ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
ShoutChat
Recent Posts
Increasing demand factors in residential
by tortuga - 03/28/24 05:57 PM
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 (), 265 guests, and 15 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
#78595 10/05/01 11:44 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 449
F
Fred Offline OP
Member
2002 NEC books hit town this week. Got mine Tuesday. County inspector called me Wednesday. Wanted to know if I could explain AFCI requirement and tell him what an AFCI breaker looked like.
Let the fun begin!

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
 

#78596 10/05/01 11:53 PM
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 4,116
Likes: 4
Member
You Lucky Guy!

Does anyone know if the IAEI will be giving out Code Books? Details?

Bill


Bill
#78597 10/07/01 06:50 PM
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 4,294
Member
Got mine a couple of weeks back.

What do you like / dislike about the new Code Book?? (I personally can't stand the SI units as a primary and the inches used as the secondary...drives my old a** nuts. Look at the wirefill tables).

I'd also like to thank whoever shuffled the Sections like a deck of cards so that we can't quote a Section from memory anymore. [Linked Image]

[This message has been edited by electure (edited 10-07-2001).]

#78598 10/10/01 05:06 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 449
F
Fred Offline OP
Member
I too am frustrated by the shuffling. I thought there was enough of that with the 99. When the 99 came out Mike Holt posted an Article 250-Grounding and Bonding Index that cross-referenced locations in the 96 to the 99. I printed it and put it in my binder with the code book. I hope he does something similar for the 02. I know this isn't a name you hear on this forum much but I like Tom Henry's Key Word Index too. I already ordered one for the 02. It does make it easier and quicker to locate specifics when you're in a heated debate.

#78599 10/23/01 12:02 AM
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 30
T
Member
There is a cross reference to Chapter in Annex F.

SI is not an issue in my opinion. We'll still use inch pounds. After all we use wire and the NEC term is conductor.

As far as the AFCI's go I have one I took apart and show in my classes. Where was this inspector for the 1999 NEC?

Last year I went to a presentation by a NFPA official on the usability task force charges for the 2002 NEC. When I got my 2002 NEC I noted two things he didn't mention>

1) Font in the table of contents is just a bit larger, its easier to read.
2) Articles are in grey text boxes and stand out (1996 NEC each article was on a separate page, the 1999 the articles all run on)

And I've noted some vertical lines missing and the bullet is gone.

I like the NEC books with the spiral coil binding- I've had mine modified at Kinkos. Mike Holts new Illustrated Changes books are like that.

At Mike Holts Chicago EC&M code change seminar last week, there was a CMP 3 rep there (responsible for Chapter 3) He was asked if there was a logical order to the layout in chapter 3, answer was no. But there are all even numbers so new ones can be added.

#78600 10/23/01 12:10 AM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 449
F
Fred Offline OP
Member
Tom, "where was this inspector for the 1999 code?". He was working in a factory then.

#78601 10/23/01 11:28 PM
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,236
Likes: 1
Member
Picked up a copy today...

Boy that Article 80 sure seems, well powerful...

The blanks sort of caught me off guard... And had me puzzled for a while... Just looks weird..(write your own code!)

The SI units are reasonable in that they don't translate to the hundred-thousanths (6mm roughly equals 1/4" rather than saying 0.23622...") makes it more intuitive...

I haven't got much past Article 80 yet...

[This message has been edited by sparky66wv (edited 10-23-2001).]


-Virgil
Residential/Commercial Inspector
5 Star Inspections
Member IAEI

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