ECN Forum Forums Photo Discussion Forums Violation Photo Forum It is not going to get any better!

How many? For what? Permitted use?

Looks like many a computer server room I have been in.

Relocatable power taps are not permitted to be daisy chained (I can't tell if they are or not). They also are not permitted to be secured to a surface like this (although they all come with holes on the back for this purpose ). This would be listing information.

You know that Costco has these that are 6ft. long! I didn't count how many recepts where in it but i'm sure you could really load a 20 amp. circuit with it not to mention a 15 amp. circuit

[This message has been edited by BElder (edited 09-15-2005).]

On the other side of the coin, what is a _good_ solution for this? A wall bank of 20 duplex receptacles?

For many computer application, you have a ton of small power supplies and transformers. Perhaps 25W each; a bunch could be powered off of a single 15A circuit, if there were enough receptacles...

The costco power tap mentioned above is _great_ for these transformers and low power computation loads. It spaces the transformers out quite nicely for heat dissipation, and the various wires are not too crowded together.

It seems to me that there should be power strips listed for wall mounting and essentially permanent use, plugged in to receptacles. I recognize that this is not currently acceptable under code, but it is also done very frequently, and often safely.

I personally am far more disturbed by the lack of neat wire dressing and organization, not the use of power strips.

-Jon

If you put in a wall bank of 20 duplex receptacles, that doesn't give them Surge Protection without spending a whole lot more per receptacle.


How about some hard wired Plugmold? Those are approved for attachment to walls. I don't see them available with built in surge protection, but you can put in hard wired surge protection, either in the sub-panel or in a outlet box.

No doubt, this is ugly.

"Relocatable power taps are not permitted to be daisy chained (I can't tell if they are or not)."

The sure look that way to me. the fourth strip is plugged in the wall, the third plugged into the fourth,. the second into the third, etc. Note the white cords with angled plugs.


"On the other side of the coin, what is a _good_ solution for this? A wall bank of 20 duplex receptacles?"

Why not? Here's a shot of the rear of my home-theater stack:

Very impressive Larry.

Dave

Larry's solution is beautiful and I thank him for posting it.

About daisy chaining these relocatable power taps, at one site I pulled up a mess of 5 of of these daisy chained three deep from under a raised computer floor. Upon examination, I quickly reduced the count down to two both of which were not fully utilized, plugged directly into the premises wiring, and left them tucked neatly at the bottom of the racks they served. People were just being lazy, or, had removed alot of equipment by the time I saw the site.

In any event, the problem I saw should have never occurred and the relocatable strips should never have been installed at the site. Someone should have just spent extra dough for plug strips mounted on the racks and avoided the hazards that came to pass under the computer room floor due to "out of sight, out of mind."

Shane

In 1973, in response to a "gas crisis," speed limits nationwide were lowered to 55mph. This law was thoroughly detested, widely ignored, and eventually repealed. Despite predictions of a "highway holocaust," the return of the higher limit has had little effect on accident statistics. It has had an effect on those jurisdictions that exploited enforcement to financial gain.


We are surrounded by millions of these power taps. We also have an entirely arbitrary limit on the number of receptacles in commercial/ industrial settings- something that the use of plugmold, or a bank of receptacles, can too easily violate.
Indeed, this code provision (90 watts per plug) is the primary reason these things are listed for "temporary" use only, and lack easy means for secure mounting.

As was pointed out, these strips also often provide a safety protection- surge protection- not readily available by any other means. (Lets see....a bank of $40 receptacles, with several new circuits run- or a $15 outlet strip? How will I decide?)

Can this be a case where the rules are wrong? Does not the routine violation of one code provision lessen our respect for the code- and make us more tempted to ignore other provisions?

Larry's solution is great! But can you convince the people to spend (guessing $200.00) for this insted of $9.99 for the power strip?
Larry just out of curiosity is this a seperate circuit to the panel or a tap off of an existing circuit?

Another good post Reno, I have thought of many of the same issues.

I have some Wiremold brand portable power taps and they are wired with 12 AWG and 20 amp Hubbell receptacles.

They also have brackets to mount to a wall.

"Larry just out of curiosity is this a seperate circuit to the panel or a tap off of an existing circuit?"

