ECN Forum
Posted By: Joe Tedesco What's Wrong Here? - 05/27/01 03:38 PM
[Linked Image]

Give the rules in the NEC that can be used to cite the violation here.
Posted By: Glenn Re: What's Wrong Here? - 05/29/01 01:46 AM
370-23(a).

370-16(a)(1).

400-8(1) if the cable is not NM etc.

300-11(a). Duct tape is not suitable.

300-11(b). It appears the cable is supporting the box.

Glenn
Posted By: Joe Tedesco Re: What's Wrong Here? - 05/29/01 04:29 PM
Glenn:

The cable was 3 wire/with ground Type NM, and you called the other violations here.



[This message has been edited by Joe Tedesco (edited 05-29-2001).]
Posted By: Tom Re: What's Wrong Here? - 06/01/01 11:06 PM
In my opinion, if it wasn't for the language in 336-18, duct tape would be perfectly acceptable for securing NM cable. After all, that NASCAR 200 MPH duct tape seems to hold pretty good (Tongue in cheek).

BTW, some duct tape is now UL listed for it's intended use.

Tom
Posted By: Bill Addiss Re: What's Wrong Here? - 06/02/01 01:35 AM
Tom,

Do you mean the uses found here? [Linked Image] www.ducttapeguys.com


I took some pictures down at NASA in Florida. In the giftshop the EMT receptacle drops were Epoxied to the poles. I saw no straps.

Bill

[This message has been edited by Webmaster (edited 06-02-2001).]
Posted By: Tom Re: What's Wrong Here? - 06/02/01 09:53 PM
Bill,

I forgot about the duct tape guys, they would probably be the ultimate authority on the subject.

Another authority on duct tape is "The New Red Green Show" on PBS. Everything Red does in the Handymans Corner involves duct tape.

As Red would say, keep your stick on the ice.

Tom
Posted By: Matt M Re: What's Wrong Here? - 06/07/01 03:24 AM
A little trivia here. [Linked Image]

I was involved with some wiring on one of the 3M buildings in St. Paul MN back in the early 80s. This particular building was used for research of reflective sheeting and adhesives.

I think of this every time I hear the term duct tape. One of the techs that worked there told me the story of how this product was developed. They needed a flexible but very strong tape, and someone came up with the idea of applying adhesive to cotton fabric. The strongest weave of that day was known as cotton duck (e.g. Carharts), hence the name duck tape. It wasn't until other manufacturers started producing their own versions of the product that it was incorrectly labeled as duct tape.

Tape is normally refered to by the product that it is made of, not what it is used for. For example, plastic tape, rubber tape, cambric tape, cellophane tape, etc.

Don't you feel totally enlightened now? LOL!

Matt
Posted By: Anonymous Re: What's Wrong Here? - 06/07/01 03:48 AM
If anyone can document this as true, I would be pleased to call it duck tape - indeed, I have seen such a brand. Your reasoning makes sense to me.



[This message has been edited by Dspark (edited 06-06-2001).]
Posted By: Bill Addiss Re: What's Wrong Here? - 06/07/01 07:52 PM
Matt,

I've always assumed that people were saying it wrong when they said "Duck" Boy, we're learning all kinds of stuff here!


I found this Duck vs Duct explanation over at the Ducttapeguys site. Does this agree with what you were told?

[Linked Image from octanecreative.com]

http://www.octanecreative.com/ducttape/duckvsduct.html


[Linked Image]
Bill
Posted By: Matt M Re: What's Wrong Here? - 06/09/01 03:16 AM
Bill,

Nope, totally different story there LOL. I think I'll have to stay with the guy from Minnesota mining and manufacturing, the cotton duck fabric just seems to me a more logical beginning. I know that a lot of my old duck hunting clothes were made of cotton duck material.

Matt
© ECN Electrical Forums