Table Lamp PAT Test advice.

[securespark]

...and as no one has mentioned it so far:
View attachment 263112

The keyword there RG, is "should".

 

[securespark]

I appreciate that, but are there not instructions for determining whether something is Class II regardless of a sticker?

That is: double insulation, cable restraint, terminals enclosed in an insulated enclosure etc.


I realise no one would want to bother but it would be possible to make a Class I item into Class II by altering the connection method and conversely, for the same reason, an originally Class II item might subsequently become Class I - even if it had an indelible Class II marking.

What I am getting at is that it is not the sticker, or indelible marking, which magically makes an item Class II.

But you can't always inspect these areas without dismantling of the appliance.

 

[ericmark]

What about when you plug that item into a socket that isn't? After all they are portable appliances!

There has to be an equipment register, and the register should show where it is used, so for example a radio with a fig of 8 two pin power lead set I would pass for use in the office, but fail for use on the factory floor due to the amount of water used and the lead could fall in the water. Also the length of time before next test is due depended on the environment so workshop equipment every 3 months, but an office PC could be 4 years.

The equipment register was a real problem, as so often items would be scrapped without informing engineering, so we would have to complete a list of items not found, and send the list to the department listed on the equipment register and inform them the item must not be used until it has been re-tested.

The inspection and testing of in-service electrical equipment was normally done where we had some free time, however it was easy enough to sub-contract the work when busy, I remember one year this was done and the company doing it changes all the plant numbers on everything they tested, with no record of what original number corresponded to the new number. I don't think they were paid, as it cost more time to correct the equipment register than it would have taken to do the testing.

However since all items did have a plant number, the loss of a class II sticker hardly mattered, as when it was first entered onto the equipment register it would have all the details entered.

@RandomGrinch point about testing new equipment we found a problem as if we found there was a fault a year latter, then it was too late to return under guarantee. So although technically new equipment does not require testing, the company policy was to test all new equipment and at same time add it to the equipment register, and attach a sticker saying when next test was due.

I know there is no requirement to put on stickers, one could for example do all items in a shop and issue one certificate to cover all in the shop at that date. However it becomes an administration nightmare to keep track. And all it needs is for some one to bring in some thing from home, and you can have some thing faulty with no way to show it should not have been on the premises.

Even items not owned by the company would be on the equipment register, with a note inspection and testing done by name of company, this was common with vending machines. Also some items like central heating boilers were also under a maintenance contract. I did some times wonder it the guy who looked after the equipment actually realised he was responsible for all inspection and testing, not just the gas safe bit?

 

[ericmark]

But you can't always inspect these areas without dismantling of the appliance.

I seem to remember fans where the only exposed metal part was the shaft to the fan, and 25 amp through bearings is not a good thing, so we tested as an IT item even when not really one. Long screwdriver though the cover to reach the shaft.

The fridge and fridge/freezer plus washing machine were also a problem as near impossible to test some thing like the de-frost element without some dismantling, so we crossed our fingers and hoped the neutral not switched, so insulation test neutral to earth would high light faults.

But most items like this were on a maintenance contract so not our problem.

I know one item took three men most of the weekend to inspect and test, the batching plant was clearly portable you could see the wagon wheels used as it went from site to site, seem to remember needed 22 articulated units to move it, wonder how the guys charging so much per item got on with that?

 

[securespark]

I would still fail it because no matter what it says in a ledger, the appliance could be used elsewhere.

 

[securespark]

I know one item took three men most of the weekend to inspect and test, the batching plant was clearly portable you could see the wagon wheels used as it went from site to site, seem to remember needed 22 articulated units to move it, wonder how the guys charging so much per item got on with that?

Did it have a 13A plug on it?

 

[RandomGrinch]

I seem to remember fans where the only exposed metal part was the shaft to the fan, and 25 amp through bearings is not a good thing, so we tested as an IT item even when not really one. Long screwdriver though the cover to reach the shaft.

Yes, exactly!
..and portable AC units, where the only earth connection, requires filter removal and a screw driver poked through to the condenser coils!

...and yes, we also register and test new appliances to get them labeled up and on our inventory.

 

[RandomGrinch]

The keyword there RG, is "should".

I think part of the issue, is there is no suggestion that the OP's appliance has been provided in an unsafe condition;
however it is definitely inadequately labeled.
This is something that I come across regularly when people take 'domestic' appliances into a work setting - don't get me started on step ladders!

Under HSE PAT guidance, there is no 'requirement' for BS standards etc. to be taken into account (although in practice, you will!).

The requirement is to provide a 'safe' appliance, and that comes down to your RA's, the tests you have at your disposal and the experience of the tester.

If the appliance can't be assessed as safe (to the best of your ability), through the above means, then it should be failed.

 

[ericmark]

Did it have a 13A plug on it?

And what has that got to do with it? It did have 13A sockets. OK we say PAT, but the real name is "Inspection and testing of in-service electrical equipment" to be portable it needs to either have wheels or be under a weight limit, the batching plant had wheels. No if's or but's it was portable.

 

[securespark]

And what has that got to do with it?

The last dedicated PA test unit I was issued with had a 1363 socket fitted to it and came with an adaptor kit for 4343 plugs.

 

[winston1]

@RandomGrinch point about testing new equipment we found a problem as if we found there was a fault a year latter, then it was too late to return under guarantee.

But not too late to reject it under the Consumer Rights Act.

 

[mattylad]

Return them to the store for a full refund as not fit for purpose if they fail PAT.
ISTR the store has to prove that they are not that you have to prove that they are not (the store workers will not be qualified to say yes/no).

 

[JohnW2]

I have failed items with metal parts and no Class II sticker as I can't be sure they are safe in an environment with no RCD protection, but would pass the same item where all circuits are RCD protected, same goes for a wet environment.

If we are talking about "portable" appliances, how can one know for sure what environment they will be used in?

Kind Regards, John

 

[RandomGrinch]

If we are talking about "portable" appliances, how can one know for sure what environment they will be used in?

Kind Regards, John

We can't!
And I would disagree with ericmark in that quote!
In my workplace, the test performed on an appliance wouldn't change (except rarely to perform additional checks).
However, if for example a desk lamp had moved from an office into an engineering workshop, it's test frequency would definitely be changed!

 

[JohnW2]

I appreciate that, but are there not instructions for determining whether something is Class II regardless of a sticker? ... What I am getting at is that it is not the sticker, or indelible marking, which magically makes an item Class II.

I'm inclined to disagree, and suggest that it probably is the marking that matters.

It would seem that the default is that everything has to be regarded as Class I, with the dispensation is that it may be regarded and treated as Type II IF it bears the appropriate marking (which obviously implies that it qualifies for that marking).

Is it not similar to the situation with "MF" joints/JBs? One could make a JB identical to (or 'at least as good as') an MF-marked JB but, at least as far as BS7671 is concerned, would not be allowed to use it in a non-accessible situation unless it had "MF" marking.

It therefore seems that, in both cases, the issue is not about whether or not an item would qualify (electrically) for the appropriate ("Class II" or "MF") marking but, rather, whether or not it is so marked (in which case, I'm rather surprised that 'stick on labels' are regarded as acceptable). In other words, in the absence of such a marking, one has to regard the item as ('the default') Class I or non-MF.

Kind Regards, John