Hello I am new to this forum my question is this I work for an electrical retailer fitting electric cookers, although I have no formal electical qualification I am allowed to do this as I have trained to do so.Now the company want us to test RCDs (trip time and current) am I allowed to do this or do I have to have a formal qualification?
To carry out testing you need at least 16th edition wiring regulations ,you need to be nic eca approved or have your work tested by the council any work within a kitchen has to be submitted to the local council under part p of the building regs,you are connecting to a circuit and not plugging it in realisticly .you need to test the complete circuit to ensure it has an earth if you connect up a cooker to a circuit how do you know it has an earth ,!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! there are an awful lot of houses that dont have RCD's main bonding to water gas and oil plus all the supplimentary bonding required is essencial and has to be installed get yourself trained wiring regs and inspection and testing ,regs change next year ,if you have no formal qualification training you should not be testing
Hi Sparks and thanks for answering my question. At present we actually carry out 4 tests test1 earth loop impedance,test2 earth continuity test3 cooker insulation and then a final earthloop impedance test all using FLUKE 1652 test equipment.
KUZZ how do you define competant? a person who holds 16th edition regs or someone who has been shown how to do it. I am a competant gas engineer because I am CORGI registered but I am only deemed competant in the categories of work on my card.
As far as part p goes "A competent person is someone / a company who is approved by one of the government authorised bodies, otherwise known as a Part P Scheme Provider." However connecting a electric cooker up to an existing cooker point is NOT notifiable work. No need for certificates. But the regs say if you carry out electrical work it must be tested, so testing is still necessary.
As far as BS 7671 (the regs) is concerned competent is not clearly defined by qualifications/experience. If someone got hurt it would be up to a court to look at the level of your experience & the quality/relevance of your training. Then if you were deemed competent you would be prosecuted.
That's how I interpret it anyway. And to answer you original question If you have the right training, even if you have no formal qualifications i see no reason you shouldn't carry out an r.c.d test.