help , ive pat tested a drill that as passed but doesnt work how please

[Guitarist]

Dont get my posts wrong as i said i do just plug and function test myself then PAT test it but only if i know its use and history, but im posting from an advice point of view and even though it may sound overboard you have to agree it makes sense from a safety point of view.

Fair enough mate. You have to put safety first when giving advice.

 

[Megahertz]

Hi - I realise this post is a week old, but thought it might be worth contributing.

PAT Testing is a check to see if the appliance is SAFE. It is not necessarily concerned with whether the appliance works as it should. For example, a video recorder might not record properly because of a fault or a computer might not connect to the internet because the network settings are all messed up. In both of these example the appliances are not 'working' properly although they will probably still be safe.

In the case of a power tool or piece of machinery, it is possible that worn brushes could cause sparks, or dodgy bearings could cause a dangerous rattle. Neither of these two faults would be picked up by the earth bond and insulation tests, so a function test is advisable. Of course, as stated above, the function test should be carried out AFTER the inspection, earth and insulation tests.

Even something simple like a blown fuse in the plug would have the same effect as forgetting to switch the appliance 'on' for the insulation test, so a satisfactory function check has the effect of 'validating' the rest of the test process.

In this particular case I think the OP would have been wise to check the appliance actually worked as expected before passing it.

Hope this helps.

 

[ohreally]

as stated above, the function test should be carried out AFTER the inspection, earth and insulation tests

Each to their own.

I'll conduct a function test before any other (in addition to a second lastly), to ascertain whether an appliance is operational before connecting to a test instrument. This is simply to eliminate any wayward accusations that i have damaged a clients equipment. If anything is suspect I will discuss with client at the time. I will always treat appliances appropriately and would never knowingly cause damage but there are some folks who are quick to pass blame for inoperable appliances. I'm not going to put myself in the firing line for the sake of a few moments check/ insp.

 

[Adg]

I had similar problem with some Hilti breakers I was testing, I had my suspicions that it was something to do with the soft starts as the breakers were reasonably new. I rang the megger tech services for advice and they confirmed the soft starts can cause the tools not to run whilst under test. I use a megger 420.

 

[Risteard]

I'll conduct a function test before any other (in addition to a second lastly), to ascertain whether an appliance is operational before connecting to a test instrument.

I know this thread which has been resurrected is ancient, however I would suggest that it is very poor practice indeed to perform a functional test on an appliance before you have ascertained that it is safe to energise!

 

[Pete999]

What is your background, this would have been explained as part of your PAT test course, and your drill cant have passed if it isnt functional, it shouldn't have been issued a passed if it dosn't work, the test results may be misleading if part of the drill is faulty, why did you pass it????

Agree how can you PASS something if it doesn't pass the functional tests, double sigh

 

[K-PAT]

I'm not quite sure why this thread was reopened after such a long time, but I have to agree with those who say don't do the function test until you have ascertained that the appliance is safe to energise.That is exactly why my Metrel BetaPat machine won't let me do a function test unless the EB and IR tests have been carried out and passed.If a client wants to claim that my testing has damaged his appliance in any way, I would invite him to prove it with some sort of testimony from another tester or electrician, who I'm sure would give him suitable advice....Regards to all on the forum!!!

 

[amckay]

Must disagree here, function test can only be done after passing the all other tests, consider the earth broken on a drill with a fault and you do the function test first, it could kill where as the broken earth would show and fail on the tester thus stopping you doing a dangerous function test.

Sorry to say but very poor advice!

Disagree here. I have tested thousands of items over the years and the first thing I do is check it works, in exactly the same way that it was being used before it was handed over. I don't consider this a "function test", as this is done after all other testing. It is merely a quick check that the item is in working order before any other tests are carried out. Splitting hairs? Maybe. Saves a lot of hassle tho.

Darkwood is right.

Check appliance, check flex, check plug, remove plug inspect internal, earth bond test, ir test, earth leakage test, functional test. As set out in 4th edition cop. Reason why functional test is done last is because you are there to check the electrical safety of equipment and you have no idea if the appliance has a fault which makes the equipment dangerous to use potentially getting a shock. Test first check last.
But each to their own...

 

[Adam W]

Interesting argument. Personally I'd make a decision as to what to do on a case by case basis - if you're testing in an office and you have to get someone to power down their workstation before you test it, you can be pretty sure it 'worked' before you test it. If you find an appliance in a box in the corner of a dusty old storeroom there might be a reason it's there, ie it doesn't work. Again it depends on who you're testing for - a facilities manager might be less likely to argue about an extension lead failing than a licensee when their ice maker stops working, although you'd probably see that working before you took it out of service to test it. I suppose if it were, say, a bottle fridge in a function room that was switched off you could counter-argue that it wasn't working when you tested it and could have failed in the time between the test and when it was last used, hence the reason for testing every so often.

Technically the retest should be conducted before the previous test expired, so will be covered by the previous test, and obviously you would carry out an 'all senses except taste' inspection before switching it on; if a skilled/instructed person risks a shock from functional testing an appliance then what chance does the end user have?