Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
sdeans  
#1 Posted : 10 February 2014 16:32:13(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
sdeans

Looking for some advice. We have had an accident involving one of our engineers within a customers premises. He plugged a device into a socket that was being set up in a customers home and received an electric burn to his hand due to the socket being faulty. My question is this - he had a socket testing device that he claims was used prior to using the socket that indicated that it was safe to use. Would there be a reason a socket tester would say it was safe for it then to 'blow' up like this?
Frank Hallett  
#2 Posted : 10 February 2014 17:13:22(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Frank Hallett

Do you have an authoritative test for the Testing device - and records? Have you tested the testing device since the reported event? Did the client circuit have an RCD fitted to the outlet in question? If the answer to any of the above is "No" or "don't know"; we can't really help except in a very generic way. Frank Hallett
paul.skyrme  
#3 Posted : 10 February 2014 19:49:16(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
paul.skyrme

sdeans, Yes there are many reasons that a socket tester would not identify a fault that could cause a burn. However, I have NEVER in 30+ years at work seen this happen with an undamaged socket outlet, and an appliance that was not faulty. Not enough information given to give sound advice as Frank has said. However, Frank, RCD's are not compulsory on all socket outlets. They are also not the be all and end all of electrical protection, in fact, they are very unreliable. Also, they only offer protection against live to earth faults, these are typically the lowest energy faults.
Zimmy  
#4 Posted : 11 February 2014 07:56:17(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Zimmy

There are only two things the plug-in so-called-socket-testers are good for. 1 seeing if the 'line' conductor is in the right terminal 2 Throwing at someone your not keen on. They should be stored in a place where the sun don't shine. This is another case of someone doing something with something they know little about. Blunt yes but then I'm not the one burnt! If in doubt, put your hands in your pockets and don't believe all the adverts for these things. They cannot tell if the neutral and earth are crossed. They cannot tell you if the earth path is valid. AND three lights saying all is well is a joke.
Zimmy  
#5 Posted : 11 February 2014 08:01:14(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Zimmy

If on the other hand he was using a EFLI (Earth fault loop impedance) tester - as he should have been, being qualified to use such a tool, then something really bad must have happened. More info please... Please tell us that he was not testing with a multi meter set to current.... set to Ohms would be bad enough but the internal fuse may have opened ... but if set to current... BIG bang. If he was using a multi meter... serves him right! Tell him/her to follow GS38, if he/she don't know what that is ... sack them.
walker  
#6 Posted : 11 February 2014 08:09:01(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
walker

Was it an electrical burn or a thermal burn? Like others have said, assuming the socket & plug a physically undamaged its difficult to see how this has occurred. I think you need to consider the competence of your technician (I doubt very much he is really an engineer, pity we in the UK misuse this term).
Frank Hallett  
#7 Posted : 11 February 2014 09:17:53(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Frank Hallett

Thank you to Paul S for identifying the limitations of an RCD and whether it was legally required. Also to Zimmy for the additional comment. I support those comments; but my questions were simply designed to illustrate that insufficient information had been provided and were an attempt to to focus on the elimination of more common fault sources whilst gaining that additional info. I suspect that walkers comments may also be relevant. Frank Hallett
Zimmy  
#8 Posted : 11 February 2014 12:34:24(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Zimmy

Quite correct Frank. Spot on.
Users browsing this topic
Guest
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.