I thought short courses were fine. Just done a week on site. Now i think they're not fit for purpose.

[James]

So a whole new can of worms opens up
How do you define a "smart person" then how do you overcome the discrimination that will cause when some don't make the grade as a smart person
If you only learn the "basics" would that not make you a "basic domestic electrician" and what training progression will be needed to progress from the basic level

At what point does the industry educate the public on how to choose an electrician when "I'm an electrician" could cover widely differing levels of knowledge and experience. I've been to a few faults over the last few years where the customers had engaged a number of electricians to find faults and been challenged with what makes you think you will find the fault when all the previous ones haven't, all faults found and then I get why couldn't they find them then you have to tell them what state the industry is in

It's all to easy to dilute the pool and before you realise it you have a lot of "electricians" and a lot of problems they can't solve

Most satisfying faults to find and fix are the ones where you get called in as the 2nd or 3rd “electrician “
often the opening conversation starts along the lines of, I doubt you can fix it because x others have tried and failed.
can be good fun to point out the fault, how you found it and what you did to fix it.
often you earn a customer for life and some A rated recommendations.

 

[Dustydazzler]

Most satisfying faults to find and fix are the ones where you get called in as the 2nd or 3rd “electrician “
often the opening conversation starts along the lines of, I doubt you can fix it because x others have tried and failed.
can be good fun to point out the fault, how you found it and what you did to fix it.
often you earn a customer for life and some A rated recommendations.

even better , video yourself doing the job and put it up on youtube

 

[timhoward]

I've been to a few faults over the last few years where the customers had engaged a number of electricians to find faults and been challenged with what makes you think you will find the fault when all the previous ones haven't, all faults found and then I get why couldn't they find them then you have to tell them what state the industry is in

Point taken, but to be completely honest I'm not sure even longer recognised training paths are brilliant at teaching fault finding. Testing and inspection seems to be taught in a sort of painting by numbers way, and if it goes off script many newly qualified people struggle. Some of the posts on this forum are ample evidence of this. I think real world experience is where people develop fault-finding skills.

There are always exceptions too - there's a lad near me that did a short course, but prior to that got an A grade in A level physics. As one might expect he's very good at fault finding.
My point is that the length of course might affect many things but fault finding seems to be something people are gifted at or not, and it might possibly be more about the person and their ability than the course they happen to do.
This doesn't detract from your general point that the public have no idea what they are actually getting when they seek a 'qualified electrician'.

 

[Lister1987]

Point taken, but to be completely honest I'm not sure even longer recognised training paths are brilliant at teaching fault finding. Testing and inspection seems to be taught in a sort of painting by numbers way, and if it goes off script many newly qualified people struggle. Some of the posts on this forum are ample evidence of this. I think real world experience is where people develop fault-finding skills.

There are always exceptions too - there's a lad near me that did a short course, but prior to that got an A grade in A level physics. As one might expect he's very good at fault finding.
My point is that the length of course might affect many things but fault finding seems to be something people are gifted at or not, and it might possibly be more about the person and their ability than the course they happen to do.
This doesn't detract from your general point that the public have no idea what they are actually getting when they seek a 'qualified electrician'.

Fault finding (much like that inspection element of Inspection and Testing) is something that can be taught fundamentaly but is honed and improved on over time; you have a basic start point (did any device trip, if so what device?, Is there continuity were there should be and inversely where there shouldn't be?, has the user done or changed anything recently? What has the weather been like...and so on) but improving on that and interpretating the answer comes over time.

Anyone can do testing, not everyone can do inspecting as 1 is 'simple' and thr other is complex.

 

[DPG]

Fault finding (much like that inspection element of Inspection and Testing) is something that can be taught fundamentaly but is honed and improved on over time; you have a basic start point (did any device trip, if so what device?, Is there continuity were there should be and inversely where there shouldn't be?, has the user done or changed anything recently? What has the weather been like...and so on) but improving on that and interpretating the answer comes over time.

Anyone can do testing, not everyone can do inspecting as 1 is 'simple' and thr other is complex.

I disagree. Some people seem to have their brain wired in a way that isn't suited to methodical fault-finding, regardless of whether it is an electrical problem or something entirely unrelated.

 

[UNG]

Fault finding (much like that inspection element of Inspection and Testing) is something that can be taught fundamentaly but is honed and improved on over time; you have a basic start point (did any device trip, if so what device?, Is there continuity were there should be and inversely where there shouldn't be?, has the user done or changed anything recently? What has the weather been like...and so on) but improving on that and interpretating the answer comes over time.

I think your post is flawed and demonstrates a lack of knowledge regarding real fault finding, to confuse fault finding with inspection and testing blurs the lines between working with known standards and ensuring compliance on a go no go basis and fault finding where the test values achieved need to be interpreted correctly to have any idea of what you are looking for

It is difficult to teach fault finding beyond the basic principles, over time you develop your own methods how long it takes to do that can vary, when you have the production manager on your back because many £000's are being lost every hour it focuses you quite quickly, after a few years experience especially if you are involved in PPM work then you can often see developing faults before they become a fault

While fault finding has a number of basic principles it also combines a number of other wider skills not least choosing the optimum type of test equipment for the fault you are trying to locate and then understanding and interpreting the readings it gives you.

I agree that asking the right questions at the right technical level that the customer can process is another skill as sometimes you have to lead the customer through the problem to track / locate / narrow down the fault

Anyone can do testing, not everyone can do inspecting as 1 is 'simple' and thr other is complex.

