The Electrical Contractor Network

ECN Electrical Forum
Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals

Books, Tools and Test Equipment for Electrical and Construction Trades

Page 1 of 2 1 2 >
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#197038 - 11/05/10 08:44 PM new fixture quick connects
rhiphi Offline
Registered: 01/27/05
Posts: 39
Loc: Groton NY
So I'm interested in everybody's thoughts on the new disconnects in most new fixtures {is it code yet ???}
I find them to be a nuisance when I'm installing more than one wire they are only giving you one place to connect
when a multi- tap would be better.that means you have to wire nut your wires make tails then hook to the disconnect
inside of an already tight fixture ????

And I find most of my coworkers doing the same thing
snipping them and tossing them to the floor

also this summer my partner and i were mounting some remote ballasts in some 24 x24 boxes and not thinking we wired line to the disconnects for some 300 watt lights and low and behold when we fired them up oops the manufacture put the disconnects on the lamp side of the ballasts so keep your heads up on which side of the ballasts they are on
light disconnects
Only one choice allowed

Votes accepted starting: 11/05/10 08:44 PM
You must vote before you can view the results of this poll.
Work Gear for Electricians and the Trades
#197041 - 11/05/10 11:04 PM Re: new fixture quick connects [Re: rhiphi]
luckyshadow Offline
Registered: 01/04/05
Posts: 305
Loc: Maryland USA
Disconnecting means for the ballast in fluorescent fixtures that utilize double - ended lamps are required by code.( in other then dwellings)
This requirement is in the 2005 NEC article 410.73(G). The requirement became effective January 1, 2008.

Edited by luckyshadow (11/05/10 11:07 PM)
#197042 - 11/06/10 05:34 AM Re: new fixture quick connects [Re: luckyshadow]
rhiphi Offline
Registered: 01/27/05
Posts: 39
Loc: Groton NY
Ok thanks new york still has not adopted that code
at least it's not where I am
#197044 - 11/06/10 09:05 AM Re: new fixture quick connects [Re: rhiphi]
KJay Offline
Registered: 11/27/07
Posts: 763
Loc: MA, USA
I think they’re kind of pricey for what they are, but still have to use them on ballast replacements and retrofits. I think I paid like 8-bucks for a three pack of Ideals a while ago.
I’m still waiting for my “free” sample from T&B that I requested like 4-months ago, to see if I like theirs better before I decide to buy any quantity of these.
#197045 - 11/06/10 09:41 AM Re: new fixture quick connects [Re: KJay]
renosteinke Offline
Cat Servant
Registered: 01/22/05
Posts: 5305
Loc: Blue Collar Country
We've discussed these in the past, so please excuse me for repeating myself ...

The NEC has required that there be a 'disconnecting means' at each fixture for a few years now. The industry has taken this to requirement to be met by the use of the little snap-connectors you describe.

I'm delighted that we're seeing new fixtures with the disconnects already in them. Beyond that, the idea has been a fiasco.

Why? Primarily because there is no common connector in use. The ones that come with the fixture are not what you will use with the replacement ballast. So, you're right back to working hot, working in the dark, or having an awful daisy-chain of connectors in the fixture.

IMO, the issue would be resolved were ONE ballast manufacturer supply the connector with every ballast, be it OEM or replacement. Such a move would simply push all the rejected designs into the history books. I'm referring to Advance here, which is very much dominant in their industry.

A less likely approach is for there to be a NEMA-standard design for all to meet.
#197050 - 11/06/10 12:23 PM Re: new fixture quick connects [Re: renosteinke]
Tesla Offline
Registered: 06/16/04
Posts: 1280
Loc: Sacramento, CA

With respects...

I suspect it will have to become a NEMA standard do to the politics/economics.

When the proposal was accepted, the committee didn't fully comprehend the need for a STANDARD disconnecting means within the fixture.

Because of the possible combinations, don't be surprised if a couple of NEMA standard designs emerge.

#197084 - 11/08/10 06:08 AM Re: new fixture quick connects [Re: Tesla]
harold endean Offline
Registered: 02/16/02
Posts: 2248
Loc: Boonton, NJ
I don't want to keep harping on this issue, but look what happens when the manufactures write the NEC. They promote their own equipment. I feel the only place a manufacture is allowed to sit on a code making panel is when the section of the code refers to the construction of a piece of equipment.

Just my 2 cents.. smile (stepping off my soap box!)
#197090 - 11/08/10 07:11 AM Re: new fixture quick connects [Re: harold endean]
ghost307 Offline
Registered: 05/09/05
Posts: 897
Loc: Chicago Illinois USA
If the manufacturers on the CMP why don't they write it specifically for their product?
Not every luminaire and ballast manufacturer sits on the CMP that wrote this so it would have been a simple matter to exclude all of the other manufacturers.

Take a look at the guy trying to sell the PowerSafe Protector by sticking it in the 2011 Code. Take a look at how long it took for Carlon to get their stuff into the Code.

What we need is a NEMA, ANSI, UL requirement that the manufacturers only use "widget XYZ" for ballast connectors.
#197092 - 11/08/10 11:21 AM Re: new fixture quick connects [Re: ghost307]
gfretwell Offline

Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 9066
Loc: Estero,Fl,usa
The problem is they write the rule before the product really exists. It would have been better if the industry had settled on the connector before it was written into the law. Part of the problem is patents. They should settle on a connector that is old enough to be off patent so everyone can make them. (like the good old 5-15)
I personally like the old AMP/Tyco mate-n-lok (that is old enough to be in the public domain) but there are plenty of good connectors.
Greg Fretwell
#197098 - 11/08/10 01:51 PM Re: new fixture quick connects [Re: gfretwell]
renosteinke Offline
Cat Servant
Registered: 01/22/05
Posts: 5305
Loc: Blue Collar Country
There's no doubt that where there's a will there's a way; just look at all the funny plugs your computer uses! Yet, somehow, completely witout governmental or code assistance, the computer industry was able to work things out.

Yet, for all the failings of the various parties involved, I think this topic really illustrates the fact that you can't legislate progress.

Nor can you discount the effect of Murphy's law; the best widget won't work if the installer cuts it off and tosses it on the floor- for whatever reason.

That's the problem with making things 'idiot proof;' as soon as you do, they come out with a better idiot. (A general statement, and NOT aimed at the OP!)
Page 1 of 2 1 2 >


2017 NEC and Related
2017 NEC
Now Available!

Shout Box

Recent Posts
Forum Styles
by Admin
Today at 02:08 AM
License exam
Yesterday at 09:16 PM
Looking for older post
by sparkyinak
Yesterday at 12:27 AM
Members: Non-Members: Did you know?
by Admin
01/22/17 02:34 PM
Safety at heights?
by HotLine1
01/21/17 08:51 PM

Who's Online
0 registered (), 59 Guests and 10 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
New in the Gallery:
Desk-mounted "power-board"
Top Posters
gfretwell 9066
Trumpy 8560
pauluk 7693
HotLine1 6833
sparky 5545
Member Spotlight
Member Since: 11/11/05
Posts: 190

ECN Electrical Forums - sponsored by Electrical Contractor Network - Electrical and Code Related Discussion for Electrical Contractors, Electricians, Inspectors, Instructors, Engineers and other related Professionals