Cable reels pat testing

[pc1966]

Interesting, as that is about 10% difference for what ought to be the same area of copper!

 

[DPG]

I think the text in the 4th edition could be clearer, mainly for when 'PAT testers' rather than electricians are doing the testing. We obviously have more knowledge than people who would often be doing the testing.

Be interesting to see how it is shown in the 5th edition when I get hold of it.

 

[pc1966]

I think the text in the 4th edition could be clearer, mainly for when 'PAT testers' rather than electricians are doing the testing. We obviously have more knowledge than people who would often be doing the testing.

It is an issue for pass/fail equipment intended for relatively unskilled use, and even for the devices that give you an earth bond reading it is not always made clear how to decide if it is a fail (for short cable, as high R must be dodgy connection) or a pass (for extension lead of a given length).

Or indeed what sort of a length actually is reasonable!

Be interesting to see how it is shown in the 5th edition when I get hold of it.

Be prepared for disappointment!

 

[westward10]

Interesting, as that is about 10% difference for what ought to be the same area of copper!

Must admit I expected them to be the same but explains the difference.

 

[brianmoooore]

If you limit the length of extension cables, all you're going to get is multiple extension leads daisy chained together.

 

[DPG]

If you limit the length of extension cables, all you're going to get is multiple extension leads daisy chained together.

Very true. But someone who is PAT/ISITEE testing should be using the code of practice. What someone decides to do with the equipment after that is not their concern.

 

[brianmoooore]

The object of the exercise should be safety. A 100m extension lead is far safer than four 25m ones, which will have three plug and socket joints lying around in random places, getting wet, getting crushed or forming trip hazards.

 

[DPG]

The object of the exercise should be safety. A 100m extension lead is far safer than four 25m ones, which will have three plug and socket joints lying around in random places, getting wet, getting crushed or forming trip hazards.

I agree with that. But if you picture the poor guy you often see with a huge pile of cables and equipment in front of him, all he can do is test things as one-off items. He may well have no visibility of where they will be used.

 

[pc1966]

Very true. But someone who is PAT/ISITEE testing should be using the code of practice.

But is it up to PAT/ISITEE testing to determine if a commercial product, like a 100m lead, is safe or not by design?

Of course they should check it is physically in good condition, and that the cable resistance matches expectations, and the manufacturer's recommended fuse size is fitted.

 

[brianmoooore]

I'm not blaming the guy doing the testing, I'm blaming the ivory tower enclosed muppets that draw up ill thought out legislation.
If a worker needs power 100m away from the nearest power outlet, then he's going to do whatever it takes to get the power there. Those drawing up the legislation should be aware of this and legislate accordingly.

 

[westward10]

I'm not blaming the guy doing the testing, I'm blaming the ivory tower enclosed muppets that draw up ill thought out legislation.
If a worker needs power 100m away from the nearest power outlet, then he's going to do whatever it takes to get the power there. Those drawing up the legislation should be aware of this and legislate accordingly.

Thought Murdoch was back then???