- Joined
- 27 Jan 2008
- Messages
- 23,620
- Reaction score
- 2,661
- Location
- Llanfair Caereinion, Nr Welshpool
- Country
I do like PBC_1966 comments they are very valid. The problem is we want to shift blame. Once reported does not matter what code then we have transferred the onus to some one else. It was said the 4 code system failed because owners could not work out what was informative and what needed action, but the 3 code system is the same. We can however put items in notes so we can still report items which don't attract a code.
The Electrical Safety Council seem to have taken in on themselves to list what should and what should not be reported. And what code should be given. To my mind it is all wrong. If I am testing an installation I feel any portable appliance plugged in at the time is beyond my remit. Neither is it up to me to comment that there are not enough outlets.
To test a house just completed and fail it because there are driers plugged in with leads going through door ways is silly, as we know once the house is in use that would never happen. It seems common sense is not very common, we just follow the rules laid out by some one who thinks he knows it all, and these people who think they know it all are especial annoying to those of us that do.
To my mind we are tradesmen and should act as such. We should be allowed to use our knowledge and experience rather than following some book. I think the BS7671:2008 is a good guide. It's not law it's just a guide to what is good practice. But to then publish guides to the guide seems to be going OTT.
I still don't understand why when taking the C&G2382 we should be asked questions about the appendix? It is an appendix not the regulation so why ask questions on it?
To my mind questions should test understanding. I know now changed but the question asking if a competent person can look after the safety of others or just himself was silly. What is needed is not to test ability to read but ability to interpret the regulations.
So the question "What is the maximum length of an unfused spur off a 32A ring final circuit"
A) 3 meters.
B) No limit as long as line - neutral impedance is better than 1.54 and line - earth better than 300Ω when RCD protected.
C) 50 meters.
D) As defined by 434.2.1.
I am not giving an answer as to be frank I am not sure what it is. But a question like this tests the ability to interpret rather than simple reading parrot fashion. We get all our bits of paper but we are not really qualified until we have completed or journeyman. My dad after doing a 5 year apprenticeship had to serve 6 months with four other firms before he was considered as a tradesmen. In other words 7 years to qualify. To my mind having to work 7 years in the trade before being allowed to work solo was good. Even the poor apprentice in 7 years will pick up enough to ensure he knows his trade.
As to allied trades that's a harder question. I admit I trained as an Auto Electrician not a simple electrician. When I made the sidewards move I will also admit I made mistakes. This was in 1977 I knew electrics what I didn't know was the regulations. I worked for a large firm SLD pumps. As a result I had some back-up to help me move. When employed the comment was they needed some one who could repair traffic lights and pumps. I knew the traffic lights like the back of my hand, and they thought easier to teach me pumps than teach a pump man traffic lights.
In 1980 I went to work in Algeria and that was a steep learning curve. Dutch system with Siemens bottle fuses and German sockets. After that it was the Falklands forget the rule book it was keep it going if possible in a safe way. Did not do bad 20 coffins sent out start of job and 4 returned at end unused. That includes heart attacks as well as accidents.
On returning to UK the BSi had combined with IEE as it was then to issue the 16th Edition. For the first time people were quoting rules. Before that the wiring regulations never left the managers office. Since then I have taken my exams and now have level 5 qualifications, but to be frank having a degree does not help in every day electrics. I still make errors like everyone else. OK as a member of the IET and attending meetings I may gain some facts which the simple electrician is not given.
But to be told what I should pass or fail seems to me to be missing the whole point of education. I consider myself as a tradesman and I feel I should be able to judge what is safe without having to read books, I know circuits with an RCD are safer than those without but I also realise we need to see where we are going. Where we have battery back-up then the RCD is not a problem, but without that the idea of being plunged into darkness being safe does not seem to follow my line of thinking.
We live in a world of method statements and risk assessments and to ignore them and hide behind the wiring regulations seems to me flawed.
To me we should be asking which exposes occupants to the least danger. So a house with a central stair case will likely be better with no RCD to stair case lights and one with windows lighting the stair case will be likely better with RCD protection. We have to ballance chance of electric shock to falling down the stairs.
Problem is obtaining data. Injurys due to falling down stairs due to failed lighting due to RCD tripping v injurys due to electric shock which a RCD would have stopped. A RCD does not stop us getting an electric shock. It only protects when the fault will cause the RCD to trip before we make contact with the power. So drilling through cable it offers no protection best it can offer is reduced contact time so in real terms it only protects where the fault is not due to direct human action but indirect like a water leak.
If we are looking at a water leak then a 100 mA RCD would protect just as well as a 30 mA RCD they will both trip before a human can contact the power. The quoted fact that 30 mA is the limit a human can take has really nothing to do with selecting the RCD size. A 30 mA RCD can still take 40 ms to trip which is enough to kill some one. But with a 100 mA RCD loss of lighting is less likely to happen. I would personaly access that there is less risk using a 100 mA RCD than a 30 mA RCD when falls due to lighting failure are taken into account.
But it's not up to me, it's up to those people who think they know it all?
C)
The Electrical Safety Council seem to have taken in on themselves to list what should and what should not be reported. And what code should be given. To my mind it is all wrong. If I am testing an installation I feel any portable appliance plugged in at the time is beyond my remit. Neither is it up to me to comment that there are not enough outlets.
To test a house just completed and fail it because there are driers plugged in with leads going through door ways is silly, as we know once the house is in use that would never happen. It seems common sense is not very common, we just follow the rules laid out by some one who thinks he knows it all, and these people who think they know it all are especial annoying to those of us that do.
To my mind we are tradesmen and should act as such. We should be allowed to use our knowledge and experience rather than following some book. I think the BS7671:2008 is a good guide. It's not law it's just a guide to what is good practice. But to then publish guides to the guide seems to be going OTT.
I still don't understand why when taking the C&G2382 we should be asked questions about the appendix? It is an appendix not the regulation so why ask questions on it?
To my mind questions should test understanding. I know now changed but the question asking if a competent person can look after the safety of others or just himself was silly. What is needed is not to test ability to read but ability to interpret the regulations.
So the question "What is the maximum length of an unfused spur off a 32A ring final circuit"
A) 3 meters.
B) No limit as long as line - neutral impedance is better than 1.54 and line - earth better than 300Ω when RCD protected.
C) 50 meters.
D) As defined by 434.2.1.
I am not giving an answer as to be frank I am not sure what it is. But a question like this tests the ability to interpret rather than simple reading parrot fashion. We get all our bits of paper but we are not really qualified until we have completed or journeyman. My dad after doing a 5 year apprenticeship had to serve 6 months with four other firms before he was considered as a tradesmen. In other words 7 years to qualify. To my mind having to work 7 years in the trade before being allowed to work solo was good. Even the poor apprentice in 7 years will pick up enough to ensure he knows his trade.
As to allied trades that's a harder question. I admit I trained as an Auto Electrician not a simple electrician. When I made the sidewards move I will also admit I made mistakes. This was in 1977 I knew electrics what I didn't know was the regulations. I worked for a large firm SLD pumps. As a result I had some back-up to help me move. When employed the comment was they needed some one who could repair traffic lights and pumps. I knew the traffic lights like the back of my hand, and they thought easier to teach me pumps than teach a pump man traffic lights.
In 1980 I went to work in Algeria and that was a steep learning curve. Dutch system with Siemens bottle fuses and German sockets. After that it was the Falklands forget the rule book it was keep it going if possible in a safe way. Did not do bad 20 coffins sent out start of job and 4 returned at end unused. That includes heart attacks as well as accidents.
On returning to UK the BSi had combined with IEE as it was then to issue the 16th Edition. For the first time people were quoting rules. Before that the wiring regulations never left the managers office. Since then I have taken my exams and now have level 5 qualifications, but to be frank having a degree does not help in every day electrics. I still make errors like everyone else. OK as a member of the IET and attending meetings I may gain some facts which the simple electrician is not given.
But to be told what I should pass or fail seems to me to be missing the whole point of education. I consider myself as a tradesman and I feel I should be able to judge what is safe without having to read books, I know circuits with an RCD are safer than those without but I also realise we need to see where we are going. Where we have battery back-up then the RCD is not a problem, but without that the idea of being plunged into darkness being safe does not seem to follow my line of thinking.
We live in a world of method statements and risk assessments and to ignore them and hide behind the wiring regulations seems to me flawed.
To me we should be asking which exposes occupants to the least danger. So a house with a central stair case will likely be better with no RCD to stair case lights and one with windows lighting the stair case will be likely better with RCD protection. We have to ballance chance of electric shock to falling down the stairs.
Problem is obtaining data. Injurys due to falling down stairs due to failed lighting due to RCD tripping v injurys due to electric shock which a RCD would have stopped. A RCD does not stop us getting an electric shock. It only protects when the fault will cause the RCD to trip before we make contact with the power. So drilling through cable it offers no protection best it can offer is reduced contact time so in real terms it only protects where the fault is not due to direct human action but indirect like a water leak.
If we are looking at a water leak then a 100 mA RCD would protect just as well as a 30 mA RCD they will both trip before a human can contact the power. The quoted fact that 30 mA is the limit a human can take has really nothing to do with selecting the RCD size. A 30 mA RCD can still take 40 ms to trip which is enough to kill some one. But with a 100 mA RCD loss of lighting is less likely to happen. I would personaly access that there is less risk using a 100 mA RCD than a 30 mA RCD when falls due to lighting failure are taken into account.
But it's not up to me, it's up to those people who think they know it all?
C)
