Not sure how I feel about this. - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: mendip_discovery
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 11, 2024, 07:25:05 pm
content: Today a Kewtech EzyPATplus (shudders at the name) came in. While testing it I looked through the bag of accessories with it and I found the item below. I am not sure what the point of it is, but even worse... what is it doing in a PAT testing kit.FYI it is the Earth pin from a 3-pin UK mains plug, once inserted this allows the gates on the live and neutral connections to be accessed.

author: themadhippy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 11, 2024, 07:31:56 pm
content: Quotetesting the earth impedance on extension leads?

author: mendip_discovery
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 11, 2024, 07:40:04 pm
content: Quote from: themadhippy on January 11, 2024, 07:31:56 pmDon't they just use the Red IEC lead (kettle lead) that comes in most PAT testing kits and plug that into the extension lead. Given that the PAT testing training I have seen is actually rather basic and rubbish I don't think it is wise to let people have something that could expose them to harmful voltages.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 11, 2024, 07:46:04 pm
content: With a lot of modern UK sockets, pushing in an earth pin alone doesn't work. There needs to be something pushing into the live and/or neutral holes as well for the shutters to open.

author: themadhippy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 11, 2024, 08:08:18 pm
content: QuoteBloody fancy modern test gear,the kit ive used never had such luxury,just a 13A socket and socket for your earth test clip.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 11, 2024, 11:21:34 pm
content: Not exactly on-topic, but to me (as a non-expert outsider), this whole PAT testing seems largely a licence to make money for nothing. I'll stop short of calling it a scam.Companies and government agencies waste thousands upon thousands of dollars every year for what is basically pointless and could essentially be carried out by a visual inspection. There might be some merit to it in some industrial or high-risk workplaces where cables are frequently being moved or used in harsh environments.Correct me if I'm wrong or being too harsh here. If it were that important, it would be mandated somewhere.

author: themadhippy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 11, 2024, 11:39:44 pm
content: QuoteNo no no,its there to ensure the safety of the worker,and that class 2 monitor that never gets moved really does need testing every year,honestly.Quoteit sorta kinda is in the uk under puwer ( provision and use of work equipment regs)

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2024, 12:24:43 am
content: QuoteWhich would be subject to interpretation and possibly arguments. A meter's readout is much less fallible and/or is easier to pass/fail.Also a bit tricky to look at the wires hidden away in the trunking and roof space.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 12, 2024, 12:39:12 am
content: Quote from: coppice on January 11, 2024, 07:46:04 pmI can say that European Schuko plug combined with scissors for earth connection work perfectly well with UK sockets. Been There. Done That.

author: themadhippy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2024, 12:43:53 am
content: Quotethats nothing to do with pat , that's down to pit.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2024, 12:47:28 am
content: just one letter difference

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 12, 2024, 01:23:35 am
content: Quote from: PlainName on January 12, 2024, 12:24:43 amTo cite a specific example that happened to me was at my old workplace, we underwent this testing. A particular battery charger passed and was issued the requisite sticker. The very next day it almost burn the office down. Now, what went wrong, I have no idea, but having a label that says "passed" gives end-users the assumption that the appliance is perfectly safe to use. Obviously in this case it wasn't or it developed the fault later, either way rendering the information on the PAT label entirely useless and unreliable.In a typical office or commerical environment, its largely meaningless and a waste of money.Also, to my knowledge, PAT has nothing to do with the wiring in the walls/ceiling. It's only an appliance/power lead/extension lead test, right?

author: mendip_discovery
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2024, 06:51:26 am
content: It's not mandatory to do PAT testing but some insurance companies insist on it. The only thing that alludes to the need for regular testing is that the employer is responsible to keep electrical stuff safe.I have done a PAT testing course and let's just say I got more from a promo video from seaward than I did on the "online course". So far the stuff I have failed have been visuals, and I cut the lead in half in front of the customer so it couldn't be used. I kinda see the point in doing it as there are results for things that are good or bad, but anyone charging <50p an item isn't going to spring much time on it.I knew a chap who did it as a job and he said he found the wrong fuse in power leads regularly and even IEC leads with no earth. So there is that to think of.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2024, 01:47:10 pm
content: The biggest use of PAT testing I've seen is in colleges in the UK, vetting appliances brought in by students. Considering some of the funky things brought in by foreign students from places with poor electrical standards, I imagine that does achieve some benefits.

