Test Equipment Anonymous (TEA) group therapy thread

[Cerebus]

I pay 5p / kWh to charge my car between 00:30 and 04:30.   This works out to about £0.013 per mile for fuel.    I set the dishwasher and clothes washer to run during this window too.    I'm thinking about getting a ~8kWh  battery for the house to shift more to the 5p rate.

Is that kosher? Back in the day there were limitations on what you could power with the off-peak tariffs but I haven't looked at off-peak tariffs in years.

[Cerebus]

Why should I apologise for recognising a de facto situation created by someone else? I'm recognising the reality of the situation; you are just complaining that it isn't as it should (in your opinion) be.

You will not get a mortgage on a property where the wiring (if newly installed) does not meet the current wiring regs. You will not get public liability/fire insurance for your building if the wiring is not periodically inspected and found to comply with the regs (at the time of installation).
You may not get a mortgage on a property where the wiring, even if it complied with the regs at the time of installation, does not comply with the current ones; it depends a lot on the individual circumstances.

The situation that Robert outlined re PAT some time ago is not an argument against PAT, it is an argument against incompetent testers.

You may indeed, as the responsible person in a company/organisation, decide that certain items do not require testing. If you wish to avoid potential future prosecution by the HSE, you MUST provide documentation stating why this is the case. If you are/were wrong in your assessment, you are still going to be for the high jump.

FWIW I'm with Big Clive on the subject of changes to the regs, by and large. It has become a means to extort money, with the constant "improvements to safety" having long since passed the point of diminishing returns. Once upon a time we educated people not to stick metal objects into mains powered equipment to "see if it's working", like we once educated people to look both ways before crossing the road, and to use a crossing point if possible.

Nowadays it has apparently been decided that it's too difficult/expensive to educate people properly, and so make every situation as completely idiot-proof as possible. We all know where that leads...

You can bloviate as much as you like on the subject, but that doesn't alter the fact that these so called regulations are not regulations.

And resorting to ad hominem attacks doesn't alter the fact that while they may not be regulations in a dictionary definition of the word, getting caught in failing to follow them is likely to result in legal action.

Colouring that as ad hominem when it it not is underhand. OK, if I'm 'caught' not following the 'regulations' who is going to take legal action? What am I going to be prosecuted for? What will the charge sheet say? Remember, this is "getting caught in failing to follow them" not for some outcome of careless work, whether done within the 'regulations' or not.

[Cubdriver]

Anyone here good at identifying connectors?

I need a couple of these things, used in the TDS500/600/700 scopes. Does anyone know what they are and who makes them etc?

Maybe something like this?  Hirose FX2B-100P-1.27DS(71)

https://www.digikey.com/en/products/detail/hirose-electric-co-ltd/FX2B-100P-1-27DS-71/4284200

-Pat

[AVGresponding]

You can bloviate as much as you like on the subject, but that doesn't alter the fact that these so called regulations are not regulations.

And resorting to ad hominem attacks doesn't alter the fact that while they may not be regulations in a dictionary definition of the word, getting caught in failing to follow them is likely to result in legal action.

Colouring that as ad hominem when it it not is underhand.

Pretty sure that calling me pompous and boastful qualifies.

[AVGresponding]

Measured Voltage at metal parts against earth. A couple hunnerd mV, but that's it.
No dangerous voltage after correctly attaching the ground wires within the cabinet.

I would recommend that you look out for a PAT (while your pinball machines do not seem to be 'portable', it is applicable to anything connected to a standard outlet). It does not need to be a current one with protocol etc., but as those machines leave your hand when done, it would certainly aid your risk management.
Improvised measurements such as described above are not really a substitute for the prescribed PE resistance/Insulation/leakage tests.

PAT regs apply to anything not part of the permanent wiring (here in the UK at least, and they are from when we were still harmonised with europe so...) which includes anything connected to a Fused Connection Unit (aka a fuse spur) or flex outlet plate via a flex, even if the flex is protected by flexible conduit.
Confusingly, this includes what is referred to in the PAT regs as "static equipment", which could be something like a lathe connected via a 64A TP N+E commando.

