quilp Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 It always makes me laugh out loud when we start a topic about whatever and diversify onto summat-else! H&S to EffZee! Little old lady, possibly the victim of injustice to Barrie Stevens! Love it.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilp Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 Well I'm not changing my mind on PAT testing, but while your on the subject of part P... Earth Bonding now some of that is bolloks. My whole house is plumbed in copper, yet I still need to bond the bathroom taps and radiators!! What the hell is that going to achieve? Appart from having ugly great wires all over the place? Aye Jim, some of the regs are a tad questionable, but it's 'safety first'. Every time a new edition comes out there's alway's a bit of head-scratching goes on. Procedures considered safe in earlier editions suddenly aren't, and vice-versa. The 'Part-P' though. I agree with when all things considered. Essentially, a Part-P registered spark is usually completely up to date with industry standards. Bit expensive for the one-man bands and smaller companies though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim Posted May 12, 2012 Author Share Posted May 12, 2012 Well I'm not changing my mind on PAT testing, but while your on the subject of part P... Earth Bonding now some of that is bolloks. My whole house is plumbed in copper, yet I still need to bond the bathroom taps and radiators!! What the hell is that going to achieve? Appart from having ugly great wires all over the place? I have always wondered about earth bonding to the taps and radiators, what if someone doing a bit of home improvement in the future, cuts into the plumbing and uses plastic push fittings and plastic pipes? As those type of plumbing fittings are DIY friendly they are more likely to be used by a householder. Does doing this mess up the earth bonding? I know there are regs about not doing work on the plumbing system in your own house on the island, there are even notices in B & Q about it or there were anyway. What do the forums sparkys think? I can't be doing with what if, what same diy guy decides the wire is ugly and takes them off....? Cam an electrician tell me It's acceptable to put the earth Bonding on the pipes in the ceiling void above the bathroom? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilp Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 Well I'm not changing my mind on PAT testing, but while your on the subject of part P... Earth Bonding now some of that is bolloks. My whole house is plumbed in copper, yet I still need to bond the bathroom taps and radiators!! What the hell is that going to achieve? Appart from having ugly great wires all over the place? I have always wondered about earth bonding to the taps and radiators, what if someone doing a bit of home improvement in the future, cuts into the plumbing and uses plastic push fittings and plastic pipes? As those type of plumbing fittings are DIY friendly they are more likely to be used by a householder. Does doing this mess up the earth bonding? I know there are regs about not doing work on the plumbing system in your own house on the island, there are even notices in B & Q about it or there were anyway. What do the forums sparkys think? I can't be doing with what if, what same diy guy decides the wire is ugly and takes them off....? Cam an electrician tell me It's acceptable to put the earth Bonding on the pipes in the ceiling void above the bathroom? Oooo-h, that'll cost yer! Might be next week or the week after.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballaughbiker Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 Jim - buy yourself the IEE on site guide of the 17th edition (BS7671:2008). You might be in for a surprise regarding equipotential bonding assuming your bathroom circuits are protected by a 30mA RCD....It all changed in July 2008 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim Posted May 12, 2012 Author Share Posted May 12, 2012 cheers, I will do that, I do have one but it's an old copy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScotsAlan Posted May 13, 2012 Share Posted May 13, 2012 We may disagree over the PAT testing Jim. But my point is that they say they will scrap legislation, but don't tell us what it is they are scrapping. They make out they are doing good, but they only tell us half a story. So we have to trust them without being able to openly debate the facts. The PAT testing was from the BBC website. And I probably wrongly assumed the IOM intends to follow the UK. But if they are blindly following the UK Tory led government, I find it worrying. The Tories are not exactly famous for putting the welfare of the ordinary worker first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTF Posted May 13, 2012 Share Posted May 13, 2012 Good idea Roger but it will never happen (more despair!) One of the good things about PAT testing apart from examining readings on a meter and keeping a record of it, is that a third party (ie not connected with a user or owner) get to assess an appliance. I saw one the other day that was a 1950s electric fire still in daily use. It was in good general working order (having been made from quality materials) but still had rubber insulated flex that had endured maybe 60+ years use. Close general examination revealed exposed conductors and loose terminals inside the plug with associated heat damage from arcing. All this was determined with the PAT tester still in its box. Quite amazingly, the user who was an intelligent 50 something, could really understand 'all the fuss' and objected