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
1 members (Scott35), 273 guests, and 20 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,923
Likes: 32
G
Member
I had a picture of one of those LBs here a while ago. There was a sharp shoulder on the inside of the hubs that you could strip wire with.


Greg Fretwell
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
 

Joined: May 2005
Posts: 984
Likes: 1
G
Member
I got disgusted with UL a few years ago when I saw a design flaw in an MCC starter.

The operating mechanism for the fused disconnect blocked access to the fuse holders. The only way to change the fuses was to turn the starter disconnect ON and change the fuses while hot. I mentioned this to the guy at UL and he told me that they only test for safety when properly installed and were not interested in anything having to do with "maintenance".

I now consider the UL Listing as little more than a starting point when I'm deciding what to specify on a job.


Ghost307
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 337
S
Member
This creates a major conflict, allowing a listed device to be installed specifically in conflict with the code. I do not have an issue with the LED rod lights and their conflict, but I know of another case where equipment is "Listed" and if installed according to listing, it works, but the manufacturer then says on the side that you don't need to follow code because our device is better than code, which is a lie or at best a horrible misrepresentation and creates a large hazard. The mfg. tried to get code changed, but the scientific community stopped it and still after many proofs of the failure of the device when installed according to the manufacturer claims, they misrepresent on.

Shane

Last edited by sabrown; 09/30/14 08:11 PM.
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 984
Likes: 1
G
Member
It's up to the AHJ if they want to waive a Code requirement, but personally I would not accept a claim of a manufacturer as sufficient to ignore the Code (which, once properly adopted, has the force of law).


Ghost307
Page 2 of 2 1 2

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