Part P joke Part 2

[welchyboy]

I was recently called out to a boiler fault. When I got there it was explained to me that, he boiler was changed two years ago and connected up by the plumber. It worked ok until it was turned off last spring.

Two weeks ago, the customer tried to kick the boiler in

 

[Sidewinder]

Prof,

Admin set this forum up to help learners.

There have been several heated threads recently with regard to the "correct" use of terms.

I must back up steps here.

Learners are easily distracted.

Use of colloquial terms that qualified & experienced personnel may well recognise can confuse learners and those studying for specific qualifications.

Those of us who (should) know better should really strive to be pedantically correct with our terms to ensure that we explain these thigns correctly for learners to appreciate the nuances, especially when you consider how strict C&G are with their terms in certain areas.

 

[Riggy]

Prof,Admin set this forum up to help learners.

There have been several heated threads recently with regard to the "correct" use of terms.

I must back up steps here.

Learners are easily distracted.

Use of colloquial terms that qualified & experienced personnel may well recognise can confuse learners and those studying for specific qualifications.

Those of us who (should) know better should really strive to be pedantically correct with our terms to ensure that we explain these thigns correctly for learners to appreciate the nuances, especially when you consider how strict C&G are with their terms in certain areas.

Sidewinder, you may well be right (I don't think you are, but that's irrelevant), the issue in the two previous "heated" threads was not what you said, but the tone in which you said it. Steptoe has the same issue here, I for one can fully understand Professional being annoyed by that post.

 

[Doc Hudson]

well to be honest thats one of the main reasons why i want to go up to A/C status as i feel downright ashamed to have domestic installer badges on my van sometimes!

Whilst an admirable sentiment, do you not also think there are rough A/C's out there as well. I am sure some who remember the electrical world before 2005, (Pre part P, DI status et al), will know of various electrical contractors who's work was of a less desirable standard and who's qualified supervisors were barely supervising, just sitting in a office signing off certificates written by the apprentice tea boy. It is a fact of life there are good and bad workers in all fields. Not all DI's are bad and Not all A/C's are good, just as there are good dentist bad dentists, good garages bad garages, good decorators bad decorators, good gas fitters & bad gas fitters. At the end of the day everyone has to decide what their own standards are and work to them without being compromised by events and situations around them. These sort of examples are a useful tool reminding us how not to do something.

Doc H.

---------- Post Auto-Merged at 11:12 ---------- Previous post was made at 10:11 ----------

Sidewinder, you may well be right (I don't think you are, but that's irrelevant), the issue in the two previous "heated" threads was not what you said, but the tone in which you said it. Steptoe has the same issue here, I for one can fully understand Professional being annoyed by that post.

Prof,Admin set this forum up to help learners.

There have been several heated threads recently with regard to the "correct" use of terms.

I must back up steps here.

Learners are easily distracted.

Use of colloquial terms that qualified & experienced personnel may well recognise can confuse learners and those studying for specific qualifications.

Those of us who (should) know better should really strive to be pedantically correct with our terms to ensure that we explain these things correctly for learners to appreciate the nuances, especially when you consider how strict C&G are with their terms in certain areas.

Riggy I will just make it clear that Admin did set this forum up to help learners. If I am thinking of the correct threads, then the issue under debate was the use of correct terminology. The fact that you are happy to encourage the use of incorrect terminology is a choice you are free to make. But students losing marks in an exam because of using incorrect terminology would not be appreciative of such guidance saying that it does not matter. The forum is for mature adult debate, which by its nature can on occasion get heated, but if the tone of any thread had been a problem then the threads would have been moderated appropriately. On the whole I am inclined to think the content of Sidewinders post is correct. There is the report available about failures on C&G exams and how terminology is a major stumbling block to many students. Many issues are open to debate and personal interpretation but I understand that terminology is not one of them. Also remember that the forum does use a peer regulation and recognition system where likes and reputation can be added or removed from people by their peers in recognition of the overall help and usefulness of their posts. Using these measures I am not sure that your interpretation of Sidewinder or Steptoe is that accurate.

Doc H.

 

[welchyboy]

Whilst an admirable sentiment, do you not also think there are rough A/C's out there as well. I am sure some who remember the electrical world before 2005, (Pre part P, DI status et al), will know of various electrical contractors who's work was of a less desirable standard and who's qualified supervisors were barely supervising, just sitting in a office signing off certificates written by the apprentice tea boy. It is a fact of life there are good and bad workers in all fields. Not all DI's are bad and Not all A/C's are good, just as there are good dentist bad dentists, good garages bad garages, good decorators bad decorators, good gas fitters & bad gas fitters. At the end of the day everyone has to decide what their own standards are and work to them without being compromised by events and situations around them. These sort of examples are a useful tool reminding us how not to do something.Doc H.

Yes of course i agree with that, before i went on my own, i have nearly allways worked for big firms who were all NIC A/C,

and for every good sparks there was at least 5 absolute jokers they had to carry, some of the work that they done was sooo bad!,

but i generally find now, that if you come across a 1 man band NIC A/C approved then you know chances are he will be half decent as he hasnt got anyone to hide behind.

On a side note, I actually come accross a job this week which was a new install around a year or two old, took off the cover of the TPN board and it was one of the best,neatest jobs ive seen, i was shocked to be honest as i am so used to seeing rats nests every day, the bonding cables were labelled, and there was a copy of the cert inside the door, it gave me hope! lol

i had to add another circuit to the board, took me ages to connect it so as not to make it look like an add on!

 

[professional]

Prof,Admin set this forum up to help learners.

There have been several heated threads recently with regard to the "correct" use of terms.

