Bob

Surely its only "safe" at the time that it is tested, as in practice it could be damaged as soon as it is put to use following the test procedure.

following the "PAT test" the user of such equipment should make pre-use and in use inspections at regular intervals to check for any possible damage.

Allan

As an aside

I was in a static caravan last week (80's holiday joy)

The company was a reputable one
The kettle had a current PAT sticker (we were first people in this year)
The caravan had RCD protection + current test displayed
I inspected ALL electrical appliances before use (I am very sad)

Half way through making a cup of tea at 6.30am (that's what happens if you have a baby) the kettle turned into a fire works display - shorting from the centre of the lead to the sink.

I waited for the RCD - it din't trip
The lead caught fire

Fun was had by all

I think that sums it up!

(To give credit to the caravan site we had an electrical contractor testing everything at 7.30am!!! No faults found, other than the cremated lead....

Hi,

I personally think that PAT testing is abit pointless. The problem is that when someone sees a PAT sticker on an appliance's plug they assume that the appliance is "safe" so do not carry out the user checks.

Recently my vacuum cleaner at home suddenly stopped working. It gave a rather big flash when plugged in so I PAT tested it....It passed!!! when I took the thing apart the motor was sitting in a huge puddle of water.

So in answer to your question no PAT testing does not guarantee that the appliance is safe. (in my opinion)

PAT has very limited value if carried out by a numptie but can be very beneficial if the tester is competent.

6 I hope you're not an electrician Mr Spindler as what you have written is, of course, Rubbish! You may have thought that you have tested it but \I can promise you that you missed a bit.

It is plain to see that the unit was NOT tested correctly. A full P.A.T. would have included a 'run' test, continuity (and not just talking earth continuity either) etc. Let someone who knows how to carry out such testing and not some half trained 'Spark'. As ever here, people who don't have much of an idea are chipping in with all sorts of nonsense. Please, remove this if you think I'm out of order but when someone gets burned/dead please have the decency to inform me :-)

Thanks Zimmy
That's the sort of info I wanted!

The guy had a van with his name on it so must have been proper :)

That any ‘point in time’ test, inspection, examination, servicing etc (LOLER TE, MOT, NDT, aircraft BF etc etc) has limitations is obvious, but that doesn’t mean that they don’t have a part to play in an overall management/maintenance system, whether that is for electrical equipment or any other equipment.

As far as electrical maintenance is concerned, depending on the equipment and the circumstances, a combination (where necessary) of testing, formal inspection, pre-use checks is part of an overall maintenance regime.

Someone once told me you did not have to PAT test anything that was double-insulated and had the appropriate symbol on it.

Then that person hasn't understood the guidance properly.
It's not as cut-and-dried as that.

INDG236 has the answers you are seeking within it. Note that: (1) it is guidance for low risk environments; and (2) the quoted part has provisos immediately adjacent. Further guidance is listed at the end of INDG236, including eg HSG107, which will also cover environments that cannot be considered low risk.

HTH

P.A.T. Unit used correctly will ....

Visual will show damage to leads, case, plugtop and correct fuse size and internal connections of plug.
Then Insulation tests.
Some will give leakage between conductors.
Some will give warning of high in-rush currents when the unit is switched on (this will be done by using the winding resistance and calculating the current)
Continuity of cpc (including resistance test of cpc from plug to unit) if above a stated value a warning is given and the unit will be failed.
Continuity of Phase and neutral.
The 'run test' then does what it says on the label. If the unit does not run then....

If the motor is open circuit then there could not be a warning of hi inrush current nor w

Some 'qualified' PAT people have completed the half-day course, some of us have completed the 2377 3-day course and have the 2391/2400.

Not having a pop at anyone and don't wish to give a talk on the subject but used correctly they are as good as it gets in the right hands. Half the courses run on PAT are rubbish as are the new 'short course route' to being an electrician for that matter and some of us are locked in battle with the NICEIC/ECA/HSE as I write.

Rob

Have a look in the IET Code of Practice for In-service Inspection and Testing of electrical Equipment (4th ed.):
http://electrical.theiet...ce-inspection-4th-ed.cfm
Specifically Table 7.1 on page 52.
This gives initial I&T frequencies for many environments, not just the low risk ones outlined in INDG236.
It is only in the low risk environments that combined I&T for Class II appliances is not recommended. In all other environments, it most definitely is.
That was my point.



But most definitely a part of In-service I&T. See my post above.

As usual, I see this thread is gathering 'momentum'...

I'll leave people to chew over the details, but would like to add some good news...we may be shortly seeing the end of PAT testing!!!

That was one of the recommendations in the Lofsted report.
If PAT testing goes, then we are back to the mundane 'suitable maintenance' as required Reg 4 of the Electricity at Work Regs.

Keep smiling, it's Friday!!

Not wishing to hijack this thread - but have I been informed correctly that the latest IEE guidelines does not require the PAT testing sticker to identify the next test due-date. Only the last test date & pass/fail.

If this is the case, how many others (safety bods + ordinary managers) will find it difficult to assess whether an item is still safe?

Thanks David

But I think that the number will be less.

Currently Joe Bloggs can look sticker on plug that says "next inspection due date is 11/4/13" and knows immediately that the items needs to be formally PAT tested again (whether safe or unsafe) .

Tomorrow he could look art the new sticker that says "date of last PAT test is 11/4/12" and not know whether the item should have been retested after 1 month, 3 months, 4 months, 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, 36 months, 48 months or 60 months.

No major problem for small site - but if you have 1,000+ items then a quick safety inspection will become an administrative nightmare & fewer inspections completed !?!