CA6117 MFT as an ideal PAT Testing alternative

[@ElectricityUnplugged]

Interesting video Dave, the functions of that MFT are endless :)

[@abdulseaforth6930]

Nice one Dave. However, I do know that you need to check the integrity of the earth for a class I piece of equipment by at least x1.5 it’s rated value (I looked that value up). Which is why I purchased a dedicated PAT machine. Anyway, always enjoy your content.

[@ElectricityUnplugged]

That's not true, 200mA test is generally the standard now. The old 'hard test' is still valid but not done much now,

[@dsesuk]

You can't comply completely with the code of practice without a dedicated instrument, nor am I suggesting an MFT works as an outright replacement for the proper kit. The PAT process encompasses a wider range of test options, but in a pinch, you can cover the essential basics to know that it ought to be okay to plug in an appliance and use it as the manufacturer intended if you have the right MFT to hand.

[@dsesuk]

@@ElectricityUnplugged This was an ad-hoc presentation, but I should have mentioned the 6117 offers a 20mA and a 200mA test and it's the 200mA test that should indeed be selected.

[@rlfvacslakenheath]

the 1.5 times test is used for manufactuering testing and really should be used when appliances are taken apart and repaired or for appliances with high risks of damage. but for periodic inspection in 80% of appliacations 200ma is fine.

[@greatrixbrad]

Excellent @dsesuk, though this hasn’t helped my covetous feelings towards the 6117 at all… Don’t tell my Megger I was watching 🙏😉

[@rlfvacslakenheath]

going to be a sad person but pat testing doesnt measure r1+r2 just r2. you measured r2 in the video. so your value you give from the on site guide is incorrect. i come across this a lot working with electricians i know what you trying to say its a force of habit. unlike every arm chair expert my qualifications 4th and 5th edition city and guilds 2377. owner of 4 of the editions of the code of practise 2 to 5. owner of vast seletion of new and old test equipment and practising on the tools for 10 years. also made a quite bad rambly youtube video about pat testing.

[@dsesuk]

You're right Ryan, that was an error, I should have quoted the resistance of the protective conductor only. I think I made the same error before in a video of mine - you'd think I'd learn!