author: Shock
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 14, 2024, 10:32:37 am
content: PAT testing has without a doubt saved lives, prevented fires and damaged equipment, china is doing it's best to counteract that though. That earth pin seems dodgy, it should be a rated plug or adapter with insulated leads. It's only a matter of time before the PAT testing technician finds an incorrectly wired socket.

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 14, 2024, 10:52:33 am
content: Quote from: Halcyon on January 11, 2024, 11:21:34 pmVisual inspection is actually most of the work in meeting the applicable standard, but in the world of useless box checking where the person demanding the testing doesnt actually care about the result or ever has audits of the testing, the low cost operators just do the automated electrical test (often incorrectly) and attach the automated label to the object for the $/unit rate.The vast majority of people doing this as a service are passing+tagging equipment which should be taken out of service from visual inspection. Things like missing/unreadable load plates, frayed or cracked mains leads, or one particularly egregious example: exposed terminal connections for the mains input.Also as they get paid $/unit, of course the test intervals are usually far more often than actually required. Desktop PC's and other stationary equipment should really be 5 yearly/once, and dont need a test on bringing into service (as theoretically a new appliance should have had those tests already done by the manufacturer).

author: themadhippy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 14, 2024, 02:04:29 pm
content: QuoteThen the pat tester deserves everything he gets for being an idiot who shouldn't be any anywere near a pat tester.QuoteDisagree,something could get damaged in transit,also 5 years down the line when you test you have something to compare the results with and maybe spot a problem in the making.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 14, 2024, 02:56:21 pm
content: Quote from: Shock on January 14, 2024, 10:32:37 amThat's definitely true. I've seen some pristine things that returned from PAT testing damaged.

author: Bud
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 14, 2024, 04:04:43 pm
content: You were the millionth customer and they sent you a bar of gold on a string ?

author: Infraviolet
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 17, 2024, 02:38:18 am
content: "PAT testing has without a doubt saved lives,prevented fires" (My emphasis)For the most part, no. PAT testing is largely worthless because the testing involved only detects for conditions likely to cause electrical shocks to humans, conditions which are relatively rare given most mains devices thesedays are a switched mode power supply which then provides an isolated lower voltage to the stuff which actually powers everything the device does.A device can easily have a multitude of internal faults which could lead to high current draw and fire, a PAT test wouldn't spot them. A fuse should stop some of those though, a superiority of the UK plug design over countries which have fuseless plugs. But even then, a device can consume a current within its fuse rating, and concentrate enough heat within it at some particular location to get hot enough to set itself alight.Add Lithium batteries in to the picture, now contained in so many devices, and you're often looking at non-mains devices being more dangerous than mains ones.A PAT test also makes very little sense when a device has internal states which can change and control higher powered parts of it, via relays or such, which mean the exact configuration of the device during a test might be quite different to what a device might have when in use, because perhaps the device switches some functionality on after 5 minutes, or when an internal temperature passes a threshold... The test gives no indication of what the device may do in that state.And such tests on a device, which merely prove shock is unlikely, not that is safe from fire and such, only show it passed when the test was done. Any accident with someting faulty is likely to happen immediately after the fault develops, the chance of a fault developing, then being spotted in a test before the fault has a harmful consequence is negligible.Checking something looks in good condtion, and is from a decent manufacturer makes sense, but the formal tests are frankly focused around the designs of devices from a historic era, and overly focused on shock a relatively minor risk (worse case person holding it dies) as versus fire a much worse risk (the whole building burns down and multiple peope die).