Pedant mode ON  ON
There is no such thing as a PAT (Portable Appliance Test) Regulation in the UK. The is NO legal requirement for PATing. The Electricity at Work Regulations 1989 require that any electrical equipment that has the potential to cause injury is maintained in a safe condition. PATing does not maintain anything, it detects faults. It could be argued that a failed PAT in a work environment is evidence of a breach of the Electricity at Work Regulations 
PATing has it place as tool in ensuring elecrical safety but it is not a legal rrequirement. It might be a requirement of a companies processes or an insurance policy.
  OFF

Edit Cerebus beat me to it.

Maintenance is included, however it's not uncommon for this step to be skipped for time/cost purposes. In fact, in my experience it's not uncommon for every step except the application of a "PASS" label to be omitted, including the visual inspection...   

Still, that's a quality of service problem, not one that's intrinsic to the official procedures. Ultimately, as your own experience proves, if you pay peanuts, you get shit-heads.

[AVGresponding]

You're both missing the point.

No, you're missing my point, presumably deliberately. Fine, I'll concede the point that it's not "written in law", something that I never claimed in any case.

[Cerebus]

You can bloviate as much as you like on the subject, but that doesn't alter the fact that these so called regulations are not regulations.

And resorting to ad hominem attacks doesn't alter the fact that while they may not be regulations in a dictionary definition of the word, getting caught in failing to follow them is likely to result in legal action.

Colouring that as ad hominem when it it not is underhand.

Pretty sure that calling me pompous and boastful qualifies.

Ah, you need a better dictionary then. I presume you're referring to my use of 'bloviating':

bloviate | ˈbləʊvɪeɪt |
verb [no object] US informal
talk at length, especially in an inflated or empty way.

[TERRA Operative]

Anyone here good at identifying connectors?

I need a couple of these things, used in the TDS500/600/700 scopes. Does anyone know what they are and who makes them etc?

Maybe something like this?  Hirose FX2B-100P-1.27DS(71)

https://www.digikey.com/en/products/detail/hirose-electric-co-ltd/FX2B-100P-1-27DS-71/4284200

-Pat

That's really close, but the footprint is just a little wrong to fit.

(Image is viewed from component side)

[Andrew_Debbie]

I pay 5p / kWh to charge my car between 00:30 and 04:30.   This works out to about £0.013 per mile for fuel.    I set the dishwasher and clothes washer to run during this window too.    I'm thinking about getting a ~8kWh  battery for the house to shift more to the 5p rate.

Is that kosher? Back in the day there were limitations on what you could power with the off-peak tariffs but I haven't looked at off-peak tariffs in years.

Yes.   There are export power limits set by the DNO but that is about it.   Some Vehicle to Grid systems may not be allowed but only because they can discharge more than the DNO power limit for neighbourhood.

[Cerebus]

You're both missing the point.

No, you're missing my point, presumably deliberately. Fine, I'll concede the point that it's not "written in law", something that I never claimed in any case.

I'm not missing your point, I just don't accept it. Claiming "de facto" regulatory status may not be literally claiming something is written in law but is tantamount to it. Talking about "PAT regs" and declaiming that you won't apologise for deliberately using that term isn't exactly what I'd characterise as having respect for the rule of law.

I'm making a fuss because I believe that the "rule of law" is important, and flouting it socially dangerous. Too many people appeal to non existent laws and regulations to get their own way ("you need to buy this PAT service Gov. it's the law"), and too many people ignore the actual law when it's not convenient (like wanting to have a staff party when ordinary people can't visit dying relatives).

[Cubdriver]

Anyone here good at identifying connectors?

I need a couple of these things, used in the TDS500/600/700 scopes. Does anyone know what they are and who makes them etc?

Maybe something like this?  Hirose FX2B-100P-1.27DS(71)

https://www.digikey.com/en/products/detail/hirose-electric-co-ltd/FX2B-100P-1-27DS-71/4284200

-Pat

That's really close, but the footprint is just a little wrong to fit.

(Image is viewed from component side)

Maybe the AMP Champ series?  https://www.te.com/commerce/DocumentDelivery/DDEController?Action=srchrtrv&DocNm=114-6061&DocType=SS&DocLang=EN

https://www.digikey.com/en/products/detail/te-connectivity-amp-connectors/1734359-2/2202943

-Pat

[Robert763]

Sorry, this is a personal pet hate, things that do not have the force of law being sold as if they have by using names like 'regulations'.

We're on the 18th edition now.