Actually, this is fed from a 4-space/8-circuit G.E. sub-panel just above in the wall, fed via a 6/3 NM on a 50a. 2-pole breaker in my main panel. I used the G.E. because the breakers aren't centered in the enclosure:



Note the yellow RCA cord; this is a 12v. trigger from my surround pre/pro. There is a 25a, 4-pole contactor inside the panel which switches 4 of the 8 circuits. I had to cascade several relays because the pre/pro trigger is only capable of 15ma.

The 12v. output operates a reed relay with 1a. contacts, which in turn controls a 120v-coil, 10a-contact relay, which in turn operates the contactor. The reed relay contacts can't handle contactor's current directly.

(Yes, I know it's illegal to have misc equipment in a panel. Hey, after all, I'm a professional, so I know how to break the rules properly!)

"Hey, after all, I'm a professional, so I know how to break the rules properly!)"

Famous last words?

"Hey, after all, I'm a professional, so I know how to break the rules properly!)"

Like the shoemaker with holes in his shoes or the carpenter with a hole in his roof.

I have a buddy who is an electrician, at who's house you can see some of the most horrific uses of extension cords, temp lighting and countless other electrical odds and ends used in a way that a professional (that he is) should always be on hand.
I laugh (probably should cry) to myself everytime I set foot in this guy's house.

Checkmate, Larry. Guess the code, by proscribing anything actually useful, really wants us to return to horse & buggy days!

We can't let anything like progress interfere with inspection convenience, can we?

Larry: What is the purpose of having a remote controlled contactor for the four circuits? Some type of power on/power off sequencing for amplifiers and pre-amps, possibly (to minimize audio "thumps")?

Mike (mamills)

Larry, by posting this you raise a question. What is the code-compliant way of doing this? My imagination is tending towards the following:
Panel->Breaker->Contactor(Separate Enclosure)->Second Subpanel->Final Breakers

Although Non Code Compliant, I (at the risk of being yelled at) agree that sometimes In circumstances like this, professionals know when it is safe to break the rules.

I would agree this would be a bad idea if it were the *Main* panel, but being a subpanel it can be isolated for service by turning off the feed breaker in the main.

And with reference to your 'Stack O Outlets', EXCELLENT work, neat, and shows that such a thing can be neat and workmanlike.

Thre should exist industrial control relays and such that would be code compliant, maybe not in the panel, but maybe downstream. Or those remote control light switch relays that fit in knockouts of boxes with the low voltage wiring outside the box.

Thanx for the kudos, guys.

Mike, the contactor is not on delay. It's simply for automatically controlling my amplifiers and ancillary electronics.

Hello folks.

I work in IT, but working in IT frequently involves coming up with power solutions, so I have interest in electrical work as well.

There are a lot of situations where an installation of equipment will only be around for 6-12 months, and the equipment doesn't draw very much power. In these situations, it would be extremely wasteful to call an electrician out to install additional outlets which will be completely unused once the installation is gone.

We use power strips all the time where I work, but we try to use them as safely as possible. We use only high quality strips, and we never daisy-chain. When I do find daisy chained strips, I fix it and chew out whoever is responsible.

I never understood the "rule" about not being able to secure power strips to a surface. In a lot of cases, securing them to a surface makes for a much neater installation than having them loose on the floor to become hopelessly tangled up in a dangerous, potentially firey mess.

What's better: three power strips secured to a table leg, up off the floor, with the cables neatly secured, or a big spaghetti mess on the floor that frequently gets kicked and/or jostled by people working in the area?

This is definitely a case where the code can probably use some adjustment. Though I fully agree that the photo in this post is much too messy and the daisy-chaining needs to be fixed!

-Z

I Don't have a problem with "surge strips" for the most part all of them have a built in circuit breaker. Thats all I need. The Wiring IS protected!
Where is the problem if the surge strip has a circuit breaker? I know code says that it is a No-No, But Why? Without these surge strips you would see alot more scary wiring!
We have more important issues to deal with.
Let's put things into perspective.
I wish the only violation here was 110.12 neat and workmanlike manner

Justin

Very nice work Larry!

Your solution works well in an "entertainment center" closet but if you don't mind me asking how you do explain to a customer you need to install 12 receptacles in their home office/former bedroom?

Wait a minute! I see a fifth power strip to the right in the first photo.

Nice organized job Larry, at least compared to the first picture.

Ian A.