching.

Training him to sew up his own pockets?

Owain

On Friday, 20 July 2018 19:42:21 UTC+1, ARW wrote:

I know a few people on here that have done PAT testing courses.

Anything wrong on this web page?

http://www.intersafe.co.uk/news/What...o-PAT-Testing/

I've read at least half a dozen pat testing webpages, and most have very basic errors in.

The same is often true of PAT courses unfortunately. Fusing & obviously non-compliant goods are areas where bs often abounds.


NT

used his keyboard to write :
I've read at least half a dozen pat testing webpages, and most have very
basic errors in.

The same is often true of PAT courses unfortunately. Fusing & obviously
non-compliant goods are areas where bs often abounds.

It is unfortunately a small industry which due to the low level of
qualification and equipment needed, attracts many less than well
qualified with a limited understanding of the principles.

Those selling the service often also overstate the need for it to be
done and the dire consequences if it is not done regularly.

On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 08:04:54 +0100, Harry Bloomfield
wrote:

used his keyboard to write :
I've read at least half a dozen pat testing webpages, and most have very
basic errors in.

The same is often true of PAT courses unfortunately. Fusing & obviously
non-compliant goods are areas where bs often abounds.

It is unfortunately a small industry which due to the low level of
qualification and equipment needed, attracts many less than well
qualified with a limited understanding of the principles.

Those selling the service often also overstate the need for it to be
done and the dire consequences if it is not done regularly.

"Earth bond test 1000V Measured bond resistance o.1 Ohm"

This was on every cert a Birmingham company provided for years.

Mind you I also pulled up a few "high end" calibration companies whos
"traceable" certs didn't carry an uncertainty.

AB

On Saturday, 21 July 2018 08:04:56 UTC+1, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
tabbypurr used his keyboard to write :

I've read at least half a dozen pat testing webpages, and most have very
basic errors in.

The same is often true of PAT courses unfortunately. Fusing & obviously
non-compliant goods are areas where bs often abounds.

It is unfortunately a small industry which due to the low level of
qualification and equipment needed, attracts many less than well
qualified with a limited understanding of the principles.

that's the problem

Those selling the service often also overstate the need for it to be
done and the dire consequences if it is not done regularly.

I'd expect that, but haven't seen it.


NT

On Saturday, 21 July 2018 08:04:56 UTC+1, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
tabbypurr used his keyboard to write :

I've read at least half a dozen pat testing webpages, and most have very
basic errors in.

The same is often true of PAT courses unfortunately. Fusing & obviously
non-compliant goods are areas where bs often abounds.

It is unfortunately a small industry which due to the low level of
qualification and equipment needed, attracts many less than well
qualified with a limited understanding of the principles.

that's the problem

Those selling the service often also overstate the need for it to be
done and the dire consequences if it is not done regularly.

I'd expect that, but haven't seen it.


NT

It's a solution to a problem that largly does not exist.

--

Graham.
%Profound_observation%

On Saturday, 21 July 2018 13:16:07 UTC+1, Graham. wrote:
On Saturday, 21 July 2018 08:04:56 UTC+1, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
tabbypurr used his keyboard to write :

I've read at least half a dozen pat testing webpages, and most have very
basic errors in.

The same is often true of PAT courses unfortunately. Fusing & obviously
non-compliant goods are areas where bs often abounds.

It is unfortunately a small industry which due to the low level of
qualification and equipment needed, attracts many less than well
qualified with a limited understanding of the principles.

that's the problem

Those selling the service often also overstate the need for it to be
done and the dire consequences if it is not done regularly.

I'd expect that, but haven't seen it.


NT

It's a solution to a problem that largly does not exist.

It plainly exists, stuff still fails safety tests. The magnitude of electrical safety problems pre-PAT I don't have figures on.


NT

On 21/07/2018 13:16, Graham. wrote:
On Saturday, 21 July 2018 08:04:56 UTC+1, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
tabbypurr used his keyboard to write :

I've read at least half a dozen pat testing webpages, and most have very
basic errors in.

The same is often true of PAT courses unfortunately. Fusing & obviously
non-compliant goods are areas where bs often abounds.

It is unfortunately a small industry which due to the low level of
qualification and equipment needed, attracts many less than well
qualified with a limited understanding of the principles.

that's the problem

Those selling the service often also overstate the need for it to be
done and the dire consequences if it is not done regularly.

I'd expect that, but haven't seen it.


NT

It's a solution to a problem that largly does not exist.

It was only ever expected to be for power tools and the like, that are
very likely to become damaged or worn in the harsh conditions of some
sitework. It has since spread to cover everything in the workplace - to
the extent that the place I am currently working at (while not including
them in the PAT testing) includes warnings on the video noticeboard
about the dangers of worn or damaged USB leads!

SteveW

On 21/07/18 08:04, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
used his keyboard to write :
I've read at least half a dozen pat testing webpages, and most have
very basic errors in.

The same is often true of PAT courses unfortunately. Fusing &
obviously non-compliant goods are areas where bs often abounds.

It is unfortunately a small industry which due to the low level of
qualification and equipment needed, attracts many less than well
qualified with a limited understanding of the principles.

