PAT Testing

[TimMc]

For the Yankee nay-sayers - PAT testing is to ensure that portable tools, appliances, extension cords and various in-the-circuit accessories continue to work as designed and intended, and to remove non-compliant items from service.

Construction sites are big offenders when it comes to extension cords, no ground (earthing) continuity, damaged tool insulation, etc and I fully agree that residential work is probably where one finds the greatest number of failures because absent a serious injury or death, there is little regulatory oversight and typically no dedicated safety officer. I've been in plenty of small theaters or schools where damaged cables and connectors were in constant use and only a failure to conduct electricity would remove them from service.

Americans have this love/hate relationship with safety compliance; we don't want to get hurt or to hurt others but we're damned opposed to anyone telling us what to do or how to conduct our personal and business affairs. That's why we need unions and regulatory enforcement. If people acted in the interests of safety instead of speed or money perhaps intrusive regulation would not be necessary... but as history has show, we have to be dragged, kicking and screaming, into a mindset that injuring or killing workers is a Very Bad Thing.

 

[BillConnerFASTC]

TimMC - you make good and fair points. I note in particular

interests of safety instead of speed or money

. It seems not contrary with a US culture which clearly seems to favor and value capitalism and individual freedom over socialism and government control.

 

[Lyle Williams]

I think electrical is much lower in the general population.

Yes, but on stage isn't quite "general population" either.

Stories about singers and guitarists getting electrocuted are heard each year from around the world. Often these events are traced to DIY electrical modifications.

There needs to be a process to find and remove such items from service.

 

[Crisp image]

Getting someone in to PAT test is often a horrible solution, due to the interruption of your workflow.

It's much better to just be able to test new gear as it is unboxed, and test old gear as it passes in front of you.

.

I don't think anyone looks at my test tags, other than me.

The fine I mentioned above is in construction where there is much greater vigilance due to the risks on those sites.

I don't keep count, but I estimate that I have 350 powered items or power cables. As I recall I have found ~15 items (mostly cables with transposed Active/Neutral) that needed to be pulled from service. IEC leads are the worst offenders, as I sometimes get other people's leads back instead of my own.

For us yes I can see the benefit of being a qualified tester and testing as we go because it becomes so quick. I don't think I have had one of my devices checked when taking it to a venue for use by the house they just take it and plug it in.

Americans have this love/hate relationship with safety compliance; we don't want to get hurt or to hurt others but we're damned opposed to anyone telling us what to do or how to conduct our personal and business affairs. That's why we need unions and regulatory enforcement. If people acted in the interests of safety instead of speed or money perhaps intrusive regulation would not be necessary... but as history has show, we have to be dragged, kicking and screaming, into a mindset that injuring or killing workers is a Very Bad Thing.

There is a fine balance between being safety conscious and being stupid about it. Business are there to make money and there no doubt about that. The term used here is "As far as reasonably practicable" when applying to H&S. EG if it was going to cost a million dollars to eliminate an issue that only one person is exposed to once a year then it is not reasonably practicable to do that. However there may be a more suitable cost effective solution such as hiring in a boom lift or a pre-inspection of the access point to the area to ensure that it is still safe to get to and then PPE may be an safe solution.

I think here in Australia we do the safety thing quite well but there is always an opportunity to get better. The regulators (worksafe) are very active in my industry (Mining and energy sector) with frequent (some would say the should have their own office on site) visits. While they can be a PITA generally they uphold the health and safety act and ensure that we comply with it. The only problem I have is that inspectors may have no experience in the area they are assessing and do not understand the why we do it this way processes that are unique to the site.

So enough about this topic from me. I believe in a safe workplace and procedures that are in place to help make it safe so I can make it home to my family at the end of my day.
I sincerely hope that all control boothers feel the same way.

Regrds
Geoff

 

[TimMc]

TimMC - you make good and fair points. I note in particular
. It seems not contrary with a US culture which clearly seems to favor and value capitalism and individual freedom over socialism and government control.

Government regulation of health products, food safety (did you read Sinclair Lewis's The Jungle?) and workplace safety are necessary because those expenses are not compatible with unfettered "capitalism at any cost."

I'd remind you on the Triangle Shirtwaist fire where employees were locked in the building. The 107th anniversary of that fire is next month. 146 garment workers died horrible deaths because of the "free market."

I can cite lots of dead folks (in debate we called it "blood on the flowsheet) if we are going to continue in this vein..

 

[JonCarter]

Triangle was a disaster, granted. But I don't think the free market was the cause. There are a lot of "free-market capitalists" who didn't (and don't) lock their doors. No matter what laws or regulations a government passes there are a**es who will violate them and ignore common sense.

 

[FMEng]

History is filled with preventable deaths from employers cutting corners in the name of profits. It happens in all occupations, from construction, to mining, to entertainment. Greed is the quite possibly the most powerful force on earth.

It's been proven time and again that government regulation is the only way to counteract the negative consequences resulting from greed. Industrial pollution is another example.

 

[David Ashton]

The main problem with tagging is that it is the most boring job on earth and testers lose concentration, been there done that. I have come across some classics like the test tag in between the plug and the cord grip and a test tag on an asbestos cable, the favourite ripoff is patch panels with 100's plugs all tagged, but of course they are not tested with cables run to each socket, unless we test them, which is a very slow and tedious and expensive job. Overall it's a pain and not very useful but it's a legal requirement so you can't take the risk that you get caught out.

 

[Lyle Williams]

A tester costs about 100x the cost of having someone test a single item. If you are doing the testing in-house, you have control over not only the workflow, but the quality.

Additionally, you can develop your own risk-management plan and alter the test intervals found in AS3760 to suit the risks and controls found in your environment. Doesn't make sense to test particular cables every twelve months? Well, don't then. Pick a more sensible interval and document your reasoning in the risk management plan.

A risk management plan isn't just for relaxing a standard. It is for tayloring it to your own real world. For example, AS3760 allows for new items to not be tested and then be marked "New To Service" for the first test period (which might be a year, or five years). Having found a number of faulty-from-the-factory items, I no longer will use the "New To Service" provisions.