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.
Ryan Jackson, Salt Lake City
#105871 - 09/15/0504:15 PMRe: It is not going to get any better!
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.
#105873 - 09/15/0507:43 PMRe: It is not going to get any better!
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.
there should be power strips listed for wall mounting and essentially permanent use, plugged in to receptacles.
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.
#105874 - 09/15/0510:22 PMRe: It is not going to get any better!
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."
#105877 - 09/16/0505:54 PMRe: It is not going to get any better!
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?