Rank: Guest
|
Posted By GeoffB4
A manufacturer supplies and installs commercial equipment on customer sites. On occasion the equipment trips out or needs some form of first line repair or adjustment.
Some customers will immediately call out the manufacturer engineers to reset the equipment, some customers have their own engineers and do it themselves, and some customers will ask for advice over the phone on what to do.
It is the last type of customer causing this query and to limit the breadth of the discussion I'd like to discuss just one aspect.
Imagine a circuit breaker trips out. The manufacturer is asked for advice by the customer over the phone on what can be done locally to fix the problem. The manufacturers engineers currently advise how to open the equipment cabinet, to remove a plate (using a screwdriver) and to reset the MCB. There are no immediate exposed mains within the cabinet.
Is this a reasonable action by the manufacturer to help customers - noting that they have no idea of the competence of the person they are advising.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ron Hunter
If resetting of the MCB is a safe operation (i.e cannot give rise to danger) which can be carried out by the customer, why has the designer put this breaker behind a screwed down plate within a cabinet?
I know that handbooks get lost or ignored, but is it clear about fault finding actions? Does the handbook also stress the competency issues for those operating/maintaining the equipment?
Handbooks can be a source of "due diligence", particularly where the equipment is suitably labelled at access panels referring people to the handbook!
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By GeoffB4
Ron, my understanding of the fitting of a panel is that it is good practice on commercial equipment to deter unauthorised switching - not necessarily because there is a danger.
The phrase 'it doesn't have to be user friendly like domestic distribution panels' was used when discussing this scenario.
For example on most commercial distribution cabinets a key is required for entry, on domestic premises a 'coin' is sufficient.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Paul Devlin
I would concur with Ron on it, if the machine has tripped then it has done so for a reason and the breakers behind a metal plate would indicate to me that its there for a reason also, to make sure that its not easy to get to, ie being tampered with or reset by a person not competent to do so.
You might be leaving yourself open in the event of any mishap when someone other than the engineer under their instruction is resetting the breakers or indeed someone is injured or worse because the machine was tripping due to a fault with it.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Pete48
Geoff,
I guess the clever answer is that only if the work methods meet section 16 of the Elec at Work Regs?
But does it, eh?
Pete
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By GeoffB4
Persons to be competent to prevent danger and injury
16. No person shall be engaged in any work activity where technical knowledge or experience is necessary to prevent danger or, where appropriate, injury, unless he possesses such knowledge or experience, or is under such degree of supervision as may be appropriate having regard to the nature of the work.
I don't know Pete. There are no exposed main, what do you think?
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.