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

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

Featured:

 Electrical
 Clearance

 *
 Tools
 *

 Books

 *

 Test Equipment

 

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 (), 3,485 guests, and 11 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
#96808 12/28/05 03:53 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 26
J
Member
Dose anyone know if the NEC2002/2005 still states that the code is minimum requirement?
I know it has always been said and I thought I read it one time.
Thanks


Joe Rossi
Work Gear for Electricians and the Trades

Workgear for Electricians

#96809 12/28/05 04:09 PM
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 582
R
Ron Offline
Member
I think 90.1 is as close as you'll get.


Ron
#96810 12/28/05 07:18 PM
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 7,413
Likes: 9
Member
Yes, but be careful of using "minimum", as in some instances it is "maximum".

John


John
#96811 12/30/05 11:15 AM
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 269
E
Member
It's also a "permissive document". If it doesn't say you can't, then you can. [Linked Image]


John
#96812 12/31/05 02:43 AM
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 375
G
Member
The code consists of rules rather than objectives:

1) It never states an objective goal. Since the goal is not determinable, it is impossible to find a minumin.

2) It consists of parts which are viewed by engineers as unsafe. One easily demonstrable such part is the rating of wires without reagard to the surrounding insulation. It is possilbe to add enough insulation to walls so that the wiring in the insulation achieves temperatures above the design temperature. It appears that the code is on the wrong side of safe.


Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5