Do you want me to post my same answer as the last 2 times or will this just confuse you again?
Armeg Screwdriver Set
- Thread starter kerching
- Start date
Help Support Talk Electrician Forum:
I do like to play the devil.Sometimes Essex!! I can't make my mind up as to whether you are an argumentative sort for the sake of it or just plainly don't get it? Read the regs apply accordingly, be aware that there is a reg that requires us to follow mfrs instructions start with that and add the other regs to it as you go.
Stop playing the blonde Essex
. It was not me that brought 526.1 into this thread. It was only when I challenged this post then everything else came out of the wood work.How boring would forums be if we all agreed? ; -).
Now I know you love me and miss me elsewhere don't you?
Ok. We are going round in circles. You know what you mean and I know what I mean. Maybe a forum is not the best place to have this discussion. No hard feelings.
Sharpend
"It Just Is"
Leave I out lurch, he'd be linched within a couple of posts on there!!
Sharpend
"It Just Is"
Would i?
I'm not getting involved in the discussion, but since we are talking about the implications of BSEN61439-3, it is interesting to note what it says on the subject.
On my Torque Screwdriver Price List, I published a table from BSEN61439-3.
Column II of "Tightening Torque", shows recommended torque values for different thread diameters, when using a Torque Screwdriver.
SBS Dave
Now Essex,
The table SBSDave has posted is with regard to BS EN61439-3.
It has nothing to do with BS1363 accessories.
The manufacturers of DB components such as MCB's have decided that they will issue an instruction that to ensure that the devices are safe & reliable in use they require that the connection fixings are tightened to a specific torque.
Now 526.1 uses the word “shall” thus we have to comply with 526.1.
Now whilst BS7671 is not law, compliance with law can almost certainly be achieved by following it.
As per the intro paragraph from HSE.
Now, you can’t pick & choose which regulations you comply with, when they are relevant to the task being undertaken.
Therefore all of the other regs I quoted earlier also apply, and, unless you comply with those, then you cannot state that you have complied with 526.1.
134.1.1
Good workmanship by skilled or instructed persons and proper materials shall be used in the erection of the electrical installation. The installation of electrical equipment shall take account of manufacturers' instructions.
There is that “shall” word again.
421.1.1. I think we need to look a little broader than the single reg. Lets look at the reg group, then as far as 421.1.1
421 PROTECTION AGAINST FIRE CAUSED BY ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT
421.1 General requirements
421.1.1 Persons, livestock and property shall be protected against harmful effects of heat or fire which may be generated or propagated in electrical installations.
Manufacturers’ instructions shall be taken into account in addition to the requirements of BS 7671.
Oh, look, the “shall” word again.
510.3
Every item of equipment shall be selected and erected so as to allow compliance with the regulations stated in this chapter and the relevant regulations in other parts of BS 7671 and shall take account of manufacturers’ instructions.
Oh look, “shall” again.
611.2(ii)
The inspection shall be made to verify that the installed electrical equipment is:
1. (i) in compliance with the requirements of Section 511 (this may be ascertained by mark or by certification furnished by the installer or the manufacturer), and
2. (ii) correctly selected and erected in accordance with the Regulations, taking into account manufacturers’ instructions, and
3. (iii) not visibly damaged or defective so as to impair safety.
Oh look, “shall”, again.
611.3(xvi)
The inspection shall include at least the checking of the following items where relevant, including as appropriate all particular requirements for special installations or locations (Part 7):
…
(xvi) Presence of diagrams, instructions and similar information
…
“Shall” once more.
The last common comment right thought these regs is manufacturer’s instructions.
Therefore, as the torque requirement is something given by the MCB manufacturers, it must be followed.
As no torque setting is given by the accessory manufacturers then one does not have to tighten them to a specified torque.
The other thing you need to understand is an accessory is a passive, manually operated device.
An MCB, or RCD is an electro-mechanical “device” that can undertake independent operation, i.e. to disconnect the supply under certain conditions.
Now, as these devices are active and not passive, then in the event of a failure, fire etc. the manufacturer could be held liable as their device does “something” without human intervention.
Therefore during their design FMEA’s they have identified that they must minimise the risk of a faulty connection to the device.
Also, as they have coils and other devices within them, they will vibrate, and not necessarily at 50Hz.
Therefore the fasteners will be subjected to external influences from the device that they are fitted into by this vibration.
Finally, you will have thermal cycling of the connection as loads cycle, thus the connection may creep.
Therefore the manufacturer must ensure that there is sufficient elastic deformation within the “fixing” to minimise any loosening due to creep phenomena.
They do this by specifying a torque setting for the fastener.
