Up In Canada

[solo618]

This just out of curiosity, but does Canada follow the same standards we do? Because since I have been home a while , I've have been watching that Mike Holmes show and he has made comments about it being against code to have more than 10 rec. on a ckt in residential. I think the show is from Canada so I was wondering if they have different codes.

 

[dbeasley488]

Cec

Cec

There is a Canadian Electrical Code.

 

[gardiner]

There is the Canadian Electrical code (CEC) followed by the majority of the provinces and and the Ontario Code which is similar to the CEC in some ways but not exactly like it followed by Ontario only, and I believe Holmes on Homes is filmed mostly in Ontario.

 

[kingpb]

This just out of curiosity, but does Canada follow the same standards we do? Because since I have been home a while , I've have been watching that Mike Holmes show and he has made comments about it being against code to have more than 10 rec. on a ckt in residential. I think the show is from Canada so I was wondering if they have different codes.

It may be against code to have more than 10, but there is nothing wrong with less either. Frankly, I think the codes are deficient in allowing the few circuits they do. It's all to appease the builders who want to keep the cost down, i.e. maximize their profit.

THE CODES ARE MINIMUM, IT'S OK TO DO BETTER THAN MINIMUM. No inspector is going to say, gee, why did you only put 6 outlets on that circuit?

We say the NEC is not a design guide it's for safety, but that's what people shoot for when doing their design. On the flip side, if it's for safety, why is more than 10 receptacles unsafe? OK, I plug a bunch of stuff in, the breaker trips, so what, it did what it was supposed to do. I can still plug enough stuff in on ten outlets to trip the breaker as well, so how is that "SAFER". What if I can show putting 100 on a circuit is "safe". Maybe I only intend to use 1 at a time. Why do I have to apply a certain load to each one, per code? Isn't that design? So the code tells me my usage, but yet it does not know what I'm going to do, sorta sounds like a half baked design guide.

So, is it a design guide or isn't it. I know it's supposed to be for safety, so make it about safety, and quit trying to make it be a half baked design guide, whereby you fill in the blanks and leave it up to the AHJ to make a determination, about design.

The code book is a bunch of rules of thumb for contractors to go by so they don't have to hire an engineer, i.e. more profit.

The NEC is obsolete, through it out and require all jobs be sealed by a qualified engineer. We need the work.

In the end, if you want to know why something is the way it is, FOLLOW THE MONEY.........................

 

[LarryFine]

We say the NEC is not a design guide it's for safety, but that's what people shoot for when doing their design. On the flip side, if it's for safety, why is more than 10 receptacles unsafe? OK, I plug a bunch of stuff in, the breaker trips, so what, it did what it was supposed to do. I can still plug enough stuff in on ten outlets to trip the breaker as well, so how is that "SAFER". What if I can show putting 100 on a circuit is "safe". Maybe I only intend to use 1 at a time. Why do I have to apply a certain load to each one, per code?

First of all, there is no NEC-specified quantity limit. It's suggested in the load calc section for non-residential, but the NEC doesn't come right out and say so. It would be easy enough to make a little table with receptacle quantity limits for each circuit rating, or even combine the info with one of the existing tables.

What would be your recommendation? No limit, and leave it up to the designer? A specific number? How do we choose a quantity for each circuit rating? Of course, we're allowed, and even encouraged, to design each circuit according to predicted use. If economy is paramount, though, NEC minimums do prevails.

 

[kingpb]

Unfortunately Larry, economy seems to be paramount, and because it is often the uneducated (in electrical) that is the purchaser, they are trained like silly circus monkeys to think lowest cost. (Greed)

I'm sure when you bid a job, your thinking I have to keep the cost down or I won't get the work. This is the reality of it, because the GC, or whomever is asking for the price, is going to take the lowest bid.(Greed) So, in turn, you look to the NEC to see what is the "Minimum" you can do in order to keep your price down. Everyone does the same, so then it becomes how much are you willing to cut labor hours (minimum), and what is the lowest price you can get materials (minimum).