I must back up steps here.

Learners are easily distracted.

Use of colloquial terms that qualified & experienced personnel may well recognise can confuse learners and those studying for specific qualifications.

Those of us who (should) know better should really strive to be pedantically correct with our terms to ensure that we explain these thigns correctly for learners to appreciate the nuances, especially when you consider how strict C&G are with their terms in certain areas.

I think the problem lies with C&G - the term anal retentive was never more appropriate. They seem more intent on ensuring the correct use of terminology than ensuring that a student gaining a pass grade actually possesses a basic understanding of the subject in question.

The use of the term "main earthing conductor" makes perfect sense as it accurately describes the where the conductor is connected to i.e. the "main earthing terminal" - or should it be "earthing terminal" as their is clearly no requirement for an installation to have more than one. ROTFWL

Clearly I am in the minority is suggesting that common sense should rule the day - the main earthing conductor connects the installation to the main earthing terminal ....

Oh how DO I get through the day without C&G to correct my every word. ]

 

[Sidewinder]

Prof,

I'm not going to argue that C&G may well be overly fussy with their terminology requirements and lax in other areas.

However, to pass the exams you must meet their requirements.

 

[Doc Hudson]

I think the problem lies with C&G - the term anal retentive was never more appropriate. They seem more intent on ensuring the correct use of terminology than ensuring that a student gaining a pass grade actually possesses a basic understanding of the subject in question.The use of the term "main earthing conductor" makes perfect sense as it accurately describes the where the conductor is connected to i.e. the "main earthing terminal" - or should it be "earthing terminal" as their is clearly no requirement for an installation to have more than one. ROTFWL

Clearly I am in the minority is suggesting that common sense should rule the day - the main earthing conductor connects the installation to the main earthing terminal ....

Oh how DO I get through the day without C&G to correct my every word. ]

No one is debating the importance of common sense or what you may or may not call something whilst working on a site or to your boss / employee over the phone. But the fact that Sidewinder is making is one of the underlying objectives that Admin established when setting up the forum. That is to provide accurate answers to questions that are asked, to a level that if a student chose to quote something in a C&G exam from the forum it would be correctly terminology not idle slang, jargon, or similar. By your analogy we should tell all people who take driving tests to ignore speed limits and use your own judgment and common sense as to how fast you drive, as that is what happens in the real world. But teaching this way will not help people to pass their test. From many of your posts you appear to have issues with many authorities and bodies, Part-P, various contractor schemes, C&G, who are in your eyes wrong at every level. Everyone is entitled to dislike whatever they choose but as these are part of this industry at this point in time, we do all have to just grow-up get on with it and accept some things we may not like. Any competent professional electrician who cannot understand the point Sidewinder is making is clearly not as competent as they think they are.

Doc H.

 

[steptoe]

I think the problem lies with C&G - the term anal retentive was never more appropriate. They seem more intent on ensuring the correct use of terminology than ensuring that a student gaining a pass grade actually possesses a basic understanding of the subject in question.The use of the term "main earthing conductor" makes perfect sense as it accurately describes the where the conductor is connected to i.e. the "main earthing terminal" - or should it be "earthing terminal" as their is clearly no requirement for an installation to have more than one. ROTFWL

Clearly I am in the minority is suggesting that common sense should rule the day - the main earthing conductor connects the installation to the main earthing terminal ....

Oh how DO I get through the day without C&G to correct my every word. ]

do you want to read that again?

I think what you may be trying to say is

"the earthing conductor connects the main earthing terminal to the source of earth for the installation"

it does not connect the installation to the MET,

to simplfy things further, it is the earth cable that comes from the rod/HED/sheath and provides the installation with an earth reference to star point,

I think this proves in point why (in most circumstances) it is imperative to use the correct terminology in order to understand how and what each part of the installation does what it does and how and why it does this.

if you think main earth terminal is a redundant term then perhaps you have never been on a larger project where it may well have dozens(or even hundreds) of earth marshalling points.

 

[professional]

do you want to read that again?I think what you may be trying to say is

"the earthing conductor connects the main earthing terminal to the source of earth for the installation"

it does not connect the installation to the MET,

to simplfy things further, it is the earth cable that comes from the rod/HED/sheath and provides the installation with an earth reference to star point,

I think this proves in point why (in most circumstances) it is imperative to use the correct terminology in order to understand how and what each part of the installation does what it does and how and why it does this.

if you think main earth terminal is a redundant term then perhaps you have never been on a larger project where it may well have dozens(or even hundreds) of earth marshalling points.

Almost, but not quite - "the main earthing conductor connects the main earthing terminal to the source of earth for the installation"(thank you for your assistance)

In certain circumstances, say a former TT installation with a few rods (still connected) scattered around that has been converted to TNCS (maybe PME).

I would argue that the MAIN earthing conductor is the one without which the installation would not comply with the requirements of the DNO for the specified supply parameters/earthing system at the time of provision of the alternative earthing system. In the case above, the source of earth for the installation has effectively changed from a rod(s) to a provided terminal , making the the rods a form of supplementary earthing and hence the logic in then referring to them as "supplementary earthing conductors" and the earthing conductor connecting the main earthing terminal to the "new" source of earth for the installation as the "main earthing conductor".

Whilst I fully agree that terminology is important - I am constantly dismayed at the apparent emphasis on ticking boxes over actually being able to DO the job. Our customers (the public) deserve individuals that can Design, Install and Inspect and Test electrical installations - not write an essay on the rights of man.

There does seem to be a major problem in the industry i.e. that policies and procedures are dictated by many that are not remotely affected by their own decisions.