Regardless of your personal opinion, mine, Big Clive's, or anyone else's, they are de facto regulations by means of the trouble you can get into if you fail to comply with them.

Quoting the HSE saying portable appliance testing isn't a legal requirement after your employee dies by electrocution while using a toaster in your canteen won't stop you from getting a hefty fine and maybe a jail sentence, if you don't have an audit trail showing you did your legal duty to ensure the appliance was safe to use.

Nobody, least of all the regulator who would be prosecuting you "after your employee dies by electrocution while using a toaster in your canteen" (that's the HSE in case you're in any doubt), is saying that PAT testing is not useful as part of a proper maintenance regime, just that it is not required per se by law, that there is no regulations requiring you to undertake PAT testing (as generally understood), or hand money over to a bunch of cowboys who turn up at your door with a C&G 2377 certificate in their sticky mitts and no clue what is actually safe or not, just which button to press, claiming that there are regulations that require you to. (Check back for Robert's (I think) horror story of idiot PAT testers left on their own in a factory for the weekend - do you really want to align yourself with that crowd by advocating for non-existent regulations?)

The fact is that PAT regs (I will not apologise for calling them regulations) [/color][/size][/b]

Well you should, because they are not regulations. I know this because I know if I say "Show me a copy of these 'regulations' then." you will come up empty handed, sans Act of Parliament, sans Statutory Instrument. Calling them something they are not serves nobody except people who try to profit from FUD and is just being Humpty Dumpty. There is no such thing as a de facto regulation, regulations are de jure or they are not regulations. Words matter, ask Victoria Derbyshire; I suspect her mis-naming of Jeremy Hunt caused her no end of problems, not matter how much it amused the rest of us.

Why should I apologise for recognising a de facto situation created by someone else? I'm recognising the reality of the situation; you are just complaining that it isn't as it should (in your opinion) be.

You will not get a mortgage on a property where the wiring (if newly installed) does not meet the current wiring regs. You will not get public liability/fire insurance for your building if the wiring is not periodically inspected and found to comply with the regs (at the time of installation).
You may not get a mortgage on a property where the wiring, even if it complied with the regs at the time of installation, does not comply with the current ones; it depends a lot on the individual circumstances.

The situation that Robert outlined re PAT some time ago is not an argument against PAT, it is an argument against incompetent testers.

You may indeed, as the responsible person in a company/organisation, decide that certain items do not require testing. If you wish to avoid potential future prosecution by the HSE, you MUST provide documentation stating why this is the case. If you are/were wrong in your assessment, you are still going to be for the high jump.

FWIW I'm with Big Clive on the subject of changes to the regs, by and large. It has become a means to extort money, with the constant "improvements to safety" having long since passed the point of diminishing returns. Once upon a time we educated people not to stick metal objects into mains powered equipment to "see if it's working", like we once educated people to look both ways before crossing the road, and to use a crossing point if possible.

Nowadays it has apparently been decided that it's too difficult/expensive to educate people properly, and so make every situation as completely idiot-proof as possible. We all know where that leads...

Just because you cannot get a mortgage or insurance on a property that does not meet the wiring good practice guidance does not make that guidance a regulation.
Unfortunatly insurance companies take the easy way out and use a common guidance document as a standard.
You can wire your house (in the UK) anyway you like as long as as it's safe. Problem is convincing the building inspector (who only knows the IET document) to sign it off. They won't take the risk so your only option is to take it to the courts . Who want's to do that though?
So in practice we all take the easy route.
My, admitted limited, recent experience of "qualified electricans" is that they know little more than what they were taught about the IET document and how to push buttons on  an installation tester. Reading the electricians forums shows an astounding lack of basic knowledge by these "professionals"
       

[TERRA Operative]

Anyone here good at identifying connectors?

I need a couple of these things, used in the TDS500/600/700 scopes. Does anyone know what they are and who makes them etc?

Maybe something like this?  Hirose FX2B-100P-1.27DS(71)

https://www.digikey.com/en/products/detail/hirose-electric-co-ltd/FX2B-100P-1-27DS-71/4284200

-Pat

That's really close, but the footprint is just a little wrong to fit.

