ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
ShoutChat
Recent Posts
Do we need grounding?
by gfretwell - 04/06/24 08:32 PM
UL 508A SPACING
by tortuga - 03/30/24 07:39 PM
Increasing demand factors in residential
by tortuga - 03/28/24 05:57 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 (), 390 guests, and 14 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 2 of 2 1 2
#98017 04/29/06 12:27 PM
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,928
Likes: 34
G
Member
The tamper proof receptacle proposal was reported on the IAEI web site as accepted. Lets see how well it does in the comment stage.

Quote
NEMA Proposal 18-40 Section 406.11(New)
Panel Action: Accept Vote: 10-1-1

Commentary: NEMA proposal 18-40 would require the use of tamper resistant receptacles throughout dwellings. The overwhelming consensus was to accept this proposal, but a considerable amount of time was spent debating whether the requirement for tamper resistant receptacles should be limited to only those that are easily accessible to children. For instance, it was questioned whether the receptacles behind refrigerators, or on walls behind counter tops, should need to comply. Panel members also questioned the ease with which attachment plugs could be inserted into tamper resistant receptacles, resulting in the writing of the following panel statement:

“The panel is concerned about the possible increased insertion force required for our aging population. The panel requests data concerning the amount of force necessary to insert a plug into the shutter and the amount of force necessary to fully insert a plug into a tamper-resistant receptacle”.

The panel finally agreed to accept the proposal without any location restrictions to see what comments were generated during the public review phase. The IAEI representative voted against the proposal. The IEC representative abstained from the voting.


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
 

#98018 04/29/06 03:44 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 449
F
Member
"I for one would be very happy if shared neutrals died a fast and painful death!!"

Surely you are joking. Prohibiting MWBCs would be idiotic.

#98019 04/29/06 10:26 PM
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 840
C
Member
mxslick,

If you don't like shared neutrals, how do you feel about services and utility wiring? [Linked Image]

Peter


Peter
#98020 04/29/06 10:44 PM
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,876
E
e57 Offline
Member
C-H /eaton has been selling a 2-pole with 2 singles of either 15/15, 20/20 or 15/20 for about 2 years or more. And they happen to work very well for remodels.

On the 2 wire circuit idea, I have to agree, it is a waste. There is no more danger, or loss in circuit quality in them than any other circuit properly wired. And with copper prices doing the hoochie choochie, it makes more sense. Environmentaly, they say that 50% of the earths copper is mined out now, and that in the very near future they will have to resort to Trash mining! (For that and other resources...) Kind of retro-active recycling....


Mark Heller
"Well - I oughta....." -Jackie Gleason
#98021 05/01/06 05:50 PM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 806
Member
Gentlemen:

To keep this on topic, please see this thread:
https://www.electrical-contractor.net/ubb/Forum2/HTML/002445.html
edited to add: ...And this one:
https://www.electrical-contractor.net/ubb/Forum2/HTML/002480.html


Quote
I for one would be very happy if shared neutrals died a fast and painful death!!

I rest my case. [Linked Image]

[This message has been edited by mxslick (edited 05-01-2006).]


Stupid should be painful.
#98022 05/01/06 07:07 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,391
I
Moderator
Rest you case?

You have not said anything. [Linked Image]

I know you are both knowledgeable and professional. [Linked Image]

But you have not proven anything.

How is a multiwire branch circuit different from a feeder or service?

Bob


Bob Badger
Construction & Maintenance Electrician
Massachusetts
#98023 05/01/06 08:55 PM
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,445
Likes: 3
Cat Servant
Member
As far as the AFCI debate is concerned... it has been my observation that many places have either failed to adopt any AFCI requirements, or have added exceptions.

In the field, I am finding many new homes with only receptacles on the AFCI's, and not the lights (as required by both NEC and local code).

The NEC, or any code, is of value only as far as it is respected. Make enough bad calls, and respect goes away. It seems that the AFCI mania has greatly undermined the respect we have for the NEC.

#98024 05/01/06 09:12 PM
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,876
E
e57 Offline
Member
Reno, I agree....
AFCI's have not proven themselves to me yet. IMO, or even IMPO they are a great way for breaker makers to make some more mulla.

IMO, they are an infant product at this point, and far from perfect. Time will only tell, but I do not see the need, or objective of requiring them in some, or any rooms.


Mark Heller
"Well - I oughta....." -Jackie Gleason
#98025 05/01/06 09:14 PM
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,507
G
Member
I've lived through and possibly because of - Spark iginition on furnaces, GFCI protection evolution, thermal protection of recessed fixtures, mandatory smoke alarm protection and now the evolution of AFCI protection. End of story.


George Little
Page 2 of 2 1 2

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