ECN Forum Forums Photo Discussion Forums Photos for General Discussion Owner-builder job

The nail plates rule How the heck does someone know about nail playes but doesn't understand conduit or cable

I can spot a Violation;
The Feeders aren't strapped!


Just joking around!

On the serious side;
The NM cables coming from the top KOs appear not to be strapped - unless they are stapled to the Shear Panel???
Also, the use of an Al. GEC is aproaching the "D'OHH" realm (MHO).
At least (unless my eyes are totally shot) the Panelboard is a Square D QO type - looks like 200 Amp 30/40.
Is it QO or HOM - or not even Square D!? (totally looks like Square D)

Let us know what the reaction is to the Non-Compliance notification regarding the Feeders (the Free-Air Feeders!).

You get an extra 100 Points if you say:
"Gotta Put 'Em In Corn-Duit!" when issuing / responding to the correctin list item.

One question:
Why didn't the EC / Installer just mount the Panelboard two stud bays over to the left, lower the Panel down about 12" - 24", and come into the back of the Enclosure with the Feeders and the Conduit run!
At least bring the feeder's duct more to the right.
As it is, the fix would be a pullbox, or unsightly (and shirt/pants catching) LB.

Next issue: Why no White Tape on the Grounded Conductor?!

Scott35

Hey, Honey, Look! We can have the kids store their skies here!

So Scott wanted to know about why they didn't re-identify the grounded conductor as white. Let me show you:



John: What I meant by "illegal bonding" is that they had they neutral and ground bonded together in the panel in the first picture (not service equipment). Think about that bare wire, in direct contact with wood, carrying nuetral current. Scary...I really think that might be one of the biggest fire hazards I've seen in my short tenure as an inspector.

Pierre: No, this wasn't done by a licensed guy, it was done by the owner of the house/garage.

Let me edit this: This picture here is service equipment, but they also had the interior panel bonded (250.24(A)(5).

[This message has been edited by Ryan_J (edited 03-29-2004).]

[This message has been edited by Ryan_J (edited 03-29-2004).]

After seeing this recent pic, the installation sucks even more!!!


Can only say:
"Whaddaheck!!!"

Ryan,
Does that Conductor on the far right have a White Stripe running down the middle of it, and the Conductor landed to the Grounded Conductor's Bus has no Colored Stripe?


Thought the Panelboard in the first image was the Service equipment - hence no fun made of the N-G bonding (only of the type conductor...).

Looks like fun!

Scott35

Whoa Nelly, the panel cover is upside down too.

Roger

It looks like they got hold of a couple of pieces of POCO secondary cable, and put it to good use.
Ryan, did they say "If it's good enough for the POCO to use, it's good enough for me"?

On use of "POCO secondary cable"—there is another problem. With most {NEC/UL} building wire, the aluminum conductor is "AA8000-series" which is alloyed with a small amount of iron, and is far more resistant to smack-you-in-the-face installation springback and coldflow problems. AA8000 conductor has been readily available for about 25 years.

Instead, for "secondary" cable, older '1350-alloy' material is often used, but is more typically installed with nonreversible hydraulic-compressed terminals and splices. So for building wire, "good enough for PoCo" is likely not the case for Code applications.




[This message has been edited by Bjarney (edited 03-29-2004).]

Didja hear this as an excuse?


LOL

If they wanted the panel in the garage, why didn't they just use the "back to back" all in one?