Unique solution to an expensive situation.

Status
Not open for further replies.
kwired

kwired

Electron manager
Location
NE Nebraska
Strife - don't let them get to you too much, they can seem to be against you at times but in the middle of what may seem like nonsense something will come up that never occurred to you and you will learn from it.

Only you know what you have and what you did, and as thorough as the comments only you will know if you are in over your head on something.

You ultimately are the one that has assumed any liability for your actions, the more information you get the more or less confident you will be with what you did.

Coming in after someone elses install most times you can tell if the original installer(s) did a good job by just looking around a little. Paying attention to some of the little details will give you some clues of what to expect from things that may be covered up.
 
mivey

mivey

Senior Member
Strife said:
And can you tell me where did I cut corners?
Click to expand...
How could we know? We can only speculate based on the limited amount of information we have
Strife said:
Last a lot of facts got "poetic licensed" on the way to the 110'th post.
Click to expand...
I believe it was the lack of facts that led to speculation. Discussing many scenarios is just what happens around here. It is not necessarily a bad thing.
Strife said:
The ground path WAS VERIFIED.
Click to expand...
How?
Strife said:
The ground path was visually inspected.
The wire was tested for not being bonded to boxes, etc.
Click to expand...
Now we know.
Strife said:
The EMT was tested and it was enough to provide an interrupting on the 150A main.
Click to expand...
How?
Strife said:
Last: if I hadn't done it this way, and just tell the customer "it'll cost you 3K to install this receptacle, he'd have laughed in my face and call Joe Handyman who'd have wired the neutral on the ground bar, like a previous handyman did with another receptacle. Would you be happier with that outcome?
Click to expand...
Don't get so defensive. You are your best judge as you are the one with the best information. We are just kicking thoughts around based on information we have and scenarios we make up. It is just a discussion about an interesting topic.
Strife said:
Hey, why drive 65MPH? there's always a safer speed? how about 55? But then there's even a safer speed? 45. Don't stop there though, 35 is even safer.
Guess what, people get hurt WALKING into things (not by cars, that's a given), so there's always safer. Like just standing still. But even then you might have an airplane fall on you. So where do you stop? When it costs a billion dollar to install a receptacle? I'm sure even with that, there's a safer way.
Click to expand...
True enough. "Safe" is a relative term that is judged a lot of times with a money measuring stick.
Strife said:
All I did ask here if anyone sees a code issue with this. I've been called "cheap", "cutting corners", (indirectly) "not knowing what I'm doing", etc.
Click to expand...
I did not perceive it that way. I thought it was a discussion about the different ways things could have been done. We really do not have enough information to judge you specifically, not that that would necessarily be a barrier. :grin:
Strife said:
I think people who run #10 on a 20A, 20' HR are gougers, how's that?
Click to expand...
Ok by me.
 
growler

growler

Senior Member
Location
Atlanta,GA
Strife said:
can anyone find faults in this solution?
Click to expand...

Strife said:
All I did ask here if anyone sees a code issue with this.
Click to expand...

The code issue was decided right off, everyone agreed that useing EMT for an EGC was legal.

There are possible faults to the solution or most of the contractors in this country are idiots. There certainly are a lot of grounds pulled and it's not just to support the cable manufacturers. I think a lot of grounds are pulled because contractors understand that conduit isn't always run correctly to provide an acceptable ground path.

You did the job and if it was approved by the local authorities then that's all you need.

There are lots of people that may read these post in the future if they are faced with the same problem. It's good for them to understand there are many different opinions on the subject. Once they read the different opinions it will be up to them to make up their own mind on what they need to do.


You will get many different opinions on which brand of toilet paper is best so don't expect to get some sort of unanimous consensus on EMT as a ground path.

The thing to remember about the NEC is that if it were perfect it wouldn't need to be revised every three years. EMT is legal as a EGC at the present but it may not be in the future for some of the same reasons pointed out on this very forum. On the other hand it may still be legal a hundred years from now because it's considered safe enough.

We haven't all been brainwashed to the point that that we agree with everything we see written in a book.
 
Jim W in Tampa

Jim W in Tampa

Senior Member
Location
Tampa Florida
"can anyone find faults in this solution? "
You asked and we told you.
The opinions are just that.
On here if you ask you will usually get, some that you like some that you don't.
Yes your idea saved money for customer. Was it a good idea is what is at issue here.
All we did was point out the possable faults.
 
acrwc10

acrwc10

Master Code Professional
Location
CA
Occupation
Building inspector
brian john said:
Enquiring minds want to know? SERIOUSLY.
Click to expand...

It may take another 109 posts to get to the answer. Way to much info left out of the OP. The real issue here is that the emt could be and was visually inspected. If this is true, No Problem, go for it, you have my blessing ( not that you want or need it :D )
 
readydave8

readydave8

re member
Location
Clarkesville, Georgia
Occupation
electrician
Smart $ said:
Yes. But what if it were run overhead to and down through the nearest wall, then went underground in PVC. The EGC was run because the EMT on the load side of the PVC has to be bonded (and the panel too :roll:). The EMT is also electrically connected via supporting means to the grounded structural steel. It may very well pass the continuity testing to ground, but it would not be compliant with code for use as an EGC.
Click to expand...
oh ........................got it, thanks
 
Jim W in Tampa

Jim W in Tampa

Senior Member
Location
Tampa Florida
He says he viewed it and tested it to clear faults at 150 amps. Not sure how but if so then i would go with it. Just hope one them couplings ain't just barely touching.
 
acrwc10

acrwc10

Master Code Professional
Location
CA
Occupation
Building inspector
brian john said:
You won't be happy till he changes this to fit your method and then receives 50 lashes?
Click to expand...

Or you till he puts in a transformer.:grin: At least one thing a few of us agree on, do the job to a point YOU KNOW IT'S RIGHT and can stand behind it with mort then a "I thought it was good enough, duh?"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top