Discuss Anyone got a digital copy of codebreakers in the Periodic Inspection Reporting & Certification area at ElectriciansForums.net
Are you suggesting that you want an illegal copy? (And no, I don't have one.)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?
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
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.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
There is no requirement to quote Regulation numbers which nine times out of ten just cloud the issue and mean nowt to the client.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.
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.
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 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.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.
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 !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 !
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 eitherI 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
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.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.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
Reply to Anyone got a digital copy of codebreakers in the Periodic Inspection Reporting & Certification area at ElectriciansForums.net
We get it, advertisements are annoying!
Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website. For the best site experience please disable your AdBlocker.