I think you are wrong, there is more to testing than pressing a button on an MFT and expecting to see the right numbers, with inspecting it is simple when you can see what you are inspecting but good inspection is finding the things hidden in cupboards and joints buried in walls / hidden in trunking

Most of my fault finding skills come from working across all the industry sectors and a lot crosses over from sector to sector my apprenticeship was more industrial and commercial based where spending a little bit of time with the machine wiring diagram can save quite a bit of time locating the fault

Fault finding is like lock picking the more experience you have the easier and quicker the process becomes the key at times is not over thinking the problem and use the KISS principle although at times moving away from the day to day test equipment can save a lot of time

 

[Lister1987]

I think your post is flawed and demonstrates a lack of knowledge regarding real fault finding, to confuse fault finding with inspection and testing blurs the lines between working with known standards and ensuring compliance on a go no go basis and fault finding where the test values achieved need to be interpreted correctly to have any idea of what you are looking for

It is difficult to teach fault finding beyond the basic principles, over time you develop your own methods how long it takes to do that can vary, when you have the production manager on your back because many £000's are being lost every hour it focuses you quite quickly, after a few years experience especially if you are involved in PPM work then you can often see developing faults before they become a fault

While fault finding has a number of basic principles it also combines a number of other wider skills not least choosing the optimum type of test equipment for the fault you are trying to locate and then understanding and interpreting the readings it gives you.

I agree that asking the right questions at the right technical level that the customer can process is another skill as sometimes you have to lead the customer through the problem to track / locate / narrow down the fault


I think you are wrong, there is more to testing than pressing a button on an MFT and expecting to see the right numbers, with inspecting it is simple when you can see what you are inspecting but good inspection is finding the things hidden in cupboards and joints buried in walls / hidden in trunking

Most of my fault finding skills come from working across all the industry sectors and a lot crosses over from sector to sector my apprenticeship was more industrial and commercial based where spending a little bit of time with the machine wiring diagram can save quite a bit of time locating the fault

Fault finding is like lock picking the more experience you have the easier and quicker the process becomes the key at times is not over thinking the problem and use the KISS principle although at times moving away from the day to day test equipment can save a lot of time

I don't disagree with most of that, I do disagree with me confusing inspection & testing Vs fault finding, I know they can be and often are very different beasts. I know with IV you HAVE to work sequencially whereas fault finding and EICR you wouldn't necessarily do all the tests, even in the right order.

You can teach the purpose and limitations of testing, you can teach fundamental basics of inspection & fault finding (otherwise what's the point in the 2391?), It takes time to hone technique there's no doubt about that. It takes the right mindset to do deeper (checking places where most wouldn't bother or jist LIM for an easy life), without that mindset and desire to go beyond the surface then it's just monkey press, monkey write and monkey get paid.

Anyone can press a button and write down a number, not everyone can interpret the results in a meaningful way (which is what I was trying to say).

I'm green and inexperienced there's no denying that but I like to think my understanding is where it should be. I'm wanting to improve and further myself so any shortcomings that may be evident from participation in this thread, please constructively point them out and guide me to better understanding.

 

[ipf]

I don't disagree with most of that, I do disagree with me confusing inspection & testing Vs fault finding, I know they can be and often are very different beasts. I know with IV you HAVE to work sequencially whereas fault finding and EICR you wouldn't necessarily do all the tests, even in the right order.
You can teach the purpose and limitations of testing, you can teach fundamental basics of inspection & fault finding (otherwise what's the point in the 2391?)
Anyone can press a button and write down a number, not everyone can interpret the results in a meaningful way (which is what I was trying to say).

That last paragraph sums it up.......from a 2391 point of view.

I've known blokes who wouldn't have much understanding of what 2391 entails......or what or where a sequence comes in to it...but they've known how to find a machine fault with a drawing in front of them or a wiring fault when something has gone wrong. Giving them a pen and paper asking for an essay explanation of what they've done would have been like handing them a blindfold.
Fault finding does cover a huge field and isn't always a case of 'by the book'.

 

[timhoward]

@Lister1987 I'm not really disagreeing, a couple of comments:

I know with IV you HAVE to work sequencially whereas fault finding and EICR you wouldn't necessarily do all the tests, even in the right order.

Even on an EICR doing IR tests as late as possible with everything back together is good practise, so if I've put an accessory screw through a conductor at a light switch or socket or caught something in a metal trunking cover it's picked up by the test. It's very embarrassing if a stupid mistake while carrying out T&I actually makes something worse!

You can teach the purpose and limitations of testing, you can teach fundamental basics of inspection & fault finding (otherwise what's the point in the 2391?)...

Tracking down faults requires skills and thinking processes that are simply not taught as far as I can tell..
A real life EICR example from this year....IR testing an older CU with an RCD main switch.
Circuit 1, L+N bar to cpc bar is 80 Mohm (pass)
Circuit 2, L+N bar to cpc bar is 40 Mohms (pass)
Circuits 3-7, L+N bar to cpc bar is 0 Mohms.
Circuit 1 again, L+N bar to cpc bar is now 0 ohms.
Circuit 2 again, L+N bar to cpc bar is now 0 ohms.
Does anything you learn at college help you know what to do next? At this point no circuit can be turned on without tripping the RCD, and the tenant is getting cold. I'm sure a lot of the members on here would know exactly what to do next but would an average newly-qualified person who has just passed 2391-52?

Anyone can press a button and write down a number, not everyone can interpret the results in a meaningful way (which is what I was trying to say).

Agreed.

 

[brianmoooore]

where spending a little bit of time with the machine wiring diagram can save quite a bit of time locating the fault

Until, after an hour or so of head scratching and doubting yourself, you realise that the relevant part bears little resemblance to what's in front of you.