Megger MFT 1730 Calibration?

Joined
28 Jul 2012
Messages
1,351
Reaction score
55
Location
Surrey
Country
United Kingdom
Just recently got my Megger MFT 1730 re-calibrated by Britannia Test & Measurement and it passed. :D

Just wondering if it will fail calibration in 12 months from now based on how close some of the readings were to the Tolerances? Would be a heart break to me if it failed calibration and wondering how much such things cost to repair when they fail calibration tests?

See PDF for test results via the link below.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/16NCQvSLVys0O3p2uogIbLxhXKNY0i2aQ/view?usp=sharing

Regards: Elliott.
 
Not really sure how it works.

Perhaps, as your machine gets older, the readings will get better - nearer the applied value.

Get a check card and use a dedicated RCD on extention lead and Loop so that you can check every month to see what it is doing.

My Fluke (I know they're better but :)) hasn't changed in the four years since I retired.
 
Very unlikely anything will change over the years - modern electronic components do not drift in value much or at all, and unlike older items there are no manual adjustments inside either. Any corrections are done in the firmware.

If things go wrong with modern test gear, they are far more likely to go wrong in major, obvious ways such as it not working at all.

how close some of the readings were to the Tolerances
Which ones - all of those look to be well within the specification.
 
As above, the instruments themselves don't generally move out of calibration, what can steadily increase readings though is leads breaking down, I don't seem to get much life out of the megger ones so are trying kewtech ones which were recommended to me (and I can also get them off the shelf at the wholesaler rather than having to back order).

Most of the time instrument failures will mean they refuse to do a test, although I did see one where the continuity results were off by at least an order of magnatude.
 
I am really not sure about calibrating a meter, the idea is that if it fails then anything tested with it would need retesting, and in a year that would be a lot of testing, so I would test the same socket every day, so if the meter goes out, hopefully only one days work to redo. OK if only used a few times a week then yes the test period can be extended, the calibration one would hope corrects any drift and high lights errors.

However bitter experience has shown me not worth the paper written on. I started a new job and was presented with what looked like a brand new historic PAT testing machine, it had a series of lights, no meter reading, just go/no go lights.

I voiced the opinion that it would be a good move to computerise the records, which should mean in the future I would be told by the computer what needed testing that week. So a program was sent for, however it asked for readings, which I did not have, so rang up the program supplier.

Answer was easy, look at the calibration certificate and write down what it said was pass level, however this was not on the certificate so program sent back and I used Excel instead, all I needed to do was use the same word for each reading, and once we got the values, use the replace command.

So it was a traceable record so contacted firm who had it calibrated, this was our main supplier, but it seems they contracted the work out to a calibration house. Each time I saw the rep, it was where is my certificate, in the end I threatened to stop putting business there way until sorted, getting to 4 months at this point.

So next was can I give them the PAT tester so it can be retested, it seems they could not trace the traceable records! So it went back, next it seems this historic machine was made when the pass level was lower than it is now, and it could not be calibrated to the new pass levels, so by this time I had 6 months of PAT testing not worth the hard drive space it was held on. The firm was very apologetic, and gave us a very good deal on a new top of range Robin, and sent their guys to PAT test office which would help me catch up.

However after that, I have to ask, why bother? I could have sent for one MΩ resistors etc and tested my own equipment, I would at least then be able to actually trace the traceable records and know it was correct, OK some things I can't test, tripping times for a RCD for example, however two testers both testing the same RCD at regular intervals would mean very unlikely that anything goes wrong without my knowledge, and it would not take 6 months to find the meter was faulty.

In real terms if we follow the rules, even if we don't test regularly we should soon know, as we should be given the previous test results so we can see if the installation is degrading, so if reading don't match it rings alarm bells, and we retest the test set. However some people seem to think we would not test things if we had old results, so retain them. As if!!!!!

And regulation says continuity needs to use at least 200 mA, some of my meters actually use 25A, this is not a fail, yet you sheet shows there is an upper limit as well as lower limit so would worry a little about that calibration house.
 
Last edited:
These calibration services merely record an instrument's readings against standard values, and do not make any adjustments to correct errors found.

A modern meter such as the MFT1730 will be software based, and when manufactured the initial calibration adjustments will be made in the factory by adjustments in software parameters. Therefore, if an instrument later goes out of calibration, could it not be sent back to the Megger factory for readjustment?

If not, what happens? Do you simply throw it away and spend hundreds on a new one?
 
These calibration services merely record an instrument's readings against standard values, and do not make any adjustments to correct errors found.
That's testing not calibration, and to test you can now buy some thing like the Kewtech FC2000 to calibrate you should adjust to within limits.
 
A modern meter such as the MFT1730 will be software based, and when manufactured the initial calibration adjustments will be made in the factory by adjustments in software parameters. Therefore, if an instrument later goes out of calibration, could it not be sent back to the Megger factory for readjustment? ... If not, what happens? Do you simply throw it away and spend hundreds on a new one?
My understanding was that at least some of the places providing 'calibration services' (as well, of course, as the manufacturers) have the means to re-programme the firmware to tweak calibration, if necessary (which, as has been said, is probably a pretty rare eventuality with modern instruments). Is that not correct?

Kind Regards, John
 
Very unlikely anything will change over the years - modern electronic components do not drift in value much or at all,
Which ones - all of those look to be well within the specification.
I agree, My robin kit hadn't been calibrated since 2006 (but I don't do any testing which requires it) I happened to be in a workshop where a contractor was testing everything in site. The calibration certs for the 3 testers had negligible variation over the 11 years.
Your test figures look fine to me
 
I would have thought any adjustments are included in the cost, is that not part of the point taking the thing to them.
 
I would have thought any adjustments are included in the cost, is that not part of the point taking the thing to them.
Quite so. To my way of thinking, that's what 'calibration' implies - and, as has been said, that's more than just 'testing' (and producing a 'pass' or 'fail').

Kind Regards, John
 
We use calcard http://calcards.co.uk/ every month to ensure our test equipment readings don't change. We also do an RCD test on the same RCD each month.

This was suggested by NICEIC as a better alternative to annual calibration.
 
How do you "apply" a time to a tester?

upload_2018-9-17_11-45-5.png
 
Interesting question, but the implication appears to be that they have some 'box' which will disconnect the supply 'exactly' 30.0. 90.0 and 290 ms after appearance of a 30mA L-N imbalance, unlikely though that may seem.
 
Back
Top