Light sockets

davezawadi (David Stone):

I am afraid that I cannot understand why you were given a job for which you were neither qualified nor suitably trained. 


In reality, lampholders have never been a great source of danger for a couple of good reasons: They are normally full of lamp, and it is normal for most people to turn the lamp off before removal because otherwise, one used to get serious burns! The greatest danger has been removed by the change to LED lamps, they are no longer glass and therefore cannot easily be broken exposing live parts. Now, I bet you didn't think of that!


The whole EICR thing does frighten many people with codes and a report which most cannot understand. I have tried to explain why your Sister's one may be worse than it looks in the other thread. However as your PAT experience, the quality of many needs serious improvement. I think the idea that EICRs treat dangers in an "everyone is an idiot" way is inciorrect, it should not be that way, that is what happens when idiots get to carry them out!


Here is one for Mike: OK BNC, bayonet connector (which it is) but so is a C connector, just bigger!

I was sent on a training course for the PAT.  Which was boring but not as boring as testing brand new IEC leads.

One problem with lampholders is that if the bulb fails it is not always obvious whether or not the holder is live.  Especially if it has two way switching..


The whole"regs" business worries me.  It seems to be a method of allowing people with no deep knowledge of electrical engineering to do a job they don't fully understand safely.  That might be commendable but it bothers me that the answer to "can I do so and so"   is"no  because it is verbotten by reg 1123"; rather than "no because the resultant current would be too high"


My daughter thinks that it is great that the inspector errs on the side of caution because she is frightened of electricity


And here is one for you:  what does BNC stand for?

davezawadi (David Stone):

I am afraid that I cannot understand why you were given a job for which you were neither qualified nor suitably trained. 


In reality, lampholders have never been a great source of danger for a couple of good reasons: They are normally full of lamp, and it is normal for most people to turn the lamp off before removal because otherwise, one used to get serious burns! The greatest danger has been removed by the change to LED lamps, they are no longer glass and therefore cannot easily be broken exposing live parts. Now, I bet you didn't think of that!


The whole EICR thing does frighten many people with codes and a report which most cannot understand. I have tried to explain why your Sister's one may be worse than it looks in the other thread. However as your PAT experience, the quality of many needs serious improvement. I think the idea that EICRs treat dangers in an "everyone is an idiot" way is inciorrect, it should not be that way, that is what happens when idiots get to carry them out!


Here is one for Mike: OK BNC, bayonet connector (which it is) but so is a C connector, just bigger!

I was sent on a training course for the PAT.  Which was boring but not as boring as testing brand new IEC leads.

One problem with lampholders is that if the bulb fails it is not always obvious whether or not the holder is live.  Especially if it has two way switching..


The whole"regs" business worries me.  It seems to be a method of allowing people with no deep knowledge of electrical engineering to do a job they don't fully understand safely.  That might be commendable but it bothers me that the answer to "can I do so and so"   is"no  because it is verbotten by reg 1123"; rather than "no because the resultant current would be too high"


My daughter thinks that it is great that the inspector errs on the side of caution because she is frightened of electricity


And here is one for you:  what does BNC stand for?