Anyone got a digital copy of codebreakers

[jase_31]

Is there a copy of Codebreakers lying around somwhere (pdf?), be nice to have a look what is contains before I buy a hard copy? Are there any similar recommended books?

 

[Risteard]

Is there a copy of Codebreakers lying around somwhere (pdf?), be nice to have a look what is contains before I buy a hard copy? Are there any similar recommended books?

Are you suggesting that you want an illegal copy? (And no, I don't have one.)

 

[Julie.]

Unfortunately the sellers of this book are prohibited from displaying any example contents - unlike many other books where on their website it is possible to view a few sample pages on-line.

Personally, if you are doing eicrs or associated with any aspect of them, it really is something you need to have, in saying that I would take much of the contents as an idea only, as whilst most is ok, there are areas that I and others would disagree with.

There is a similar albeit simplified alternative available online from safety first.

Again, this is something I think you need to have - just like the codebreakers.

Ultimately you need to make a proper engineering decision on each aspect of the eicr, in relation to the particular installation you are doing. Both these sources give background guidance (sometimes conflicting) to assist you in this, unfortunately some are seeing codebreakers as a definitive answer to every situation without proper assessment.

 

[richy3333]

I think it’s available as a digital version but you need to use the reader that the IET use for their books - at least I have to view it that way

 

[buzzlightyear]

Look under best practices guides on tenernnt.

 

[jase_31]

I was wondering what level of detail it gives? Does it provide reg numbers etc? I has hoping to get a glimpse from a youtube video, but although it is discussed, I havent seen an example. Although I can make my own judgement, it would be nice to have something to back me up - the best practice guide is too vague for this. I did expect that other providers would offer similar books - but everyone seems to use codebreakers as their go to reference.

 

[Julie.]

I was wondering what level of detail it gives? Does it provide reg numbers etc? I has hoping to get a glimpse from a youtube video, but although it is discussed, I havent seen an example. Although I can make my own judgement, it would be nice to have something to back me up - the best practice guide is too vague for this. I did expect that other providers would offer similar books - but everyone seems to use codebreakers as their go to reference.

Yes, it gives an example description say

Trunking lid missing exposing single insulated conductors - 521.10.1 - C2

To me it goes into stupid details around fairly odd areas and then completely misses other more useful areas out.

That example is one - surely it would be better to actually say

Trunking fails to achieve IP4x or IPXXD exposing single insulated conductors - 521.10.1 - C2

That way it actually gives you something useful

 

[jase_31]

Yes, it gives an example description say

Trunking lid missing exposing single insulated conductors - 521.10.1 - C2

To me it goes into stupid details around fairly odd areas and then completely misses other more useful areas out.

That example is one - surely it would be better to actually say

Trunking fails to achieve IP4x or IPXXD exposing single insulated conductors - 521.10.1 - C2

That way it actually gives you something useful

Thanks for the info. At least it refers to the standard, where the BPG just give vague ideas.

Copy ordered!!

 

[westward10]

Yes, it gives an example description say

Trunking lid missing exposing single insulated conductors - 521.10.1 - C2

To me it goes into stupid details around fairly odd areas and then completely misses other more useful areas out.

That example is one - surely it would be better to actually say

Trunking fails to achieve IP4x or IPXXD exposing single insulated conductors - 521.10.1 - C2

That way it actually gives you something useful

No the lid is missing, IP ratings become irrelevant. Quoting doesn't achieve IP this that and the other could be interpreted in many ways, trunking lid missing is stating the exact issue.
[automerge]1599849121[/automerge]

I was wondering what level of detail it gives? Does it provide reg numbers etc? I has hoping to get a glimpse from a youtube video, but although it is discussed, I havent seen an example. Although I can make my own judgement, it would be nice to have something to back me up - the best practice guide is too vague for this. I did expect that other providers would offer similar books - but everyone seems to use codebreakers as their go to reference.

There is no requirement to quote Regulation numbers which nine times out of ten just cloud the issue and mean nowt to the client.

 

[Gavin John Hyde]

if you go to electraform and create an eicr report then on the add observation page you can use the drop down menu and set the report to use the napit codebreakers.
for example below. you can use the napit codebreakers recommended code or give it your own based on judgement etc... when entering observations it will also populate the report from this screen too.

 

[Julie.]

No the lid is missing, IP ratings become irrelevant. Quoting doesn't achieve IP this that and the other could be interpreted in many ways, trunking lid missing is stating the exact issue.
[automerge]1599849121[/automerge]

There is no requirement to quote Regulation numbers which nine times out of ten just cloud the issue and mean nowt to the client.

So I find some trunking, the lid is on, but there is a 20mm hole where conduit used to be.

Is that exact issue described in codebreakers?

Is it wrong?, C1, C2, or what?, what regulation covers this?


Well in truth it isn't in there, the only close one is the trunking, so one particular example of dozens of possibilities, what about the rest?

Why does the trunking lid missing result in a C2?

It's because it fails to achieve 4x - that's the only reason, hence why I think a more generic description is more appropriate - of course in the particular instance it may need additional information

Trunking lid missing...... C2
20mm hole in trunking.....C2
4mm hole in trunking......C2

Etc.