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 17, 2024, 09:42:14 am
content: QuoteThat's a pretty bad worst case.QuoteDifferent thing. You surely aren't suggesting that a pretty bad albeit singular outcome is ignored simply because a different failure mode could be so much worse.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 18, 2024, 12:15:25 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on January 11, 2024, 07:46:04 pmThis depends on the socket manufacturer, the permitted options are that live/neutral pins should be activated by insertion of earth, or insertion of both live and neutral simultaneously (or in rare cases, all three pins, with earth being the first pin). Most sockets I've seen implement only the first option, but industrial/higher quality products might do more. MK are known to use the second option on most of their products. And to be honest, the first option is plenty safe. If you want to bypass a safety function then there are many easier ways to get electrocuted such as a paperclip in an IEC C13 lead.

author: MarkT
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 20, 2024, 12:23:33 pm
content: Quote from: Halcyon on January 11, 2024, 11:21:34 pmWell the first part of PAT testing _is_ a thorough visual inspection, so it enforces regular inspection as well as electrical tests. As we all know if people don't _have_ to do something safety-related they usually stop doing it, a regulatory framework by contrast works a lot better. Death by accidental electrocution is rare these days precisely because of the regulations and this sort of testing. Laissez-faire simply doesn't work for safety.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 23, 2024, 01:44:04 am
content: Quote from: MarkT on January 20, 2024, 12:23:33 pmI agree with the point about safety, however I don't agree with paying someone $5 per device, to spend a few seconds every year performing that visual inspection. The person(s) using said device are more than capable of doing it themselves every time they use/move/connect the device. It doesn't take any special skill or expertise to see that something is damaged and shouldn't be used.I understand that there is more to this kind of testing than just the visual inspection, but has the rate of injury or death significantly decreased since portable appliance testing became a thing? I'm betting on "no".The organisations that seem to be the most vocal about the "importance" of PAT, are the same businesses that are making money from the practice. Again, I'm not professing to be an expert, but as someone who is well educated, I don't really see much of a benefit, particularly for the time and money spent.

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 23, 2024, 01:59:29 am
content: Quote from: Halcyon on January 23, 2024, 01:44:04 amThat may be true of the colleagues you work with, but having attended multiple electrical fires caused by people (ab)using cabling there are plenty of people out there who wont even follow basic safety instructions.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 23, 2024, 05:21:15 am
content: Quote from: Someone on January 23, 2024, 01:59:29 amI'm not doubting your experience, but I've been volunteering in the fire brigade for about 20 years now and even during my time as a General Duties police officer, I don't think I ever once attended a structure fire caused by a faulty appliance cable. Also, the vast majority of "electrical fires" occur at home (people leaving heaters too close to combustable materials, not cleaning the lint trap in their dryer etc...), which wouldn't be applicable to portable appliance testing anyway, since 99.99% of people don't have their appliances tagged and tested at home, it's almost exclusively a process for commercial and industrial premises.The only time I came close to a house fire was when I visited a friend's house and could smell smoke. Turned out someone had used the improper fuse wire in a very old fuse box and was overloading the power outlet with a double-adapter.If we're talking about commercial premises, I cited an example earlier where an office nearly burnt down due to a faulty appliance that was not detected/identified during a tag and test just a day before.Have fires occured previously because of a faulty appliance lead? Sure, but I dare say in very small numbers. Is it worth the effort of PAT? Probably not, especially considering that the test result is only really valid at that specific moment in time. A "pass" means almost nothing hours, days, weeks later. At that stage, we're back to using our eyes and judgement.