(Image is viewed from component side)

Maybe the AMP Champ series?  https://www.te.com/commerce/DocumentDelivery/DDEController?Action=srchrtrv&DocNm=114-6061&DocType=SS&DocLang=EN

https://www.digikey.com/en/products/detail/te-connectivity-amp-connectors/1734359-2/2202943

-Pat

Tracked it down to Tektronix part number 131-4619-00, 3M part number 91100-1201BP.
I found this service manual that has the info, page 110, Part A10J100

http://www.ko4bb.com/manuals/126.43.229.62/TDS520B_Mod_CM_Digitizing_Oscilloscope_Component_Service_Manual_070-9710-03.pdf

https://www.mouser.jp/ProductDetail/3M-Electronic-Solutions-Division/91100-1201BP?qs=pxWKQutMSmprHMNm7tgF9Q%3D%3D

Now to find somewhere to buy a handful without having to buy a box of 1000, if they aren't obsolete..........

[Robert763]

Why should I apologise for recognising a de facto situation created by someone else? I'm recognising the reality of the situation; you are just complaining that it isn't as it should (in your opinion) be.

You will not get a mortgage on a property where the wiring (if newly installed) does not meet the current wiring regs. You will not get public liability/fire insurance for your building if the wiring is not periodically inspected and found to comply with the regs (at the time of installation).
You may not get a mortgage on a property where the wiring, even if it complied with the regs at the time of installation, does not comply with the current ones; it depends a lot on the individual circumstances.

The situation that Robert outlined re PAT some time ago is not an argument against PAT, it is an argument against incompetent testers.

You may indeed, as the responsible person in a company/organisation, decide that certain items do not require testing. If you wish to avoid potential future prosecution by the HSE, you MUST provide documentation stating why this is the case. If you are/were wrong in your assessment, you are still going to be for the high jump.

FWIW I'm with Big Clive on the subject of changes to the regs, by and large. It has become a means to extort money, with the constant "improvements to safety" having long since passed the point of diminishing returns. Once upon a time we educated people not to stick metal objects into mains powered equipment to "see if it's working", like we once educated people to look both ways before crossing the road, and to use a crossing point if possible.

Nowadays it has apparently been decided that it's too difficult/expensive to educate people properly, and so make every situation as completely idiot-proof as possible. We all know where that leads...

You can bloviate as much as you like on the subject, but that doesn't alter the fact that these so called regulations are not regulations.

I think this is a classic case of the regulations being just that, regulations, but not ones published by the Govt as the Govt do not have the expertise nor the science to do so, so they have effectively outsourced it. You say they are not regulations, you try and flout them and see where it lands you, as Anders made reference to, in the event of a death, you could well fine yourself in deep hot water and drowning if you did not follow the 18th wiring regs and also have your equipment tested annually. Some insurance companies will not even insure business premises unless they can produce a validated paper trail to prove you have done the required PAT tests, etc. I know this from 1st hand experience with overhead cranes, and factory machinery etc.

No, you cannot be fined for not following the regulations. You can only be fined for having a daangerous electrical instaallion (including appliances). The HSE do not come and inspect for complince to IET documents, they inspect for dangerous situations.
Exmple 1:
You have a safe but not to "IET Guidance" installation. No one is hurt there is no inspection nd no fine. Even on a routine HSE inspection if something does not look right to the inspector you just have to convince them its safe. I've done this in the past. Before the 17th or 18th edition there was little IET guidaance on high earth leakage equipment. E.g. a EMC chamber with big filter capacitors. No way it will pass an installation leakage test or not trip a 30mA RCD. After long argument with th "expert" electrician I overode his insitance it had to have an RCD. I implemented other protection which satisfied the insurance company inspector (yes we self-reporte it as "non compliant).
Example 2:
You have a fully compliant installation in good condition that develops a fault and someone is electrocued. Investigation by HSE, probably no legal action and insurance pays the compensation.
Example 3:
Compliant basic installation, poorly maintained and "tick the box" PAT process. Fault develops, electrocution investigation, fines or jail insurance recovers compensation costs form company.
The the IET 18th is good practice as is proper PATing but neither are regulation under UK legislation and "doing" them does not absolve you from liability.
 

