I’m making these comments at the 17 minute mark and may well make further comments as I watch more of the video. So far I’m a little disappointed. The 2391 was originally introduced by C&G at the behest of the NICEIC. It was intended as a qualification for NICEIC QS’s to prove their competence. As an aside, I understand it was soon dropped as a requirement by the NICEIC, as so many of their QS’s failed the exam. I don’t have access to the Walled Garden now, but back in the day, the intention of the exam was in a similar vein to the NICEIC, it was for practicing Inspectors to prove their competency. It was never intended as the culmination to a course of learning or training. The original 2391, covered both initial verification and periodic inspection. Up until the introduction of Part P, very few Electricians owned or even knew how to inspect and test. Yes the Electricians would have learnt how to inspect and test in their second year at college, but after that, very few would have any further experience. I recall working on quite a large site refurbishing Council flats in Pimlico back in 1994. Although the flats were completely retired with new boards, the installation of bathroom extract fans and additional sockets, no EICs were produced. Subsequently that year working for Epping Forest District Council so called rewiring of their properties which amounted to new boards, new light fittings and new face plates, again no certification. Part P changed all that, no more bang tests. Electricians who wanted to join a Competent Person Scheme had to have test equipment and the notification process required an EIC with test results to be produced. So now there were all these qualified Electricians who had to go out and purchase their first test equipment and then re-learn something they hadn’t done since their second year in college. Other than going back to college and redoing there second year, the only option was for them to take the 2391. The 2391 is quite a hard exam, especially if you have no more than a passing knowledge of Inspection and testing. It wasn’t so much the knowledge (or lack of), it was being able to understand what the questions were asking. Here’s an example from December 2008: Identify the conditions that must apply if a Minor Electrical Installation Works Certificate is to be issued. As far as I’m concerned there is only one condition, that being the work must be an alteration or addition to a single circuit. I assume the conditions C&G require, is that it is not a new installation, that it is not the replacement of a Consumer Unit and that it is not a new circuit. The 2391 exam was also very strict on terminology, line not live, Radial not sub circuit, Ring Final circuit not ring main, etc. I believe it was in 2008 that the 2392 was introduced. This is a level 2 exam and the course is aimed at training domestic installers how to conduct Initial Verification. No need for Periodic Inspection, because Part P doesn’t cover Inspections. Similarly no need for commercial or industrial, again Part P doesn’t cover those. Eventually in 2012, it was decided to get rid of 2391 altogether and introduce the 2394 Initial Verification and the 2395 Periodic Inspection. Excellent, you want to just do Initial Verification there’s an exam for you. You want to just do Periodic Inspection, there’s one for you. Of course, you can’t please everyone. Some people wanted to do both, and resented having to pay for two exams when just last year they only had to take one. So now we have the 2391-50, 2391-51 and 2391-52. This latest iteration of the 2391 is (just like the previous iterations) intended for practising Inspectors. It is not a course to train you how to become an Inspector, the course is and always has been just to teach you how to pass the exam. To suggest that candidates should first take the Initial Verification exam, then at a later date after they’ve gained experience, take the Periodic Inspection exam, goes against the intent of the exam. What is needed is another level 2 training course like the 2392, but for Periodic Inspection. I would say the 2393, but that’s already taken. Personally, I never took the original 2391. 1 I didn’t particularly enjoy Inspecting and testing it’s always been a necessary chore for me, something I rate just above PAT testing. 2 I didn’t see why I had to prove anything, been doing it for ages. 3 was the cost, not only the cost of the course and exam, but also the cost in lost wages. As it happens last January, I came off my Motorcycle whilst on the way to work, broke my wrist. The site I was on, wouldn’t allow me on site with my arm in a cast, so I ended up being off work for 4 months. I figured I might as well do my 18th Edition, going to need it eventually, might as well do it now whilst I’m off work. So one day when I returned from hospital, I scoured the internet and found somewhere local where I could take the exam without having to do a course. Phoned them up and found out that if I got there before half 2, I could take the exam that day. Didn’t have time to find my scientific calculator, which was a shame as one of my questions involved the adiabetic equation and I don’t know how to work out square roots without a calculator, still they did lend me a copy of BS7671. I then decided what the hell, lets see if I can find a cheap 2391 course. Ended up going back to the place I did the 18th (found my calculator by then). Although they would have allowed me to take the exams without doing a course, they offered it to me with a course for not much more than just the exams. So I did the course, which I actually found quite enjoyable. Was quite impressed with the Tutor, not much impressed with the course material, very disjointed and hard to navigate. I doubt I would have bothered if I would have had to do two exams.