My point being, is that we have become a world of "minimum" where people have become accustomed to getting low quality, cheap and dirty while the guy at the top maximizes his profit. (Ignorance and Greed) So in effect the NEC has become a design guide, a very poor one I might add; used to determine the minimum requirements to keep the price to a minimum. (Apathy)

I see it in kids today, not wanting to do any work, but thinking they should get paid top dollar just because they show up. The culture that has been created does not reward those that strive to do quality work, instead it breeds complacency and tries to level the playing field by making everyone equally incompetent while expending minimal effort. (Apathy)

Fundamental causes of social problems: ignorance, apathy, and greed. The NEC plays right into it.

So how do we change it? Take out all references in the NEC that have anything to do with non-safety related issues, and let qualified designers and engineers do the design. Let people start thinking again, so they can take pride in what they do, which will in turn create value. Let clients pay for what it's worth, if they can't afford it, they don't buy it; what a novel concept.

Now, what size breaker can I put on a #1/0AWG? Ah, that's right, I 'll just look it up in that handy cookbook called the NEC.

 

[LarryFine]

On some, cheap is most important. What this means is understood by the customer before we start. I prefer 'custom' wiring where I get to play (indulge myself), and design it as if it was going to be my home.

For example, in a 7800 sq ft house I wired in Williamsburg, the master bedroom got two 15a split-wired receptacle circuits and a separate lighting circuit for the master bath, closets, and hall lights.

Each kid's bedroom and the guest bedroom (each of which has a walk-in closet and bath) got one 15a split-wired receptacle circuit, and a lighting circuit which covers the bath and closet as above.

While I like 20a receptacle circuits when supplying several bedrooms' receptacles, I don't mind 15a receptacle circuits, but I do still like separate receptacle and lighting in most rooms and areas.

 

[One-eyed Jack]

When I got into the electrical game my boss dictated the number of outlets per circuit. 8 on 14 gauge,10 on 12 gauge. Lights in the front side of hse on one circuit the back on another. No recptacles on with the lights. Not because it was NEC,because he said so. I still do for myself with that same plan. The customer gets a quality job with maximum usability. My former co-workers who have since gone in business for themselves use the same game plan.

 

[Npstewart]

I know there is no load calculated for residential receptacles other then the 3VA/square foot, but I believe the maximum outlet on 1 20A circuit is 13 per NEC 220.14 (J), and 10 outlets max on a 15A branch circuit

 

[LarryFine]

... I believe the maximum outlet on 1 20A circuit is 13 per NEC 220.14 (J), and 10 outlets max on a 15A branch circuit

That covers load calcs, but, where does it say they must be wired that way?

Are we also required to actually install 3 watts of lighting per square foot?

 

[Npstewart]

I dont have my code book with me but it says something to the effect "for dwelling units the maximum number of outlets permitted on a 20A branch circuit is 13" etc. So no matter what 13 is the max for a 20A circuit, and 10 for a 15A branch circuit

 

[rcwilson]

CEC vs NEC

CEC vs NEC

Back to the OP's question. The CEC is very close to the NEC but it seems to be better organized and easier to understand. It's almost like the authors had the benefit of being able to take the NEC and decide to include the important items in a more organized fashion. Since the CEC was first started in 1920 and published in 1927 I don't think that is what happened.

In the Ontario Electrical Safety Code that the show operates under,

Section 12-3000 "Maximum Number of Outlets Per Circuit" says

1) There shall not be more than 12 outlets on any 2-wire branch circuit except as permitted by other Rules of this Code.,
2) Such outlets shall be considered to be rated at less than 1 A per outlet except as permitted by Subrule (3).
3) Where the connected load is known, the number of outlets shall be permitted to exceed 12 providing the load current does not exceed 80% of the rating of the overcurrent device protecting the circuit..."

 

[skeshesh]

My point being, is that we have become a world of "minimum" where people have become accustomed to getting low quality, cheap and dirty while the guy at the top maximizes his profit. (Ignorance and Greed) So in effect the NEC has become a design guide, a very poor one I might add; used to determine the minimum requirements to keep the price to a minimum. (Apathy)

I see it in kids today, not wanting to do any work, but thinking they should get paid top dollar just because they show up. The culture that has been created does not reward those that strive to do quality work, instead it breeds complacency and tries to level the playing field by making everyone equally incompetent while expending minimal effort. (Apathy)

Not that I disagree much, but I don't thinks much has changed for a lot longer than the span of your lifetime. Greed, ignorance and apathy have been around for a long time and I think you're memories of the good ol' days are just a perspective.