strongly to it being taken out of service. Nobody needs training to suss problems like this out as its common sense but that can be sometimes in very short supply with some people you would think should know better. Without PAT testing, he'd still be using it! Another one of my pet hates is seeing low power appliances (wired with say 0.5 / 0.75 flex) having 13A fuses in the plug. OK, the likelihood of this being very dangerous is limited but this takes seconds to check and would likely never be checked for the lifetime of the appliance unless PAT testing was required. Quilp - how many outside appliances have you seen with insulating tape covering various joins in a 25m run of flex that has been damaged over the years? Now even with 30mA RCD protection that can definitely has the potential (geddit?) to fatal given certain conditions. one of the bollox things about P testing ( or taking ) , ( not PAT testing ) is the need to remove face plates and disturb/bend single core copper wires that are probably just long enough increasing the likelihood of fracturing the conductor which would require a larger job to fix. No doubt this is why multistrand T&E is now available cos someone realised the problem? But that is no use for 99% of the houses out there. Part P was a work creation scheme for electricians! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blade Runner Posted May 13, 2012 Share Posted May 13, 2012 We may disagree over the PAT testing Jim. But my point is that they say they will scrap legislation, but don't tell us what it is they are scrapping. They make out they are doing good, but they only tell us half a story. So we have to trust them without being able to openly debate the facts. The PAT testing was from the BBC website. And I probably wrongly assumed the IOM intends to follow the UK. But if they are blindly following the UK Tory led government, I find it worrying. The Tories are not exactly famous for putting the welfare of the ordinary worker first. Very true Alan, though as I said on page 1 it will be Manx company's insurers that will end up saying what they can and cant do re the general health and safety paperwork and procedures. I had an insurance audit about 3 years ago, the guy from the company turned up and spent 6, yes 6 hours going through all our training records and paperwork like MS and RAs. We passed OK but we did make a few changes with his advice, but from what he said they were not just looking at upping premiums for company's with little regard for safety, they do not want the business at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilp Posted May 13, 2012 Share Posted May 13, 2012 Good idea Roger but it will never happen (more despair!) One of the good things about PAT testing apart from examining readings on a meter and keeping a record of it, is that a third party (ie not connected with a user or owner) get to assess an appliance. I saw one the other day that was a 1950s electric fire still in daily use. It was in good general working order (having been made from quality materials) but still had rubber insulated flex that had endured maybe 60+ years use. Close general examination revealed exposed conductors and loose terminals inside the plug with associated heat damage from arcing. All this was determined with the PAT tester still in its box. Quite amazingly, the user who was an intelligent 50 something, could really understand 'all the fuss' and objected strongly to it being taken out of service. Nobody needs training to suss problems like this out as its common sense but that can be sometimes in very short supply with some people you would think should know better. Without PAT testing, he'd still be using it! Another one of my pet hates is seeing low power appliances (wired with say 0.5 / 0.75 flex) having 13A fuses in the plug. OK, the likelihood of this being very dangerous is limited but this takes seconds to check and would likely never be checked for the lifetime of the appliance unless PAT testing was required. Quilp - how many outside appliances have you seen with insulating tape covering various joins in a 25m run of flex that has been damaged over the years? Now even with 30mA RCD protection that can definitely has the potential (geddit?) to fatal given certain conditions. one of the bollox things about P testing ( or taking ) , ( not PAT testing ) is the need to remove face plates and disturb/bend single core copper wires that are probably just long enough increasing the likelihood of fracturing the conductor which would require a larger job to fix. No doubt this is why multistrand T&E is now available cos someone realised the problem? But that is no use for 99% of the houses out there. Part P was a work creation scheme for electricians! PORTABLE APPLIANCE TESTING.... Is just that- a PORTABLE appliance that moves or can be moved, and is generally powered via a mains outlet via a plug top. I think you're confusing PAT with general testing and inspection. PAT, categorically does NOT include the removal of any outlet plate whether it be a spur unit or socket. An appliance is connected to a test machine and its electrical values, insulation, resistance etc are tested by the machine. The general integrity/condition of the appliance, its mains supply lead and plug-top are inspected for wear and tear, fuse-rating and then either passed or failed. As for Part-P. This was created for, not by electricians to determine they were up to speed with any new amendments to the general standards required of them, as per the 17th edition regs. Part P cost in the region of £800 per spark, if my memory serves me correctly. Some companies picked-up this tab for their employees but for the 'one-man bands', they had to pay not only this expense but also had to take time off work to sit the the exam. These are the facts, WTF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballaughbiker Posted May 13, 2012 Share Posted May 13, 2012 WTF the phrase "work creation scheme" is usually associated with work that really isn't necessary. Is that what you think about Part P checks and cerification? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTF Posted May 13, 2012 Share Posted May 13, 2012 Good idea Roger but it will never happen (more despair!) One of the good things about PAT testing apart from examining readings on a meter and keeping a record of it, is that a third party (ie not connected with a user or owner) get to assess an appliance. I saw one the other day that was a 1950s electric fire still in daily use. It was in good general working order (having been made from quality materials) but still had rubber insulated flex that had endured maybe 60+ years use. Close general examination revealed exposed conductors and loose terminals inside the plug with associated heat damage from arcing. All this was determined with the PAT tester still in its box. Quite amazingly, the user who was an intelligent 50 something, could really understand 'all the fuss' and objected strongly to it being taken out of service. Nobody needs training to suss problems like this out as its common sense but that can be sometimes in very short supply with some people you would think should know better. Without PAT testing, he'd still be using it! Another one of my pet hates is seeing low power appliances (wired with say 0.5 / 0.75 flex) having 13A fuses in the plug. OK, the likelihood of this being very dangerous is limited but this takes seconds to check and would likely never be checked for the lifetime of the appliance unless PAT testing was required. Quilp - how many outside appliances have you seen with insulating tape covering various joins in a 25m run of flex that has been damaged over the years? Now even with 30mA RCD protection that can definitely has the potential (geddit?) to fatal given certain conditions. one of the bollox things about P testing ( or taking ) , ( not PAT testing ) is the need to remove face plates and disturb/bend single core copper wires that are probably just long enough increasing the likelihood of fracturing the conductor which would require a larger job to fix. No doubt this is why multistrand T&E is now available cos someone realised the problem? But that is no use for 99% of the houses out there. Part P was a work creation scheme for electricians! PORTABLE APPLIANCE TESTING.... Is just that- a PORTABLE appliance that moves or can be moved, and is generally powered via a mains outlet via a plug top. I think you're confusing PAT with general testing and inspection. PAT, categorically does NOT include the removal of any outlet plate whether it be a spur unit or socket. An appliance is connected to a test machine and its electrical values, insulation, resistance etc are tested by the machine. The general integrity/condition of the appliance, its mains supply lead and plug-top are inspected for wear and tear, fuse-rating and then either passed or failed. As for Part-P. This was created for, not by electricians to determine they were up to speed with any new amendments to the general standards required of them, as per the 17th edition regs. Part P cost in the region of £800 per spark, if my memory serves me correctly. Some companies picked-up this tab for their employees but for the 'one-man bands', they had to pay not only this expense but also had to take time off work to sit the the exam. These are the facts, WTF. I did put not PAT testing in brackets but you ignored that or didn't let it register. But the P test crap is relatively new, why after decades of electricity use do we now need an mot for our wires? It is half a job, not a legal requirement for older existing stuff that may have problems, but needed on brand new stuff that should be correct and faultless anyway! Add to that a fail for no red tape on the black switch wire in light switches, what else can the wire be? And that now old black and red wire can't be used if you have rolls in stock. I'm sticking with bollox for it, who says it needs testing? Hasn't needed tests for years but now to rip off sparks for 800 quid we hae to ave legislation to back the extra cost up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blade Runner Posted May 13, 2012 Share Posted May 13, 2012 Wow, this thread has turned into an electricians bitch fest. I am quite shocked by the negative posts as well as some of the rather less frequent positive ones, your amplitude of knowledge is not under question. Maybe some others work is shocking but it takes all sorts to make the earth go round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballaughbiker Posted May 13, 2012 Share Posted May 13, 2012 Thank you for all that blade. I thought I was pushing it to say a fault had the potential to do something... Just to point out that the change from the old colours is nothing to do with part P. It was EU harmonisation stuff that only the UK/EI appeared to follow. France certainly didn't and has retained its non harmonised colours (although their N and E colours just happened to be already "harmonised" ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilp Posted May 13, 2012 Share Posted May 13, 2012 This whole thread has tripped me out. My capacity is overloaded and resistance is futile. Relay my message. Returning to earth before the sparks fly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.