 

[stokielee]

I think the question should of been does anyone own this book and would you recommend it. For the sake of 20 quid its probably just getting if its going you help on site, i guess you've already brought several books like the BS7671 for around 60-70 quid so another £20 isnt much really then if it isnt any use to you i am sure someone on this forum would buy it from you.

 

[westward10]

An open conduit way differs to the lid being absent. I am a firm believer in stating the issue as opposed to technical jargon which is generally deemed double-dutch to the client. Codebreakers is not something I would possess or recommend to anyone as experience is key, you cannot be carrying out EICRs by substituting experience with a Guide book propped up beside you. This is the problem the EICR sector is facing.

 

[Julie.]

An open conduit way differs to the lid being absent. I am a firm believer in stating the issue as opposed to technical jargon which is generally deemed double-dutch to the client. Codebreakers is not something I would possess or recommend to anyone as experience is key, you cannot be carrying out EICRs by substituting experience with a Guide book propped up beside you. This is the problem the EICR sector is facing.

I am not sure why you object to it.

Whilst I disagree with some of the ratings given, I think it is useful, and if more people used it as a resource then we would have fewer instances of "plastic cu - must be changed" and the like.

It provides quick references, of course there is absolutely no reason to copy verbatim the technical information it provides to the inspector on to the clients report - why would there be.

On the other hand, I have seen "reports" that state nothing - need a rewire, not safe, ££££.

I do believe that if you produce a report it should be up to standard.

It should describe the issue to the layman, but it also must include the actual regulation/technical issue for the people who would be carrying out the repairs/upgrades.

Whilst it could be better, i think it provides a useful resource

 

[Grant1987]

So I find some trunking, the lid is on, but there is a 20mm hole where conduit used to be.

Is that exact issue described in codebreakers?

Is it wrong?, C1, C2, or what?, what regulation covers this?


Well in truth it isn't in there, the only close one is the trunking, so one particular example of dozens of possibilities, what about the rest?

Why does the trunking lid missing result in a C2?

It's because it fails to achieve 4x - that's the only reason, hence why I think a more generic description is more appropriate - of course in the particular instance it may need additional information

Trunking lid missing...... C2
20mm hole in trunking.....C2
4mm hole in trunking......C2

Etc.

I do agree with what you’re saying but I personally do the hand written EICR’s these days and don’t provide regs numbers to which the install doesn’t comply to I write my description e.g. Socket outlet in garage not protected by RCD with potential of use for outdoor use.

However I have used easy cert in past aswell which does the regulation numbers for you when you classify the inspection schedule with C2,C3 etc..

 

[Zerax]

An open conduit way differs to the lid being absent. I am a firm believer in stating the issue as opposed to technical jargon which is generally deemed double-dutch to the client. Codebreakers is not something I would possess or recommend to anyone as experience is key, you cannot be carrying out EICRs by substituting experience with a Guide book propped up beside you. This is the problem the EICR sector is facing.

One of the issues that the Codebreakers book is trying to fix is the lack of consistency in EICRs. If you get 5 sparks to do the same EICR... I'll put money on it that you'll get 5 different reports with a mix of C2s and C3s. Pick which one you like the most !

 

[Julie.]

One of the issues that the Codebreakers book is trying to fix is the lack of consistency in EICRs. If you get 5 sparks to do the same EICR... I'll put money on it that you'll get 5 different reports with a mix of C2s and C3s. Pick which one you like the most !

Exactly, so many are using eicrs just to obtain work that isn't needed.

Having something (which should be improved) to provide consistency is a good step

 

[Grant1987]

I am not sure why you object to it.

Whilst I disagree with some of the ratings given, I think it is useful, and if more people used it as a resource then we would have fewer instances of "plastic cu - must be changed" and the like.

It provides quick references, of course there is absolutely no reason to copy verbatim the technical information it provides to the inspector on to the clients report - why would there be.

On the other hand, I have seen "reports" that state nothing - need a rewire, not safe, ££££.

I do believe that if you produce a report it should be up to standard.

It should describe the issue to the layman, but it also must include the actual regulation/technical issue for the people who would be carrying out the repairs/upgrades.

Whilst it could be better, i think it provides a useful resource

I’ve had to change numerous plastic consumer units when not complying to Ip4x or infact not complying to me putting my arm in there and touching the bus bar on route to touching the main switch either

 

[Zerax]

Whilst it could be better, i think it provides a useful resource

Agreed. It would be useful if there was an efficient feedback system whereby sparks could ping send in details of any errors, inconsistencies or omissions. An online system would work well with this, that encompassed a good search facility. I think most EICR-ers carry a tablet/laptop. This would make it a far more usable resource.

 

[westward10]

I am not sure why you object to it.

Whilst I disagree with some of the ratings given, I think it is useful, and if more people used it as a resource then we would have fewer instances of "plastic cu - must be changed" and the like.

It provides quick references, of course there is absolutely no reason to copy verbatim the technical information it provides to the inspector on to the clients report - why would there be.

On the other hand, I have seen "reports" that state nothing - need a rewire, not safe, ££££.

I do believe that if you produce a report it should be up to standard.

It should describe the issue to the layman, but it also must include the actual regulation/technical issue for the people who would be carrying out the repairs/upgrades.

Whilst it could be better, i think it provides a useful resource

If you are competent then Guides are not required, if you are not competent then step away. There is no requirement to quote Regulation numbers they mean nothing to the client who receives the Report.