Pat testing a grinder?

[ericmark]

Sorry I should have explained better, a standard PAT testing machine has two completely different insulation testing methods, the normal one used is 500 volt same as we use on fixed installations, this is used when testing an in service bit of equipment.

The other is much higher voltage I think mine was 1500 volt, and to be frank I think the 1000 volt range of many of the insulation testers is good enough, but it comes out with a wand, so you plug in the device then go around all exposed screws and metal casings with this much higher voltage in the main to ensure you have not used screws that are too long.

At the end of the day, you are signing to say the item is safe, and to do that you should have the skill and tools required.

In the early days the flash test as it was called was done every time, however so many items were destroyed when the tester put the wand on an inappropriate part that this test was discontinued for items already in service, it is only done with items being returned to service after repair, as the repairer should know what is inappropriate to test, like the aerial of a portable radio.

Using the same meters as used to do an EICR is to my mind OK.

There are some odd things about PAT testing, for example you don't NEED to use PAT testing labels, you could for example go to a shop and test all items used in the shop and write out one certificate, what you do NEED to do, is keep records good enough to show the HSE that every item has been tested and inspected, with just 3 items in a shop you could do that, with 50 items then it becomes a problem.

I have questioned many times the record keeping of PAT testing, you are suppose to be able to see a trend, so if the IR testing shows 10MΩ, 10MΩ, 8MΩ, 6MΩ and 2MΩ you can see some thing is failing, but if it shows 2MΩ, 2MΩ, 2MΩ, and 2MΩ likely it is just an EMC filter so no problem. But to do this some one has to look at the records, not simply file them away, and you have to be able to identify the item.

There is a regime of having a role of pre-printed labels with numbers assigned to a tester rather than a machine, so each time it is tested it ends up with a different ID number, now in theory the serial number from manufacturer should cross reference with ID number so it shouldn't matter, but often it is not the case.

However this is down to the manager not the person testing, so it may be no concern of yours. It all depends who is considered the manager.

 

[SimonH2]

There are some odd things about PAT testing, for example you don't NEED to use PAT testing labels, you could for example go to a shop and test all items used in the shop and write out one certificate, what you do NEED to do, is keep records good enough to show the HSE that every item has been tested and inspected, with just 3 items in a shop you could do that, with 50 items then it becomes a problem.

I doubt that doing that would be good enough to CYA of the person in charge of the shop - as they'd have a difficult time showing that they had a system in place to spot equipment newly arrived which needed testing/inspecting. If using labels, if the manager spots something without then it's either a) had it's label removed, or b) wasn't tested.
Other than that, yes there's a lot of misinformation about regarding PATs.

I have questioned many times the record keeping of PAT testing, you are suppose to be able to see a trend, so if the IR testing shows 10MΩ, 10MΩ, 8MΩ, 6MΩ and 2MΩ you can see some thing is failing, but if it shows 2MΩ, 2MΩ, 2MΩ, and 2MΩ likely it is just an EMC filter so no problem. But to do this some one has to look at the records, not simply file them away, and you have to be able to identify the item.

Yes, but for most people, the reason they do PATs is to CYA - they don't really care as long as they have this magic bit of paper to say "someone with the skills & knowledge said it was safe - who am I (as an unskilled office manager) to argue with them". It shouldn't be like that, but I'd say in the majority of cases it is.

PS - a friend was working on a contract (with a sizeable electrical contracting firm)not far from here and at one point had the task of PATs for all the tools they had at site. But one time, the manager refused him the overtime (weekend working so as not to stop everyone else working) so he didn't get to do them. However, as it happened he had a short holiday and when he got back he found new stickers on the tools with HIS name on them - needless to say he had "strong words" with his manager who initially refused to do anything about it.
After a quick call to his wife (professional H&S person for a much bigger outfit) to double check regs, he gave his manager one hour to remove all the faked labels before a phone call to HSE - and yes he could prove that he wasn't around on the dates the labels had on them
He got overtime that weekend - not just a couple of Saturdays as would have been the case, but Sunday as well to get everything re-checked and properly documented
In this case, there's no excuse as the manager knew exactly what he was doing when he committed fraud and blatantly broke H&D rules by putting fake stickers on equipment that had not been tested.

 

[ericmark]

I have had a similar thing when the foreman submitted same results as the last year and changed dates on labels, in this case we were already doing all the hours we could, simply too much work on.

When caught it was decided computer records were no good, and all the records although short form, were printed and the person doing it signed the sheets, which went into storage labelled destroy after and a date.

It was only to satisfy HSE they were printed and signed, we used the computer records. On the odd time we did find errors, but it was rare.

What was more of a problem was to electrical test some thing like a grinder, electrically OK, but guard missing, if you affix a sticker even if the sticker says electric not mechanical people see green sticker and think it's safe. Also many grinders have the ability to latch the on switch, this is a failure, yet something welders want to grind the tungsten tips. If you realise there are 100 Bosch grinders all going to fail, and you can't buy switches which will not latch what do you do.

I went to safety officer showed him the regs and asked him to make the executive decision, he returned them all as not fit for industrial use. I actually expected him to say pass them anyway.

 

[mattylad]

Well all our grinders will fail as the switches latch on them all.

Our safety manager just would not have a clue and seeing that all the grinders would need replacing would likely have a fit.
We buy cheap Makita grinders that fail often (thin supply cords, bad switch design etc.) yet will not get industrial ones in (are there any?) that would put up with copious amounts of stainless steel dust
so grinders will continue to fail, be bought to me & my oppo for repair.
I'll test them as best I can, my oppo will just plug them into an rcd socket.

Who are HSE? would that be the lady we once saw walk around ignoring all the obvious dangers after someone got hit by the forklift? waste of time involving them.