Now, there is also a table of torque values for testing given in BS EN 60898, 61008, & 61009.
The manufacturers en-masse have decreed that they will instruct us to tighten terminal screws to specified torque values.
This requirement will have been developed when they were doing their design FMEA’s no doubt.
It is not a new thing, most manufacturers have been issuing this information for 20+ years.
However, in the past you had to hunt and ask for it.
Due to the lowering of the quality of the installers in recent years, this requirement has begun to be pushed into view.
Manufacturers have obviously had issued with returned items and have been blamed for overheating, so they are fighting their corner.
Be careful what you wish for wrt accessories though.
BS1363 includes in all parts a torque table for testing purposes.
So it’s only one small step for manufacturers to translate this testing requirement for standards compliance into an installation requirement.
Until they do, no specific torque required.
As an accessory is a passive device, any overheating or burning of connections will be down to poor termination practices, thus the manufacturer can prove negligence on the installer easily.
They will have their quality records from the manufacturing process to show that the device was inspected and tested according to the requirements of the relevant standard, that it must meet to comply with the LVD & any national laws.
The table SBSDave has posted is with regard to BS EN61439-3.
It has nothing to do with BS1363 accessories.
The manufacturers of DB components such as MCB's have decided that they will issue an instruction that to ensure that the devices are safe & reliable in use they require that the connection fixings are tightened to a specific torque.
Now 526.1 uses the word “shall” thus we have to comply with 526.1.
Now whilst BS7671 is not law, compliance with law can almost certainly be achieved by following it.
As per the intro paragraph from HSE.
Now, you can’t pick & choose which regulations you comply with, when they are relevant to the task being undertaken.
Therefore all of the other regs I quoted earlier also apply, and, unless you comply with those, then you cannot state that you have complied with 526.1.
134.1.1
Good workmanship by skilled or instructed persons and proper materials shall be used in the erection of the electrical installation. The installation of electrical equipment shall take account of manufacturers' instructions.
There is that “shall” word again.
421.1.1. I think we need to look a little broader than the single reg. Lets look at the reg group, then as far as 421.1.1
421 PROTECTION AGAINST FIRE CAUSED BY ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT
421.1 General requirements
421.1.1 Persons, livestock and property shall be protected against harmful effects of heat or fire which may be generated or propagated in electrical installations.
Manufacturers’ instructions shall be taken into account in addition to the requirements of BS 7671.
Oh, look, the “shall” word again.
510.3
Every item of equipment shall be selected and erected so as to allow compliance with the regulations stated in this chapter and the relevant regulations in other parts of BS 7671 and shall take account of manufacturers’ instructions.
Oh look, “shall” again.
611.2(ii)
The inspection shall be made to verify that the installed electrical equipment is:
1. (i) in compliance with the requirements of Section 511 (this may be ascertained by mark or by certification furnished by the installer or the manufacturer), and
2. (ii) correctly selected and erected in accordance with the Regulations, taking into account manufacturers’ instructions, and
3. (iii) not visibly damaged or defective so as to impair safety.
Oh look, “shall”, again.
611.3(xvi)
The inspection shall include at least the checking of the following items where relevant, including as appropriate all particular requirements for special installations or locations (Part 7):
…
(xvi) Presence of diagrams, instructions and similar information
…
“Shall” once more.
The last common comment right thought these regs is manufacturer’s instructions.
Therefore, as the torque requirement is something given by the MCB manufacturers, it must be followed.
As no torque setting is given by the accessory manufacturers then one does not have to tighten them to a specified torque.
The other thing you need to understand is an accessory is a passive, manually operated device.
An MCB, or RCD is an electro-mechanical “device” that can undertake independent operation, i.e. to disconnect the supply under certain conditions.
Now, as these devices are active and not passive, then in the event of a failure, fire etc. the manufacturer could be held liable as their device does “something” without human intervention.
Therefore during their design FMEA’s they have identified that they must minimise the risk of a faulty connection to the device.
Also, as they have coils and other devices within them, they will vibrate, and not necessarily at 50Hz.
Therefore the fasteners will be subjected to external influences from the device that they are fitted into by this vibration.
Finally, you will have thermal cycling of the connection as loads cycle, thus the connection may creep.
Therefore the manufacturer must ensure that there is sufficient elastic deformation within the “fixing” to minimise any loosening due to creep phenomena.
They do this by specifying a torque setting for the fastener.
Now, there is also a table of torque values for testing given in BS EN 60898, 61008, & 61009.
The manufacturers en-masse have decreed that they will instruct us to tighten terminal screws to specified torque values.
This requirement will have been developed when they were doing their design FMEA’s no doubt.
It is not a new thing, most manufacturers have been issuing this information for 20+ years.
However, in the past you had to hunt and ask for it.
Due to the lowering of the quality of the installers in recent years, this requirement has begun to be pushed into view.
Manufacturers have obviously had issued with returned items and have been blamed for overheating, so they are fighting their corner.
Be careful what you wish for wrt accessories though.
BS1363 includes in all parts a torque table for testing purposes.
So it’s only one small step for manufacturers to translate this testing requirement for standards compliance into an installation requirement.
Until they do, no specific torque required.
As an accessory is a passive device, any overheating or burning of connections will be down to poor termination practices, thus the manufacturer can prove negligence on the installer easily.
They will have their quality records from the manufacturing process to show that the device was inspected and tested according to the requirements of the relevant standard, that it must meet to comply with the LVD & any national laws.
blimey Sidey!
By way of clarification, Essex1, are you using the word "accessory", in an Electrical Catalogue sense, or as defined by BS7671:2008 AMD3?
Accessory: A device, other than current-using equipment, associated with such equipment or with the wiring of an installation.
SBS Dave
Accessory: A device, other than current-using equipment, associated with such equipment or with the wiring of an installation.
SBS Dave
Hi Kerching,
I have just posted the Torque Screwdriver to you, complete with the 4 blades you specified + a (used) PH2 blade with extra exposed tip.
I modify them myself until Felo bring out the reduced shank version next year. I have left the cut-off insulation ferrule on, to more or less restore it to its original condition. You should receive it sometime this week.
I have issued a zero-price Invoice, which records the transaction for warranty purposes and also records the serial no. for the calibration certificate.
I sell my RCBOs, etc, as separate components to the customer's specification and I use the same principle with the Torque Screwdrivers, so you buy only what you specify.
I look forward to hopefully receiving a good report on my product.
SBS Dave
I have just posted the Torque Screwdriver to you, complete with the 4 blades you specified + a (used) PH2 blade with extra exposed tip.
I modify them myself until Felo bring out the reduced shank version next year. I have left the cut-off insulation ferrule on, to more or less restore it to its original condition. You should receive it sometime this week.
I have issued a zero-price Invoice, which records the transaction for warranty purposes and also records the serial no. for the calibration certificate.
I sell my RCBOs, etc, as separate components to the customer's specification and I use the same principle with the Torque Screwdrivers, so you buy only what you specify.
I look forward to hopefully receiving a good report on my product.
SBS Dave
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2010
- Messages
- 14,621
- Reaction score
- 1,171
Thanks for that Dave,
It may be a couple of weeks befor i get onto it as i playing catchup,at present
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2010
- Messages
- 14,621
- Reaction score
- 1,171
Dave
Arrived today , thanks
Not even opened box up yet.
Should finish playing catchup by the end of next week hopefully
Arrived today , thanks
Not even opened box up yet.
Should finish playing catchup by the end of next week hopefully
Sorry i am a bit of a plain speaker and tell you how it is, not sponsored or supported by any company hence the review:-
quality of the handles ...10/10
ease of change ability 10/10
quality of the "bits" rubbish
the pz and ph seem a too sharp an angle and tend to slip out
the flat bits are to wide especially the little one which does not fit into any ceiling light fitting easily!
quality of the steel is rubbish as they bend so easily or break off, so have your angle grinder ready to re shape them.
I have been using these for 11 months now and have put themin the spares box.
Really dissapointed from a uk company, my grandmother always said to me .."buy cheap .. Buy twice". But there not cheap... Well the interchange bits are.....grandma!!!!!
quality of the handles ...10/10
ease of change ability 10/10
quality of the "bits" rubbish
the pz and ph seem a too sharp an angle and tend to slip out
the flat bits are to wide especially the little one which does not fit into any ceiling light fitting easily!
quality of the steel is rubbish as they bend so easily or break off, so have your angle grinder ready to re shape them.
I have been using these for 11 months now and have put themin the spares box.
Really dissapointed from a uk company, my grandmother always said to me .."buy cheap .. Buy twice". But there not cheap... Well the interchange bits are.....grandma!!!!!
