ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
ShoutChat Box
Recent Posts
Does a 'normal 3ph-AC motor' include capacitors?
by gfretwell - 09/18/19 01:20 AM
Another weird NEC code question on Feeder Taps
by gfretwell - 09/18/19 01:14 AM
NEC 2017_392.22(B)(1)(b)
_What's the smallest width

by Bill Addiss - 09/17/19 07:13 PM
NEC Question_Cord-&-Plug EGC shorter then Neutral
by pcsailor - 09/16/19 05:26 AM
Another NEC 2017 Question_240/24VAC Txfr-Neutral R
by pcsailor - 09/16/19 05:22 AM
New in the Gallery:
What is this for?
Plug terminals
Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 11 guests, and 11 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 5 of 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 13 14
Re: Tamper resistant: 406.11 [Re: harold endean] #175051 02/20/08 08:12 PM
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,457
E
Electricmanscott Offline
Member
So what other products are we rebelling against today? Airbags, seatbelts, bicycle helmets? I'd rather die than let the government tell me I have to buy these products! crazy

Last edited by Electricmanscott; 02/20/08 08:13 PM.
2017 / 2014 NEC & Related Books and Study Guides
Re: Tamper resistant: 406.11 [Re: Electricmanscott] #175366 02/28/08 10:48 AM
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,233
H
harold endean Offline
Member
Don't get me wrong, it's not that I am not for safety. We are all for safety around this board, it is just the fact that governing agencies are trying too hard to keep us safe. What ever happened to responsibility? I bought all of those little plastic plug protectors when my kids were small. Now they are all ground up. So if I put a new addition on my house and there is a bedroom in the addition, I still need TP receptacles?

Re: Tamper resistant: 406.11 [Re: harold endean] #175367 02/28/08 10:58 AM
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 165
Retired_Helper Offline
Member
Originally Posted by harold endean
...What ever happened to responsibility?...

That's the question I'm constantly asking. Maine electricians: where does ME stand on this new code? I'd like to go on record with the proper authorities that I oppose this change. Thanks!

Re: Tamper resistant: 406.11 [Re: Retired_Helper] #175386 02/28/08 08:36 PM
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 139
B
BPHgravity Offline
Member
The NEC is no longer a minimum standard, it is a manufacturer's standard...


Bryan P. Holland, ECO.
Secretary - IAEI Florida Chapter
Re: Tamper resistant: 406.11 [Re: BPHgravity] #175387 02/28/08 09:22 PM
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,148
R
resqcapt19 Offline
Member
Has anyone had a chance to play with these yet? I did yesterday with some P&S ones and found out they really don't work as I expected. If you put an object in one side, you can't push it in far enough to touch the contact as expected. However if you hold the object in the first side and insert a second object in the other side, the shutters open and both objects will be able to touch the contacts.
We also tried plugging some cords in and had no problem with the cords on a couple of power tools, but the cord end on an imported portable electric heater could not be inserted into the receptacle. It looked like the blades on that plug were thicker than the ones on the other plugs. This could be a big issue if the homeowner cannot plug things in.
Don


Don(resqcapt19)
Re: Tamper resistant: 406.11 [Re: resqcapt19] #175390 02/28/08 09:48 PM
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,233
H
harold endean Offline
Member
Don,

I have yet to see one, at my supply house. I was told that a sales rep ( for one of the manufactures) came strolling into the supply and started boasting, " Well you had better stock up on my brand of TP receptacles, after all it is in the code now!" Whereas the supply house threw him out and said, "We will buy them once we are told to!" Right now in NJ we are still under the 2005 NEC and the 2008 will be up for adoption in March. ( I believe ) We will have to see if NJ keeps the TP recp. in the code or takes it out.

Re: Tamper resistant: 406.11 [Re: harold endean] #175686 03/08/08 05:43 PM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 52
K
KJ Offline
Junior Member
i for one disagree with the tamper issue,
how is using a few thousand items going to fix the world of its many millions of pre existing conditions?

If the tamper resistant is such a problem solver, then we should be required to visit all existing locations and upgrade the entire country, and seeing thats not going to happen, then the tr is definately a manufacturer trying to sell product.
same with the arc fault rule,using such a safety device on a new and already safe installl, but yet when we do service cahnges or panel upgrades, and we are not required to use the afci , defeating a purpose here?

Re: Tamper resistant: 406.11 [Re: KJ] #175687 03/08/08 06:51 PM
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,316
renosteinke Offline
Cat Servant
Member
We can't really apply new rules to existing conditions ... suffice it to say that such attempts in the past led to such injustice that out very Constitution specifically forbids 'ex poste facto' laws.

Perhaps it is believed that time, and attrition, will eventually see all the bad old stuff replaced. Or, it is felt that there is sufficient growth in our future that the percentage of old stuff will dramatically decline.

Maybe, even, some code wonk went on a British holiday, and was inspired by their use of these receptacles - and just couldn't wait to bring the idea home with him.

Whether the manufacturers were behind the proposal or not, you can be sure that the prospect of replacing their sales of 50 cent devices with 5 dollar ones did not cause them to cry out in despair!

Personally, I believe that the NEC departed from the 'minimum' standard long ago, and has adopted a proactive 'if it saves one life' approach. That such an approach is patently self-contradictory is besides the point .... critical thinking and honest discussion seem to be endangered species these days.

Just keep your eye on the ball: this, and other changes, have no effect until adopted by your local AHJ. Much as the NFPA would like you to believe that the NEC is the 'bedrock' of our codes, the actual fact is that hardly any jurisdiction adopts the NEC without some modification. Now is the time to act - if you want to stop this rule.

Re: Tamper resistant: 406.11 [Re: renosteinke] #175719 03/09/08 04:19 PM
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 19
A
andyenglish Offline
Member
A clever Scot I know once told me something. He said, "Rules... They're for the guidance of wise people.. and the control of fools.."


It's always easier to get forgiveness than it is to get permission.
Re: Tamper resistant: 406.11 [Re: andyenglish] #175832 03/12/08 11:24 AM
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,233
H
harold endean Offline
Member
Not to beat this thing to death, but here in NJ we ( as contractors and inspectors) will have a chance to be heard about adopting the new NEC. In May (last time I asked) the state will put up on it's website new rules which they will adopt. The 2008 NEC being one of them. At that time, th general public will have time to make comment to the Dept. Of Community Affairs (DCA) and tell them what we think of the new codes. I for one will ask them to delete the part where TP receptacles will be required. They do have a proper place when they should be used and I believe they should be used then. I just get tired of manufactures pushing their products and getting it mandated by the NEC.

Page 5 of 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 13 14

Featured:

2020 National Electrical Code
2020 National Electrical
Code (NEC)

* * * * * * *

2017 Master Electrician Exam Preparation Combos
2017 NEC Electrician
Exam Prep Combos:
Master / Journeyman

 

Member Spotlight
Trumpy
Trumpy
SI,New Zealand
Posts: 8,262
Joined: July 2002
Show All Member Profiles 
Top Posters(30 Days)
Admin 6
Popular Topics(Views)
258,620 Are you busy
194,208 Re: Forum
183,682 Need opinion
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.3