[BU508A]

Tracked it down to Tektronix part number 131-4619-00, 3M part number 91100-1201BP.
I found this service manual that has the info, page 110, Part A10J100

http://www.ko4bb.com/manuals/126.43.229.62/TDS520B_Mod_CM_Digitizing_Oscilloscope_Component_Service_Manual_070-9710-03.pdf

https://www.mouser.jp/ProductDetail/3M-Electronic-Solutions-Division/91100-1201BP?qs=pxWKQutMSmprHMNm7tgF9Q%3D%3D

Now to find somewhere to buy a handful without having to buy a box of 1000, if they aren't obsolete..........

Octopart lists only one distributor:

https://octopart.com/91100-1201bp-3m-12605618

Smells expensive ...

[Specmaster]

Sorry, this is a personal pet hate, things that do not have the force of law being sold as if they have by using names like 'regulations'.

We're on the 18th edition now.

Regardless of your personal opinion, mine, Big Clive's, or anyone else's, they are de facto regulations by means of the trouble you can get into if you fail to comply with them.

Quoting the HSE saying portable appliance testing isn't a legal requirement after your employee dies by electrocution while using a toaster in your canteen won't stop you from getting a hefty fine and maybe a jail sentence, if you don't have an audit trail showing you did your legal duty to ensure the appliance was safe to use.

Nobody, least of all the regulator who would be prosecuting you "after your employee dies by electrocution while using a toaster in your canteen" (that's the HSE in case you're in any doubt), is saying that PAT testing is not useful as part of a proper maintenance regime, just that it is not required per se by law, that there is no regulations requiring you to undertake PAT testing (as generally understood), or hand money over to a bunch of cowboys who turn up at your door with a C&G 2377 certificate in their sticky mitts and no clue what is actually safe or not, just which button to press, claiming that there are regulations that require you to. (Check back for Robert's (I think) horror story of idiot PAT testers left on their own in a factory for the weekend - do you really want to align yourself with that crowd by advocating for non-existent regulations?)

The fact is that PAT regs (I will not apologise for calling them regulations) [/color][/size][/b]

Well you should, because they are not regulations. I know this because I know if I say "Show me a copy of these 'regulations' then." you will come up empty handed, sans Act of Parliament, sans Statutory Instrument. Calling them something they are not serves nobody except people who try to profit from FUD and is just being Humpty Dumpty. There is no such thing as a de facto regulation, regulations are de jure or they are not regulations. Words matter, ask Victoria Derbyshire; I suspect her mis-naming of Jeremy Hunt caused her no end of problems, not matter how much it amused the rest of us.

Why should I apologise for recognising a de facto situation created by someone else? I'm recognising the reality of the situation; you are just complaining that it isn't as it should (in your opinion) be.

You will not get a mortgage on a property where the wiring (if newly installed) does not meet the current wiring regs. You will not get public liability/fire insurance for your building if the wiring is not periodically inspected and found to comply with the regs (at the time of installation).
You may not get a mortgage on a property where the wiring, even if it complied with the regs at the time of installation, does not comply with the current ones; it depends a lot on the individual circumstances.

The situation that Robert outlined re PAT some time ago is not an argument against PAT, it is an argument against incompetent testers.

You may indeed, as the responsible person in a company/organisation, decide that certain items do not require testing. If you wish to avoid potential future prosecution by the HSE, you MUST provide documentation stating why this is the case. If you are/were wrong in your assessment, you are still going to be for the high jump.

FWIW I'm with Big Clive on the subject of changes to the regs, by and large. It has become a means to extort money, with the constant "improvements to safety" having long since passed the point of diminishing returns. Once upon a time we educated people not to stick metal objects into mains powered equipment to "see if it's working", like we once educated people to look both ways before crossing the road, and to use a crossing point if possible.

Nowadays it has apparently been decided that it's too difficult/expensive to educate people properly, and so make every situation as completely idiot-proof as possible. We all know where that leads...