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2010
- Messages
- 14,621
- Reaction score
- 1,171
If you have only had them 11 months then give ARMEG a call,and tell,them
you never know you may get them replaced....NOBODY likes bad publicity
Hi All,
I've have been searching for a perfect set but there's none out there atm that has a torque handle, has interchangeable blades, is slim to fit all possible products and is reasonably priced (for me up to £150 for a similar set as ARMEG VDE 13 piece). Unfortunately, all appear to be made/sourced from the very east (we all know which country) hence cutting corners occurs to increase revenue and affordability. I've had an email exchange about snapping blades and replacements with Phil @ ARMEG and am very happy with the communication received as well as honesty from his side. Nevertheless, I'm still considering forking out £280 on PB Swiss Tools (PBST are guaranteed to be 100% made in Switzerland). However, it's a real shame their VDE PH or PZ 1-5Nm (not 6Nm as ARMEG) torque screwdrivers have no interchangeable blades thus would have to get many more screwdrivers or sets to complete my bag. I wish they made VDE blades for their MecaTorque or DigiTorque handles otherwise I'll be carrying around many bulky permanent handles thus extra unnecessary weight. It's so hard to make a decision after reading people's reports about fragile snapping/twisting blades etc... Wiha, Drapper, ITL, Wera, Felo, Fluke, Klein (allegedly made in USA)... the list is long. Quite frankly I don't believe in "Made in Germany" anymore after digging up some articles that only a small proportion of product processing has to take place in Germany in order to use this marketing slogan hence Germans opposition to EU's proposal to increase this handling/manufacturing to 45%! Some say it's just 10% of processing now and you can call start using "Made in Germany". I might risk and get the ARMEG and then slim blades when they come out (accepting low quality although being able to replace them at a reasonable price) or just buy DRAPER 81762 19 Pce VDE PZ/PH/SL Insulated Interchangeable Blades Screwdriver and two PZ2 and PH2 PBST torques...
From: Phil Gould
Subject: RE: Armeg Enquiry
Date: 6 January 2022 at 14:00:50 GMT
To: David Sadowski
Unsure of the ETA. The stumbling block will be the state of the world at the minute and obtaining VDE certification. We are having to cope with a huge backlog of existing product. Every individual component that receives VDE certification MUST be tested. You cannot select a batch sample to test.
Regarding sets etc. I have no idea, if I’m honest. That would need to be thrashed around in a marketing meeting. My gut feeling is that the range of blades will be slim (!) limited to the ones that are needed for RCBO/MCB installation and that they will be available individually to service customers existing sets. I can envisage a slimline set as well for new customers with a torque handle.
Sorry this isn’t any more clear-cut than this.
Phil.
From: David Sadowski
Sent: 06 January 2022 13:47
To: Phil Gould
Subject: Re: Armeg Enquiry
Is there an ETA for the slim version interchangeable blades and are they going to be sold separately or in new updated sets as well?
On 6 Jan 2022, at 10:02, Phil Gould wrote:
Hi David, thank you for your enquiry.
All our Switchblade blades are available to purchase individually. The range is found at this link
https://www.armeg.com/1000V-VDE-Interchangeable-Switch-Blades#
Regarding breakages - we quality check every batch of the blades and they are consistently found to conform 100% to dimensions and hardness checks as laid out in the quality specification for the product.
We have been investigating the issue and have found that often users are actually using the PM1 blade to drive screws intended for PM2 blades. It can be the case that sometimes the PM2 blade body is too broad to fit down the terminal screw hole so the PM1 blade has, on occasion, been used instead. Driving with a PM1 blade in a screw with a PM2 recess causes the whole turning force to be applied on 2 surfaces rather than the multiple surfaces it's designed for. This can lead to the blade snapping
Because of the potential for abuse we are fast-tracking slim versions of the PM1 and the PM2 Switchblades to minimise the application problem moving forward.
I have personally been dealing with an enquiry recently where the customer had broken a PM1 blade. I asked him what the specific RCBO was that he was dealing with and obtained one myself for a sanity check. I also contacted the manufacturer of said RCBO to find out what screwdriver they recommended for the terminal screws and the information I received from them was entirely wrong. I questioned this and have not yet received a reply 3 weeks later. So you can see the problems that installers have. Incidentally, the screw the customer was trying to tighten had a PM2 recess, so he shouldn’t have been using the PM1 blade which is why it broke.
I hope that you find this information useful and now have more confidence in the quality of our products.
Please feel free to reply if you would like any further help.