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 23, 2024, 06:00:08 am
content: Quote from: Halcyon on January 23, 2024, 05:21:15 amI believe you are missing the point, but first some additional information:I'm talking about electrical fires in commercial/industrial (workplace) settingsNone of the fires spread due to the flame retardant materialsAll of the fires posed a threat to the safety of the end userAround half would have been prevented by in service testing being conducted on scheduleAll were caused by the end users either not checking for the condition of the cabling, or ignoring the operating instructionsIt's that last point which is the problem. General population stopped their electrical safety knowledge at a) dont put a knife in a toaster and b) water and electrical items should never mix (cue the horror on those peoples faces when I wash or clean electrical appliances). The nuances of electrical safety are beyond the general population, even beyond most electronic hobbyists. Generally those two groups arrive at the same point through a different cause, but still emblematic of the issue that people simply wont pick this stuff up even when it's important to their daily activities.You suggested user inspection as a solution, I'm saying thats basically insane. Even the "competent" people doing test and tag are failing the basics (as I've audited that) so how would the general public ever improve over that supposedly well trained group?

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 23, 2024, 06:04:19 am
content: Quote from: Someone on January 23, 2024, 06:00:08 amThat's all well and good, but how many of those fires were actually caused by a faulty appliance lead? Less than 1%? And out of those, how many were tagged?You're absolutely right, anyone can plug a lead in, press a button and print a label. Do they actually understand what's going on or the limitations of this kind of testing? The whole notion of it is a joke (except in some limited circumstances). Which brings me back to my original point, it's less about "safety" and more about making a metric shit-ton of money. It's also a false sense of security since an end-user can pick up a cable/device with a label and assume that it's totally and completely safe (even though it may not be).

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 23, 2024, 06:20:54 am
content: Quote from: Halcyon on January 23, 2024, 06:04:19 amLike I said, roughly half of the electrical fires I have attended to were from damaged flexible (user installed) leads. I believe all of those cases would have been picked up in routine AS 3760 style testing before they failed catastrophically.Thats before getting to all the other failing appliances which posed electrocution risks (though highly minimised due to the installation RCDs). Thats a valid area for discussion about the value of testing, validation of buildings RCDs could bemorevaluable than trying to play whack-a-mole with every individual appliance.Quote from: Halcyon on January 23, 2024, 06:04:19 amYes, this is very true. But not doing in service testing and trying to educate ALL users to do their own risk assessments is going to have worse outcomes than the current situation.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 23, 2024, 06:28:14 am
content: I definitely acknowledge your commentsSomeone. It definitely does no harm undergoing this sort of testing, however I'm still not convinced. I'm not about to rush out and implement tag and testing at my workplace and I'm happy to accept that risk. Then again, we are a very technical organisation so the staff are pretty switched on when it comes to this kind of thing.I'm probably better off spending the money on better quality components and products.

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 23, 2024, 07:35:33 am
content: The good thing is in service testing is not mandated. So you could introduce some form of internal training/assessment and meet OHS obligations. For your organisation that could well exceed the average safety provided by the typical (almost blind) PAT testing. But that cannot be generalised to other organisations.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 23, 2024, 11:44:33 am
content: QuoteJust noting that this is the idealised theory, but in practice it tends to be someone elses problem. Particularly where the workforce is non-technical and there only to make a wage. I've seen automatic roller doors where the support cable has popped off its bobbin and hanging in a tangle, but the door works because the other side is still OK. No-one is going to even raise a question about it until it actually stops. And that's despite the usual operator warning signs plastered all over the place.Fires aren't the only potential issue with poorly maintained stuff.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 23, 2024, 02:13:11 pm
content: Quote from: Halcyon on January 23, 2024, 01:44:04 amI have found that most people who are afraid of electricity have very good reason to be. As a student I did some repair of small appliances, to get a little money. Often from people who said electricity scared them, and they wouldn't do anything to the appliances themselves. This notion of not doing anything didn't extend to treating the cord with some respect, and not tying it in knots every time the appliance was put away. Cord abuse seems to be inversely related to how fearful people are of electricity. A rapidly degrading cord doesn't spur them into action until the appliance actually stops working.The thing with the $5 PAT inspection is its not usually someone getting their own devices inspected, which would be a waste for anyone with a functioning brain. Its usually things like colleges not allowing student's appliances into a hall of residence until they have been independently inspected. Considering some of the things students try to use, this is probably a wise requirement.