Just because you cannot get a mortgage or insurance on a property that does not meet the wiring good practice guidance does not make that guidance a regulation.
Unfortunatly insurance companies take the easy way out and use a common guidance document as a standard.
You can wire your house (in the UK) anyway you like as long as as it's safe. Problem is convincing the building inspector (who only knows the IET document) to sign it off. They won't take the risk so your only option is to take it to the courts . Who want's to do that though?
So in practice we all take the easy route.
My, admitted limited, recent experience of "qualified electricans" is that they know little more than what they were taught about the IET document and how to push buttons on  an installation tester. Reading the electricians forums shows an astounding lack of basic knowledge by these "professionals"
       

Well now here's the thing, all the electrical contractors that I know, and over the years that number was huge, before I retired, all have to have their work inspected by an inspector who will pick out contractors to inspect at random. That inspection (Anders over to you on this, as I'm going from memory here, but you are living this shit every day), does not look at the company records but at an actual installation that either has been completed or is in the process of being carried. If that inspector finds out that it is not up to the current edition (unless its in the transitional stages between old and new editions of the IEE Wiring Regs., then there are some serious repercussions for the contractor. In a similar vein to that of a discredited doctor of medicine, who can be struck off the medical register, is there something along similar lines for the electrical contractor?

Also am I not correct in assuming that you cannot get a new supply to a new installation connected by the supply authorities if that installation does not meet the latest wiring standards, i.e., wiring regs?

[TERRA Operative]

Tracked it down to Tektronix part number 131-4619-00, 3M part number 91100-1201BP.
I found this service manual that has the info, page 110, Part A10J100

http://www.ko4bb.com/manuals/126.43.229.62/TDS520B_Mod_CM_Digitizing_Oscilloscope_Component_Service_Manual_070-9710-03.pdf

https://www.mouser.jp/ProductDetail/3M-Electronic-Solutions-Division/91100-1201BP?qs=pxWKQutMSmprHMNm7tgF9Q%3D%3D

Now to find somewhere to buy a handful without having to buy a box of 1000, if they aren't obsolete..........

Octopart lists only one distributor:

https://octopart.com/91100-1201bp-3m-12605618

Smells expensive ...

Yeah, I got an otherwise good TDS754D processor board (pending tests) that just needs one connector, and I've seen a HDD option board for sale that needs one too.

If I could just buy like 10, and the same for the mating connector (131–4618–00 / 91100–22010AR), I would be so happy...

[AVGresponding]

No, you cannot be fined for not following the regulations. You can only be fined for having a daangerous electrical instaallion (including appliances). The HSE do not come and inspect for complince to IET documents, they inspect for dangerous situations.
Exmple 1:
You have a safe but not to "IET Guidance" installation. No one is hurt there is no inspection nd no fine. Even on a routine HSE inspection if something does not look right to the inspector you just have to convince them its safe. I've done this in the past. Before the 17th or 18th edition there was little IET guidaance on high earth leakage equipment. E.g. a EMC chamber with big filter capacitors. No way it will pass an installation leakage test or not trip a 30mA RCD. After long argument with th "expert" electrician I overode his insitance it had to have an RCD. I implemented other protection which satisfied the insurance company inspector (yes we self-reporte it as "non compliant).
Example 2:
You have a fully compliant installation in good condition that develops a fault and someone is electrocued. Investigation by HSE, probably no legal action and insurance pays the compensation.
Example 3:
Compliant basic installation, poorly maintained and "tick the box" PAT process. Fault develops, electrocution investigation, fines or jail insurance recovers compensation costs form company.
The the IET 18th is good practice as is proper PATing but neither are regulation under UK legislation and "doing" them does not absolve you from liability.

You missed example 4, where you have a non-compliant installation that kills someone.

[AVGresponding]

You can bloviate as much as you like on the subject, but that doesn't alter the fact that these so called regulations are not regulations.

And resorting to ad hominem attacks doesn't alter the fact that while they may not be regulations in a dictionary definition of the word, getting caught in failing to follow them is likely to result in legal action.

Colouring that as ad hominem when it it not is underhand.

Pretty sure that calling me pompous and boastful qualifies.

Ah, you need a better dictionary then. I presume you're referring to my use of 'bloviating':

bloviate | ˈbləʊvɪeɪt |
verb [no object] US informal
talk at length, especially in an inflated or empty way.

You failed to credit your source. I'm happy to admit to using Wiktionary.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/bloviate

[Cerebus]

You failed to credit your source. I'm happy to admit to using Wiktionary.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/bloviate

Cut and paste from MacOS dictionary (which I believe is Miriam-Webster derived, although I am happy to be corrected on that point as I don't know that for a fact).