Kind Regards,
Phil Gould,
Technical Support Manager
Sent: 05 January 2022 17:39
Subject: Ask an expert Enquiry
Ask an expert Enquiry Details:
Additional Info: Hi, I was wondering if you've looked into snapping interchangeable blades and why don't you sell them separately as a replacement? This is what is putting me off from buying your set because once the blade breaks the whole set is pretty much useless. https://www.amazon.co.uk/product-re...r&reviewerType=all_reviews#reviews-filter-bar
I've have been searching for a perfect set but there's none out there atm that has a torque handle, has interchangeable blades, is slim to fit all possible products and is reasonably priced (for me up to £150 for a similar set as ARMEG VDE 13 piece). Unfortunately, all appear to be made/sourced from the very east (we all know which country) hence cutting corners occurs to increase revenue and affordability. I've had an email exchange about snapping blades and replacements with Phil @ ARMEG and am very happy with the communication received as well as honesty from his side. Nevertheless, I'm still considering forking out £280 on PB Swiss Tools (PBST are guaranteed to be 100% made in Switzerland). However, it's a real shame their VDE PH or PZ 1-5Nm (not 6Nm as ARMEG) torque screwdrivers have no interchangeable blades thus would have to get many more screwdrivers or sets to complete my bag. I wish they made VDE blades for their MecaTorque or DigiTorque handles otherwise I'll be carrying around many bulky permanent handles thus extra unnecessary weight. It's so hard to make a decision after reading people's reports about fragile snapping/twisting blades etc... Wiha, Drapper, ITL, Wera, Felo, Fluke, Klein (allegedly made in USA)... the list is long. Quite frankly I don't believe in "Made in Germany" anymore after digging up some articles that only a small proportion of product processing has to take place in Germany in order to use this marketing slogan hence Germans opposition to EU's proposal to increase this handling/manufacturing to 45%! Some say it's just 10% of processing now and you can call start using "Made in Germany". I might risk and get the ARMEG and then slim blades when they come out (accepting low quality although being able to replace them at a reasonable price) or just buy DRAPER 81762 19 Pce VDE PZ/PH/SL Insulated Interchangeable Blades Screwdriver and two PZ2 and PH2 PBST torques...
From: Phil Gould
Subject: RE: Armeg Enquiry
Date: 6 January 2022 at 14:00:50 GMT
To: David Sadowski
Unsure of the ETA. The stumbling block will be the state of the world at the minute and obtaining VDE certification. We are having to cope with a huge backlog of existing product. Every individual component that receives VDE certification MUST be tested. You cannot select a batch sample to test.
Regarding sets etc. I have no idea, if I’m honest. That would need to be thrashed around in a marketing meeting. My gut feeling is that the range of blades will be slim (!) limited to the ones that are needed for RCBO/MCB installation and that they will be available individually to service customers existing sets. I can envisage a slimline set as well for new customers with a torque handle.
Sorry this isn’t any more clear-cut than this.
Phil.
From: David Sadowski
Sent: 06 January 2022 13:47
To: Phil Gould
Subject: Re: Armeg Enquiry
Is there an ETA for the slim version interchangeable blades and are they going to be sold separately or in new updated sets as well?
On 6 Jan 2022, at 10:02, Phil Gould wrote:
Hi David, thank you for your enquiry.
All our Switchblade blades are available to purchase individually. The range is found at this link
https://www.armeg.com/1000V-VDE-Interchangeable-Switch-Blades#
Regarding breakages - we quality check every batch of the blades and they are consistently found to conform 100% to dimensions and hardness checks as laid out in the quality specification for the product.
We have been investigating the issue and have found that often users are actually using the PM1 blade to drive screws intended for PM2 blades. It can be the case that sometimes the PM2 blade body is too broad to fit down the terminal screw hole so the PM1 blade has, on occasion, been used instead. Driving with a PM1 blade in a screw with a PM2 recess causes the whole turning force to be applied on 2 surfaces rather than the multiple surfaces it's designed for. This can lead to the blade snapping
Because of the potential for abuse we are fast-tracking slim versions of the PM1 and the PM2 Switchblades to minimise the application problem moving forward.
I have personally been dealing with an enquiry recently where the customer had broken a PM1 blade. I asked him what the specific RCBO was that he was dealing with and obtained one myself for a sanity check. I also contacted the manufacturer of said RCBO to find out what screwdriver they recommended for the terminal screws and the information I received from them was entirely wrong. I questioned this and have not yet received a reply 3 weeks later. So you can see the problems that installers have. Incidentally, the screw the customer was trying to tighten had a PM2 recess, so he shouldn’t have been using the PM1 blade which is why it broke.
I hope that you find this information useful and now have more confidence in the quality of our products.
Please feel free to reply if you would like any further help.
Kind Regards,
Phil Gould,
Technical Support Manager
Sent: 05 January 2022 17:39
Subject: Ask an expert Enquiry
Ask an expert Enquiry Details:
Additional Info: Hi, I was wondering if you've looked into snapping interchangeable blades and why don't you sell them separately as a replacement? This is what is putting me off from buying your set because once the blade breaks the whole set is pretty much useless. https://www.amazon.co.uk/product-re...r&reviewerType=all_reviews#reviews-filter-bar
Last edited:
