A rant about a Chris Kitcher book

[rustynails]

I bought this book over a year and half ago to do 2382/2392. Back then I noticed a few small things that were not right. Especially when cross referencing them with the GN3 etc. Afer doing some of the exercises in the back of the Chris Kitcher book on Inspection and testing second edition it appears that some of the basic principles for calculating R1 + R2 are not correct. In particular it is the books lack of ability to divise the r1 + r2/4 to get an approximation of R1 + R2 calculated from the m/ohm/m value and the length of the circuit given to you in the exercise. All of the answers lack the division. It's either me or I'm going banana's. But I feel let down by this book that I've paid hard earned money for lol something that if I didn't have any other book I would be calculating the incorrect answers...does anyone agree with me, has anyone seen this as well.

 

[trev]

Rather than ranting about it on here why don't you get on to the publishers of it? They should pass your concerns on to the author who should respond to explain himself.

 

[rustynails]

yep I was thinking that would be next...I also see a third edition has been posted perhaps those things have been sorted...don't think I will buy it tho.

 

[happysteve]

Hi rustynails,

I've recently bought this book, latest edition as far as I know (2013?). Can you post up the question number, and/or a few words from the question or answer? I will check when I get home.

 

[tony mc]

To be fair this has been brought up a few times with regards to mistakes made in the book.
However once you are well into your studies the mistakes should be easy to identify and give you confidence that you are taking in what you have learnt!
As you have said GN3 is the main reference re the exam along with BS 7671 !
I take it that the book concerned is the practical guide to inspection ,testing and certification ?
Good luck with your studies

 

[telectrix]

it has ( or had) a few mistakes but all in all, it's a good book. have you watched some of his videos on youtube? quite educational and he does well with the explanation of what he's doing.

 

[golfpaul]

Id second that, his videos are pretty good.

 

[happysteve]

To be fair this has been brought up a few times with regards to mistakes made in the book.
However once you are well into your studies the mistakes should be easy to identify and give you confidence that you are taking in what you have learnt!
As you have said GN3 is the main reference re the exam along with BS 7671 !
I take it that the book concerned is the practical guide to inspection ,testing and certification ?
Good luck with your studies

Agreed

GN3 is not without its own errors:



This is meant to represent an IR test of a single final circuit (as opposed to an IR test of the complete installation, which is shown correctly in the previous figure).

 

[Pete999]

Agreed

GN3 is not without its own errors:

View attachment 26786

This is meant to represent an IR test of a single final circuit (as opposed to an IR test of the complete installation, which is shown correctly in the previous figure).

May be my eyes aint that good could clarify your point please Oh I get it circuit breakers on right?

 

[High Tower]

Like has been said, they are good books to get started and his you tube vids aren't bad at all!, but one thing you will learn is don't take everything you read as gospel not even the regs book!

 

[happysteve]

May be my eyes aint that good could clarify your point please Oh I get it circuit breakers on right?

That's the chicken. Top of the class, sir!

 

[SPARTYKUS]

I used the above aforementioned book (Kitcher) for my 2391 in 2009/2010.

it was brilliant.

 

[Pete999]

Didn't have books when I did mine, chalk and slate was the order of the day.

 

[SPARTYKUS]

What specifically (as in page number, etc) is wrong...?

To be honest if there is a problem with R1+R2 it'd have passed me by anyway, I didn't learn it from that book.

The grammar at least is spot on in that book.

 

[rustynails]

well for example in the q & a at the back page question 26:

A lighting circuit is to be wired in 1mm twin and earth cable, the circuit is protected by a 5A BS 3036 fuse. What would be the maximum length of cable permissible to comply with the earth fault loop impedance requirements (Zs)? (Ze is 0.45)

Answer:

From table 41.2 Zs for a 5A BS 3036 fuse is 9.58 ohm.
The R1+R2 value for 1mm copper from Table 9A is 36.2mohm
Maximum resistance permissible for the cable

18.5 - 0.45 = 18.05

Maximum length of circuit is:

18.05 x 1000 /36.2 = 498M

Where does the 18.5 figure come from?

 

[happysteve]

Ah right, I see where you're coming from, now.

In my version, it's been half corrected, but it's still wrong! In my book, it says:

From table 41.2 Zs for a 5A BS 3036 fuse is 9.58 ohm.
The r1+r2 value for 1mm copper from Table 9A is 36.2mOhm.
Maximum resistance permissible for the cable:

9.58 - 0.45 = 9.13 Ohm <---- Ah ha!

(then it all goes down hill...)

Maximum length of circuit is:

18.05 x 1000 /36.2 = 498M <--- what the....?

So yeah, not the greatest feat of proof reading!

On the other hand, I challenge you to find another book that's written with as much common sense and as nicely illustrated with photographs as this one. I'm glad I bought it, but probably won't be using it for the questions (or if I do, I'll treat the answers with a pinch of salt)!

 

[Geoffsd]

I don't know.

It should clearly be 9.58 - 0.45 = 9.13 etc.

 

[PEG]

Agreed

GN3 is not without its own errors:

View attachment 26786

This is meant to represent an IR test of a single final circuit (as opposed to an IR test of the complete installation, which is shown correctly in the previous figure).

...mmm this was one of my first ever posts,on this forum,having purchased a new copy of said manuscript.....but,if we are spotting errors,at least these books have taught us something...i have a few books penned by Chris Kitcher,being a collector of books,and find them to be very explicit,and well written. There are errors and issues in most journals,whilst at college,due to my mothers lifelong belief in NOT having an opinion on something,without knowing about it,i read both the Bible,and the Quoran,and let me tell you.........:conehead:

 

[telectrix]

Quoran? thought they made fake sausages.

 

[PEG]

Quoran? thought they made fake sausages.

Both journals contain a mixture of ingredients,some more wholesome than others,squoze into the constraints of a narrow envelope,with a series of twists,separating the contents at intervals.Some eat it regularly.Some try it now and again.But,in my limited opinion,you cannot live an entire life relying on just one sausage...my names peg,and i'm on all week :conehead: