Should i do 2392 or 2391 testing and inspection?

[swaRRR]

So i've been doing electrics for several years now, and am going for my 18th edition this week. I'm 99% confident i'm going to pass it.

After that i want to do a proper testing and inspection qualification. I've never done much testing but need to learn it for obvious reasons. I have Guidance Note 3 and various resources which i'm just digging into now.

I know i can do the Initial Testing and Inspection 2392 but i'm wondering if there is any point? ie, will it lead to work?

I don't want to pay for the Initial which is gonna be about £800 if i then just have to pay another grand to do Initial and Period in another course to get the 2391.

My only worry is the course being a bit too advanced for me.

I have access to testing equipment and can set up a rig, along with doing more stuff at work, but i don't want to go straight for the exam if there's a good chance i'll fail it.

So, is the 2392 worth it to get me going (for more job opportunities) or is it just worth waiting and going for the 2391 when i'm ready?

 

[swaRRR]

Anyone?

twentyfive letters

 

[UNG]

It is difficult to advise I would say go for the 2391 but then I don't know your level of qualification, competance or experience
If testing and inspection is a regular part of your work and you have a good knowledge of test equipment then you should not have a problem
When it comes to the exams try and stay calm no matter how much the clock is wanting you to stress out

 

[Alan-N]

2392 covers Initial verification only and is Level 2
2391 also covers Periodoc Inspection and is level 3

2391 is generally considered a requirement to perform EICR's as it demonstrates a level of knowledge, although technically it's not actually required, some customers, businesses, insurance companies may not accept your certificate without 2391 and/or membership of one of the contractor schemes.. IMHO If you have experience, just go for 2391

 

[swaRRR]

It is difficult to advise I would say go for the 2391 but then I don't know your level of qualification, competance or experience
If testing and inspection is a regular part of your work and you have a good knowledge of test equipment then you should not have a problem
When it comes to the exams try and stay calm no matter how much the clock is wanting you to stress out

2392 covers Initial verification only and is Level 2
2391 also covers Periodoc Inspection and is level 3

2391 is generally considered a requirement to perform EICR's as it demonstrates a level of knowledge, although technically it's not actually required, some customers, businesses, insurance companies may not accept your certificate without 2391 and/or membership of one of the contractor schemes.. IMHO If you have experience, just go for 2391

Thanks for the responses guys.

The 2392 is the initial verification only, and they say it's for those inexperienced with testing.

Really, how much more difficult is the periodic inspection? So much more difficult they apparently had to separate the two so people could pass.

Is this the reality of it? How much harder is periodic inspection than initial verification?

 

[JBW175]

Thanks for the responses guys.

The 2392 is the initial verification only, and they say it's for those inexperienced with testing.

Really, how much more difficult is the periodic inspection? So much more difficult they apparently had to separate the two so people could pass.

Is this the reality of it? How much harder is periodic inspection than initial verification?

It all comes down to experience and how much you have of it to be fair.

If you’ve got very little experience in testing and filling out the associated paperwork, I’d probably hold back on doing it for a bit until you’ve got more, especially 3 phase installations as they’re a big part of the assessment.

It’s the practical where most people fall down as they run out of time, don’t leave enough time to complete paperwork, fail on safety etc…

 

[SJD]

The periodic testing & inspection includes (or at least it did some 10 years ago) faults you have to find and a set of photos of issues that you have to correctly identify & correctly code. Which needs some experience of what to look for.

 

[Ventricular Fibrillation]

I've been googling on this for a while now - as I understand it you need 18th, 2391 and NVQ to get ECS Gold Card (having already achieved installation level 3 quali).
I too have several years experience on the tools but limited knowledge of testing. I'm on the brink of taking the plunge and signing up with XS Training to do their online 2391 course, with a view to going on to 2346 NVQ after that.
I understand 2391 isn't easy, but I'm confident that if I put the hours in I can do it. If not, at least I tried, gained some knowledge, and only lost £900, which isn't huge in the grand scheme of things.

