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

>> Home   >> Electrical-Photos   >> Classifieds   >> Subscribe to Newsletter   >> Store  
 

Advertisement:-Left
Recent Gallery Topics:
What in Tarnation?
What in Tarnation?
by timmp, September 10
Plumber meets Electrician
Plumber meets Electrician
by timmp, September 10
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 162 guests, and 12 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
#112896 10/23/01 09:42 AM
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,672
Likes: 4
Admin Offline OP
Administrator
Member
[Linked Image]
Quote
This was taken at a local home center that is less than two years old. Name the NEC violations!

- Nick

Horizontal Ad
#112897 10/25/01 09:47 PM
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 466
Likes: 1
J
Member
Are those xfmrs with the disconnect between them?

Maybe this was wired by the industry 'professionals' that work there?

#112898 10/26/01 07:04 AM
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 4,293
Member
Although it's kind of hard to tell, it appears that there's no seismic bracing to keep these xfrmrs from rockin' & rollin' in an earthquake. I'd sure hate to be under these when those rods start bending! (Are they hard piped?)

#112899 10/26/01 11:19 PM
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 599
N
Member
Sorry about the poor picture quality. Yes they are transformers, and no they are not braced. They are also about 18ft in the air. The secondary over current protection, enclosed circuit breakers are also mounted about 18ft in the air. Not very “readily acceptable. (240-24). I think this also violates 380-8. Some of the disconnects in the store are directly behind the transformers. While it appears from the ground some might meet the clearance requirements in 110-26(a)(1) they have the secondary feeding them from underneath with seal tight 90’s. You couldn’t stand in front of them if there was a platform. Most of them don’t have a chance of meeting 110-26(a)(2). What I really find odd is they went out of their way to provide secondary over current protection for these transformers and just made a mess of it. All the while the panels are directly below them and if equipped with a main could have eliminated the enclosed breakers all together. It looks like they could have meet the 25ft maximum length allowed for transformer taps. I realize that that rule was left out of the ’99 code. But it’s back in for “02! Any inspector that was sharp enough to catch that rule surly would have caught the rest of this stuff.
Who knows what lurks inside! [Linked Image]
Nick


Link Copied to Clipboard
Featured:

 Electrical
 Clearance

 *
 Tools
 *

 Books

 *

 Test Equipment

 

Advertisement:-Right
Member Spotlight
timmp
timmp
Leo, IN, USA
Posts: 34
Joined: June 2004
Top Posters(30 Days)
Popular Topics(Views)
554,272 Are you busy
428,583 Re: Forum
398,651 Need opinion
New Page 2
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5