@garylatto4191
4 жыл бұрын
Great video and very informative for someone who did college 30yrs ago but wasnt confident to go in to it full time. but now older am retraining my self from watching your videos until I'm confident to take the exams , 30yrs onsite experience so confident with the practical side of things but struggle with the theory, thanks for taking the time to do these very informative videos/podcasts, be safe regards gary
@spinlondon
4 жыл бұрын
I always charge a day rate for Periodics. I don’t care if I end up only taking half a day, or even a few hours. I work on the premise, that until I start inspecting, I have really no idea how long it will take. As such I can’t book in a job for the afternoon, because I don’t know if I’ll finish in time. If it takes longer than a day, I’ll charge 2 days, or however many days it takes. Also, with domestics, I do not do sampling
@PJB71
4 жыл бұрын
If you don’t sample, what do you do? If you don’t mind me asking.
@spinlondon
4 жыл бұрын
patrick brannan I test each circuit.
@rattlehead85
4 жыл бұрын
This was a great Webinar....Part 2 tomorrow...doubt it’ll be done in 2 parts....more like 4 🤣
@cobydavies5304
4 жыл бұрын
I recommend we observe this discussion 😀
@spinlondon
4 жыл бұрын
I alway thought that knowledge of prior editions was quite important, especially if you take on board the Note from the HSE at the begging of each Edition. However my thoughts have changed. BS7671 was introduced in 1992, shortly after the introduction of the 16th Edition. That note from the HSE only relates to BS7671. Voelebs for instance date from pre 16th Edition as do fused Neutrals, so don’t really fall under the note from the HSE. Voelebs do not comply with any edition of BS7671, so to my mind if they operate, fine leave them there, but take on board whether RCD protection is required. If they don’t operate, they still may have a use as an isolator, again take on board whether RCD protection is required. Experience, is wonderful. How you go about gaining any in this day and age,I don’t know.
@andrewmounsey5030
4 жыл бұрын
Regarding the do 2391-50 first, gain experience then move onto 2391-51 would you advocate a mentorship route, where a newly qualified inspector does initials and runs a few of them past an experienced inspector. After a time (probably vary on individual and number of inspections and input from mentor) move onto Condition report 2391-51. Could be difficult for some sole traders but provides an opportunity to discuss engineering judgement.
@PJB71
4 жыл бұрын
Excellent podcast.👍 Why not develop your own advanced inspection & testing course. It doesn’t need to be a recognised qualification. I personally think they should have left the old 2391 alone. I took mine in 2011, I was the only one that passed out of a class of 8. I think it was meant to be challenging for a reason. Looking forward to part 2. 👍
@spark0420
2 жыл бұрын
Hi guys I’m a spark who’s been qualified (level 3) for almost a year now, I do a descent amount of inspecting and testing for my firm. I note down visual faults, and test results to pass onto my boss who implements it into certs. Is it worth paying to go back to college to do the 2391? And is there another course like the 2392 that’s better?
@dannyboisparky
3 жыл бұрын
I done one of the last 2391 exams before they changed it back in 2012. Had I failed, I would’ve then had to do it’s replacement. The tutor in the course was fantastic and went beyond just getting you through the exam. Sad to see how it has now become
@davidbaker7292
4 жыл бұрын
I paid for a package deal. Level 2 and 3 and am2. I have no previous experience or knowledge in electrical at all passed the 2391-52 and all other exams and tests first time (proud moment) in 8 months. Now trying to get a job and am being told i need experience first. I cant get someone to give me experience (even offer free work) with the qualifications i have imagin trying to get experience with nothing at all befor sitting any tests. It seems such a hard industry to get into.
@SparkyNinja
4 жыл бұрын
I agree David. The training and access to the industry has evolved to a point where even the strong contenders find themselves in the same position. Proper mentoring opportunities is what's needed and its something I am working on.
Пікірлер: 15