 

[swaRRR]

I've been googling on this for a while now - as I understand it you need 18th, 2391 and NVQ to get ECS Gold Card (having already achieved installation level 3 quali).
I too have several years experience on the tools but limited knowledge of testing. I'm on the brink of taking the plunge and signing up with XS Training to do their online 2391 course, with a view to going on to 2346 NVQ after that.
I understand 2391 isn't easy, but I'm confident that if I put the hours in I can do it. If not, at least I tried, gained some knowledge, and only lost £900, which isn't huge in the grand scheme of things.

The 2392 is like 700 quid too on its own. I've been told by several installation managers i know that they don't really recognise the partial qual and want the 2391 so i'm gonna wait and go for that.

 

[Ventricular Fibrillation]

Yes, seems to me the 2392 is just like a soft version of 2391 that you can do as preparation. On its own it doesn't hold much value.
You could break it up into 2391-50 Initial Verification then do 2391-51 Periodic later. But that's more work and more expense for the same result, so most people do 2391-52 combined course.
I'll let you know how I get on with it.

 

[Lister1987]

Thanks for the responses guys.

The 2392 is the initial verification only, and they say it's for those inexperienced with testing.

Really, how much more difficult is the periodic inspection? So much more difficult they apparently had to separate the two so people could pass.

Is this the reality of it? How much harder is periodic inspection than initial verification?

Potentially quite a bit. Any faults found during IV can generally be pinpointed quickly and with certainty, after all you'll know the exact cable runs, have a fairly good idea on external influences that could've caused your issue and thr like, however with EICRs youre effectively starting from scratch, with no idea on cable routes, installation methods, customer have-a-go handiwork and the like. You'll also likely see a snake orgy more often than not whereas with IV you're (hipefully) making the installation easier to navigate and neater.

While the 2 do share a lot of fundamentals in terms of testing, thry are drastically different from one another. One is verifying against a design (and if we're not then why not?) the other is ascertaining if the installation is fit for continued service (and checking against a design if possible)

2392 if I remember rightly teaches testing where 2391-50 is Periodic Inspection with some experience

 

[swaRRR]

Yes, seems to me the 2392 is just like a soft version of 2391 that you can do as preparation. On its own it doesn't hold much value.
You could break it up into 2391-50 Initial Verification then do 2391-51 Periodic later. But that's more work and more expense for the same result, so most people do 2391-52 combined course.
I'll let you know how I get on with it.

Please do mate it'd be an eye opener for me.

 

[swaRRR]

Potentially quite a bit. Any faults found during IV can generally be pinpointed quickly and with certainty, after all you'll know the exact cable runs, have a fairly good idea on external influences that could've caused your issue and thr like, however with EICRs youre effectively starting from scratch, with no idea on cable routes, installation methods, customer have-a-go handiwork and the like. You'll also likely see a snake orgy more often than not whereas with IV you're (hipefully) making the installation easier to navigate and neater.

While the 2 do share a lot of fundamentals in terms of testing, thry are drastically different from one another. One is verifying against a design (and if we're not then why not?) the other is ascertaining if the installation is fit for continued service (and checking against a design if possible)

2392 if I remember rightly teaches testing where 2391-50 is Periodic Inspection with some experience

Makes sense, thanks.

Do you have your 2391? If so how did you find it?

 

[Lister1987]

Makes sense, thanks.

Do you have your 2391? If so how did you find it?

Not yet, its on my todo list. I have a tester and a testing rig ehich helps massively, you'd be surprised how many go on the 2391 with no tester and/or zero experience

 

[JBW175]

you'd be surprised how many go on the 2391 with no tester and/or zero experience

Which probably accounts for the high failure rate.

I think there was 9 on my course, and only 2 of us passed first time around.

 

[Lister1987]

Which probably accounts for the high failure rate.

I think there was 9 on my course, and only 2 of us passed first time around.

I would say it beggars belief but then the 2392 suffers from Short Course tarring (DI courses anyone?) and as such isn't that well received compared to the 2391 that almost everyone knows.