Those selling the service often also overstate the need for it to be
done and the dire consequences if it is not done regularly.

And the silly nonsense I see when a PAT inspector cannot even be
bothered to examine the whole length of a desk power block lead because
"it's a bit hard to take it out from the under desk tray". I did not
observe fuses being checked for kitemarks. Basically, plug in tester and
see if it says pass or fail.

The only really useful test there is continuity being within limits.
You'd have to try astoundingly hard to fail the IR test. Perhaps with
something very very old and obviously decrepit.

The whole thing is a bloody waste of time for the most part - far more
useful to teach every single member of staff to look at their own leads
one in a while for chafing and damage. Which is what actually *should*
happen, but never does.

In article ,
Tim Watts writes:
On 21/07/18 08:04, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
It is unfortunately a small industry which due to the low level of
qualification and equipment needed, attracts many less than well
qualified with a limited understanding of the principles.

Those selling the service often also overstate the need for it to be
done and the dire consequences if it is not done regularly.

And the silly nonsense I see when a PAT inspector cannot even be
bothered to examine the whole length of a desk power block lead because
"it's a bit hard to take it out from the under desk tray". I did not
observe fuses being checked for kitemarks. Basically, plug in tester and
see if it says pass or fail.

The only really useful test there is continuity being within limits.
You'd have to try astoundingly hard to fail the IR test. Perhaps with
something very very old and obviously decrepit.

The whole thing is a bloody waste of time for the most part - far more
useful to teach every single member of staff to look at their own leads
one in a while for chafing and damage. Which is what actually *should*
happen, but never does.

The original idea was that in most offices, there would be someone
with sufficient knowledge to get the certification themselves, and
it would be mainly a DIY function.

You do not need to be an electrician to do inspection and testing,
and as you say, some rudimentary education can be given to everyone
to look out for obvious faults with appliances, cables, and plugs.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

On 21/07/2018 08:04, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
used his keyboard to write :
I've read at least half a dozen pat testing webpages, and most have
very basic errors in.

The same is often true of PAT courses unfortunately. Fusing &
obviously non-compliant goods are areas where bs often abounds.

It is unfortunately a small industry which due to the low level of
qualification and equipment needed, attracts many less than well
qualified with a limited understanding of the principles.

Those selling the service often also overstate the need for it to be
done and the dire consequences if it is not done regularly.

My brother like to mess those about that tell him it needs to be done.
He gets a lot of phone calls at work from people selling PAT testing.
If they say that "he has to have it done, "it's a legal requirement "
etc he books them in.

When they get to his garage he says "I have decided not to have the
tests done, you lied to me on the phone, go away"

He does not get as many sales calls as he used to.



--
Adam

On 21/07/18 00:39, wrote:
On Friday, 20 July 2018 19:42:21 UTC+1, ARW wrote:

I know a few people on here that have done PAT testing courses.

Anything wrong on this web page?

http://www.intersafe.co.uk/news/What...o-PAT-Testing/


I've read at least half a dozen pat testing webpages, and most have
very basic errors in.

The same is often true of PAT courses unfortunately. Fusing &
obviously non-compliant goods are areas where bs often abounds.


NT


The main issue I think is with the courses. I did mine with the IET and
we had 2 blokes, and one was clearly an engineering type and added a
great deal of basic understanding to the course - the
"this is why we do that..." approach.


So we left with a reasonably good understanding.

Some courses I imagine would be highly parrot like:

"Book says when X, do Y"

Then you get people who might be able to do the testing under normal
situations but don't really understand what they are doing - which is
less helpful if they meet unusual situations.

It harks back to the days of supplementary "earth" bonding being a new
idea and people running bits of wire to every lump of metal they could
see in the room.

In article ,
writes:
On Friday, 20 July 2018 19:42:21 UTC+1, ARW wrote:

I know a few people on here that have done PAT testing courses.

Anything wrong on this web page?

http://www.intersafe.co.uk/news/What...o-PAT-Testing/

I've read at least half a dozen pat testing webpages, and most have very basic errors in.

The same is often true of PAT courses unfortunately. Fusing & obviously non-compliant goods are areas where bs often abounds.

I've looked at the course materials for 4-5 training courses and
they were all very poor to the point of being wrong in many cases.
That's a mixture of manufacturers' courses and independant courses.

I formed the view when I was involved in specifying PAT testing
procedures that any tester must present their C&G 2377 certificate
on arrival. No other course or certificate is acceptable.

It does have to be said that when training people, coming up with
the rules for identifying Class I from Class II products is probably
one of the most difficult parts, but it's critical to proper
inspection and testing. Writing down rules, which also cope with
old products and products which have been incorrectly repaired in
the past, and don't run to several pages of A4 is probably impossible.
It really needs a good understanding of the priciples and common
appliance construction methods.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

On 20/07/2018 19:42, ARW wrote:
I know a few people on here that have done PAT testing courses.

Anything wrong on this web page?

http://www.intersafe.co.uk/news/What...o-PAT-Testing/

How about the grammatical error in the URL? (should be do, not does...)

Andy