[m k]

Tracked it down to Tektronix part number 131-4619-00, 3M part number 91100-1201BP.
I found this service manual that has the info, page 110, Part A10J100

http://www.ko4bb.com/manuals/126.43.229.62/TDS520B_Mod_CM_Digitizing_Oscilloscope_Component_Service_Manual_070-9710-03.pdf

https://www.mouser.jp/ProductDetail/3M-Electronic-Solutions-Division/91100-1201BP?qs=pxWKQutMSmprHMNm7tgF9Q%3D%3D

Now to find somewhere to buy a handful without having to buy a box of 1000, if they aren't obsolete..........

Octopart lists only one distributor:

https://octopart.com/91100-1201bp-3m-12605618

Smells expensive ...

Yeah, I got an otherwise good TDS754D processor board (pending tests) that just needs one connector, and I've seen a HDD option board for sale that needs one too.

If I could just buy like 10, and the same for the mating connector (131–4618–00 / 91100–22010AR), I would be so happy...

Is it MDR, Mini D Ribbon?

[mansaxel]

I think this is a classic case of the regulations being just that, regulations, but not ones published by the Govt as the Govt do not have the expertise nor the science to do so, so they have effectively outsourced it. You say they are not regulations, you try and flout them and see where it lands you, as Anders made reference to, in the event of a death, you could well fine yourself in deep hot water and drowning if you did not follow the 18th wiring regs and also have your equipment tested annually. Some insurance companies will not even insure business premises unless they can produce a validated paper trail to prove you have done the required PAT tests, etc. I know this from 1st hand experience with overhead cranes, and factory machinery etc.

Ferfockssake!

The "regulations" are not. You can act to the letter of the law, and go free in court, without ever having bought a single PAT, as long as you can prove that you did what could be reasonably expected from you in terms of avoiding risk.

That the insurers will refrain from insuring you, is another thing. That is their business decision.  "The only type of business insurance that is mandatory under UK law is employers’ liability cover"

What is the crux of the biscuit is that the insistence on PAT is a trust, a cartel and a shady coalition between "Testing contractors" and insurers, so that outlier insurance companies, those that will trust you to be a careful person without tons of very expensive paperwork, are being bullied into submission by the big ones that have investment in the PAT cartel. There are considerable cross-insurance deals going on between even the most fierce competitors in insurance, which is an efficient avenue to enforce the cartel.

[mnementh]

So the takeaway here is... it isn't just the USA suffering a hostile corporate takeover of their central and regional governments...?   

mnem
 

[AVGresponding]

So the takeaway here is... it isn't just the USA suffering a hostile corporate takeover of their central and regional governments...?   

mnem
 

Nope.

[Robert763]

<BIG SNIP>
       

Well now here's the thing, all the electrical contractors that I know, and over the years that number was huge, before I retired, all have to have their work inspected by an inspector who will pick out contractors to inspect at random. That inspection (Anders over to you on this, as I'm going from memory here, but you are living this shit every day), does not look at the company records but at an actual installation that either has been completed or is in the process of being carried. If that inspector finds out that it is not up to the current edition (unless its in the transitional stages between old and new editions of the IEE Wiring Regs., then there are some serious repercussions for the contractor. In a similar vein to that of a discredited doctor of medicine, who can be struck off the medical register, is there something along similar lines for the electrical contractor?

Also am I not correct in assuming that you cannot get a new supply to a new installation connected by the supply authorities if that installation does not meet the latest wiring standards, i.e., wiring regs?
[/quote]

There is no requirement in law for electricians to be reguarly audited. I think what you are refering to are audits by "professional" bodies such as NICEIC. These are only mandated by the organisation. The cynical would say to make more money.
A good example of this is "Part P" of the building regulations (which ARE law https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2010/2214/contents/made https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/electrical-safety-approved-document-p) and notified work. Many pepole will try to tell you that this type of work has to be done by a Part P registered electrician by law. This is incorrect. It has to have “Reasonable provision shall be made in the design and installation of electrical installations in order to protect persons operating, maintaining or altering the installations from fire or injury.” AND notified to and inspected by buliding control. However Part P covers toom uch for BC to cover so the Competent persons schemes were set up. This allows organisations such s NICEIC to define who is "competent" and process the notifications. Another nice little earner for them.
You can however do the work yourself, tell building control and have them inspect it. However the waiting time for and cost of BC inspection is likely to far outweigh getting a "Part P" drone  registered person to do  it.