 

[UNG]

you'd be surprised how many go on the 2391 with no tester and/or zero experience

Actually I'm not that surprised with the way training is organised now and some believing you are a fully qualified electrician with the 2382 and 2391 certs

 

[JAWS]

The main differences between the 2392 & 2391 is the 2392 is single phase only which is level 2 & the course itself you will be taught practical on how how to test. (This qualification is no longer recognised)

Where as the 2391 whether that's the 2391-50 or 2391-51 or combined 2391-52 is single phase & 3ph level 3 for experienced electricians where if you don't know how to test you're on your own & will likely fail as no practical training will be given.

 

[swaRRR]

The main differences between the 2392 & 2391 is the 2392 is single phase only which is level 2 & the course itself you will be taught practical on how how to test. (This qualification is no longer recognised)

Where as the 2391 whether that's the 2391-50 or 2391-51 or combined 2391-52 is single phase & 3ph level 3 for experienced electricians where if you don't know how to test you're on your own & will likely fail as no practical training will be given.

If there's no practical training then what's the point in the 'course'? Waht DO they teach on them?

 

[JBW175]

If there's no practical training then what's the point in the 'course'? Waht DO they teach on them?

As stated above, it’s for experienced electricians that know how to test, and do it day in, day out.

It’s very heavy on theory and GN3, you’re expected to know how to test and interpret those results prior to going on the course.

I’ll be honest, if you’ve got limited testing experience (especially 3P&N), you’re probably going struggle.

Build yourself a test rig, get to know your MFT, watch some sparky ninja videos, and practice practice practice until it becomes second nature.

 

[UNG]

If there's no practical training then what's the point in the 'course'? Waht DO they teach on them?

The 2391 is designed to enhance the underpinning core qualifications that some believe are not necessary to be a "qualified" electrician.
The expectation is that candidates taking the course have a good working knowledge and understanding of the regs, electrical installations and a level of on site practical experience. The actual course if taught properly is just revision of parts of previous qualifications relavent to test and inspect

I took the course and exam back in 2006 and having 30 years experience it wasn't a difficult exam but the time allowed to complete all the elements is tight and does build the pressure especially when I took the theory and practical we were in the middle of a heatwave

Not sure how it is done now but for a number of years now it has become quite common for the course to just review past papers and learn the answers parrot fashion and rely on memory to get you past the post and IMO does actually make the 2391 a bit worthless without other core qualifications to support it

 

[swaRRR]

As stated above, it’s for experienced electricians that know how to test, and do it day in, day out.

It’s very heavy on theory and GN3, you’re expected to know how to test and interpret those results prior to going on the course.

I’ll be honest, if you’ve got limited testing experience (especially 3P&N), you’re probably going struggle.

Build yourself a test rig, get to know your MFT, watch some sparky ninja videos, and practice practice practice until it becomes second nature.

I definitely will mate, i'm not going to go for it just yet since i feel i'd probably fail it.

Need to pony up for the MFT first, it's a dear do.

I've watched loads of testing....done by other people. Never actually done much myself except for DC testing which i'm pretty comfortable with.

Think i'm gonna go for the 2391 but maybe in 12-18 months time.

 

[Ventricular Fibrillation]

The way I see it if you have a good understanding of the principles and can devote several hours a week to hitting the books (not easy in itself these days) then it's achievable. But no point committing to the exams unless you're confident of passing. Not trying to sell anything but I'm planning on doing the online course because you have up to 6 months before you decide to take the exams.

 

[UNG]

The way I see it if you have a good understanding of the principles and can devote several hours a week to hitting the books (not easy in itself these days) then it's achievable. But no point committing to the exams unless you're confident of passing. Not trying to sell anything but I'm planning on doing the online course because you have up to 6 months before you decide to take the exams.

Getting your head in the books is one thing but it's getting / having the necessary practical experience and testing methodology to back up the theory when it comes to the practical part

 

[Ventricular Fibrillation]

True, I will definitely be building a test rig to help with the practical aspect.

 

[UNG]

True, I will definitely be building a test rig to help with the practical aspect.

A test rig is no substitute for site experience where you start out not knowing what the fault is rather than an x from y choice of faults that are preset