- Reaction score
- 1,169
A question for Spin, or anyone else for that matter.
When I was getting trained for T&I it was suggested (not written) not to go back more than one or two editions as other problems arise, I will list just a few problems that would not be acceptable now in chronological order backwards obviously missing the 16th as that was the immediate prior edition.
15th ed VOELCBs discontinued in one of the late 15th amds before the 16th, no means of testing now, and deemed an obsolete method now.
14th ed no supp bonding required in bathrooms and no RCD requirement (unless TT)
13th ed, prior to 1966 no CPC requirement at lighting circuits and also the water pipe was permitted to be used as a means of earthing.
(I know there is a "workaround" for the no CPC at lighting problem)
Clearly even if these were permitted at the time they would result in C2s now and therefore a fail now, no ?
The guidance given by the ESC seems to bear out my lecturer's assertion that we should not go back more than an edition or two before some updating becomes necessary would you agree with that assertion or not ?
When I was getting trained for T&I it was suggested (not written) not to go back more than one or two editions as other problems arise, I will list just a few problems that would not be acceptable now in chronological order backwards obviously missing the 16th as that was the immediate prior edition.
15th ed VOELCBs discontinued in one of the late 15th amds before the 16th, no means of testing now, and deemed an obsolete method now.
14th ed no supp bonding required in bathrooms and no RCD requirement (unless TT)
13th ed, prior to 1966 no CPC requirement at lighting circuits and also the water pipe was permitted to be used as a means of earthing.
(I know there is a "workaround" for the no CPC at lighting problem)
Clearly even if these were permitted at the time they would result in C2s now and therefore a fail now, no ?
The guidance given by the ESC seems to bear out my lecturer's assertion that we should not go back more than an edition or two before some updating becomes necessary would you agree with that assertion or not ?