In my experience the only things that fail electrical tests are detachable mains leads and the odd heating element(wax baths). I don't need stored trends and expensive automatic testers to tell me to replace these items - this would be the conclusion of my risk assessment.
If equipment rarely fails electrical tests, why is there this drive to record the results?
Cheers
Mark
When you conduct tests do you just go by a pass or fail indication on your tester after it has run through all the tests? If so you, like many others I have seen, may have missed the fact that the leakage (mains or applied part) had been increasing over time which would indicate a possible fault occurring. This is especially true of ECG probes who may pass a test to the required limits but may have high leakage indicating imminent failure (or at the least a bio hazard).
In IEC 62353 a reduced set of tests are conducted to save time and simplify things but in order to add a reasonable level of safety there is the requirement to compare test results to enable one to see trends and investigate before the unit poses a danger.
Without suitable records (paper or electronic) there would be no to prove legally that a device was maintained correctly.
We should not knock the recording of test data just because some do not see the point in doing it. The amount of data is not that high, especially if IEC 62353 is adopted. After all if we go by what many are saying that equipment never fails electrical safety tests then why bother testing at all?
Mike.
