ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
ShoutChat
Recent Posts
Increasing demand factors in residential
by gfretwell - 03/28/24 12:43 AM
Portable generator question
by Steve Miller - 03/19/24 08:50 PM
Do we need grounding?
by NORCAL - 03/19/24 05:11 PM
240V only in a home and NEC?
by dsk - 03/19/24 06:33 AM
Cordless Tools: The Obvious Question
by renosteinke - 03/14/24 08:05 PM
New in the Gallery:
This is a new one
This is a new one
by timmp, September 24
Few pics I found
Few pics I found
by timmp, August 15
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 255 guests, and 16 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 764
K
KJay Offline OP
Member
I just received my 2011 Handbook, so for those still waiting, I assume this means they are now available everywhere.
The change I was asking about above appears to be mostly just the Table numbering and some 60C and 90C ampacity changes.
It looks like they have reduced ampacity for some copper conductors at 60C by 5 Amps, but increased some other aluminum conductors by the same amount.

Stay up to Code with the Latest NEC:


>> 2023 NEC & Related Reference & Exam Prep
2023 NEC & Related Reference & Study Guides

Pass Your Exam the FIRST TIME with the Latest NEC & Exam Prep

>> 2020 NEC & Related Reference & Study Guides
 

KJay #197370 11/23/10 08:31 PM
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 7,381
Likes: 7
Member
Thanks Kjay!
I'm waiting for the CD & Handbook combo....



John
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,233
H
Member
I haven't got any new books yet, Waiting to see what the best deal I can do, plus my state is very slow at adopting the new NEC after it is out.

Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 7,381
Likes: 7
Member
Harold:
I know what you mean about state adoption, but I get a 'new' NEC ASAP, and the changes ASAP to prepare my courses and for my 'absorbition' time.

My CO rejected the PO request for the '11 NEC for the office to conserve $$ based on 'we don't need it yet'.


John
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,233
H
Member
John,

I work for 4 different towns and some of my towns would never buy me a code book. Last year was the first time (I believe) that I got code books for every town. They are all watching their money.

Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 15
N
Member
So Mike Holt put in the name change thing. 310.16 was pretty easy to remember and has been the same for the last 30 years. It was Table 310.12 in my 1971 Code. So now we have 310.15(B)(16) that is much more difficult to remember and say and write. I wonder when does usability become more important than the Style manual?

Last edited by nercGerald; 02/05/11 08:40 PM.
KJay #198846 02/05/11 10:23 PM
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,273
T
Member
It had to be changed if you think about it. When cited all and every know that the table referenced by 310.16 is different than 310.15 (B) 16.

Otherwise, in all correspondence the adjusted values are not apparent.


Tesla
Page 2 of 2 1 2

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5