stranded wire in a switch?

[CopperTone]

is there anything in the code book about not terminating stranded wire on a switch? wrap it around the screw and crank it down? I have an inspector telling me I cant do that - hasn't provided a code reference yet.

 

[infinity]

IMO he won't find a code reference.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

The following is from the UL Guide Information for Snap Switches.

Terminals of the wire-binding screw, setscrew, or screw-actuated back-wired clamping types are suitable for use with solid building wires unless otherwise indicated either on the device or in the installation instructions.

Unlike the Guide Information for receptacles, this one says that the device or instructions must say you can use stranded conductors. If they don't you have a 110.3(B) issue.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

IMO he won't find a code reference.

I agree however that somehow doesn't stop some inspectors from using their power.

 

[CopperTone]

The following is from the UL Guide Information for Snap Switches.
Unlike the Guide Information for receptacles, this one says that the device or instructions must say you can use stranded conductors. If they don't you have a 110.3(B) issue.

well, we reused an existing switch - not even sure what brand it is - is it up to the inspector to find out if that switch is listed for stranded then? He is the one citing the code violation. he should have to prove it is a violation. not me.

 

[480sparky]

I agree however that somehow doesn't stop some inspectors from using their power.

Abusing and misusing are more appropriate terms.

 

[markevil]

Connect a solid jumper while he is standing right there and ask him if he is happy now.

 

[eric9822]

well, we reused an existing switch - not even sure what brand it is - is it up to the inspector to find out if that switch is listed for stranded then? He is the one citing the code violation. he should have to prove it is a violation. not me.

Disagree. If it the approved use is not shown on the switch then it's up to you to show him. JMHO.

 

[LEO2854]

Disagree. If it the approved use is not shown on the switch then it's up to you to show him. JMHO.

I do not agree.
In this case the inspector is on a power trip

 

[480sparky]

If the inspector fails you, he/she MUST give you a code reference or else pass it.

With a reasonably-valid code reference, then it's up to you to challenge it.

 

[Hendrix]

IMO he won't find a code reference.

There is a new requirement in 2011, 110.14 covering termination of fine stranded conductors.

 

[Jim W in Tampa]

I have never even once had an inspector say a thing about this issue. Mine are always twisted tight and neatly under the screw. A picture of what the OP offered would be nice. As far as legal this is first time i ever heard of this so waiting to see outcome.
Do believe the inspector has a right to ask to see the box the device came in.

 

[billsnuff]

well, we reused an existing switch - not even sure what brand it is - is it up to the inspector to find out if that switch is listed for stranded then? He is the one citing the code violation. he should have to prove it is a violation. not me.

Do believe the inspector has a right to ask to see the box the device came in

Wonder what the inspector knows about the switch that we don't?

 

[acrwc10]

There is a new requirement in 2011, 110.14 covering termination of fine stranded conductors.

Fine stranded is not regular stranded wire. It is a very different conductor, it is the kind of wire you see in extension cords.

 

[acrwc10]

If the inspector fails you, he/she MUST give you a code reference or else pass it.With a reasonably-valid code reference, then it's up to you to challenge it.

Just curious, where is that written ? I hear it said all the time but most inspectors dis-agree with you, if they say "No" they need to give you a reason but I know of no requirement they give you line and verse.

 

[pete m.]

Just curious, where is that written ? I hear it said all the time but most inspectors dis-agree with you, if they say "No" they need to give you a reason but I know of no requirement they give you line and verse.

If they don't provide "line and verse" how do they convince you that you actually have a legitimate code violation?

The only "reason" that you should be defected on an install is for a code violation not a "I think it should be this way..." or "I like to see it done this way..."

As far as I know of there is no jusrisdiction that has adopted an inspectors opinion into law.

Pete

 

[acrwc10]

If they don't provide "line and verse" how do they convince you that you actually have a legitimate code violation?

The only "reason" that you should be defected on an install is for a code violation not a "I think it should be this way..." or "I like to see it done this way..."

As far as I know of there is no jusrisdiction that has adopted an inspectors opinion into law.

Pete

I am not saying he can use the "my opinion" approach. What I am saying is there is NO requirement he give line and verse, if there is "Show Me". If I get bounced on something I will question it, and then yes it is time for both of us to open the code book or concede. But if on inspection there is an issue and it is pointed out he doesn't need to say what code section unless you argue it. The reality is most installers know that they did violate code, and it is up to the installer to know the code as well as the inspector, but this doesn't happen. So to say,"if you can't say the code section that makes it legal" is ignorant, that is like saying,"if the inspector misses a violation then it is not a violation'' Nice try, see if that stands up in court.:grin:
This may seem harsh but, there is a lot of crap work out there and if the inspector had to site every code section, they would never finish any inspections.

 

[raider1]

well, we reused an existing switch - not even sure what brand it is - is it up to the inspector to find out if that switch is listed for stranded then? He is the one citing the code violation. he should have to prove it is a violation. not me.

So you have re-used a switch, don't know what brand it is or if it is listed for use with stranded wire, but you feel it is the inspectors responsibility to prove that the switch you have re-used is NOT listed for use with stranded wire.:roll:

After reading the UL whitebook reference that Don has pointed out I would say that unless you can show that the switch is listed for stranded wire you would have a 110.3(B) violation.

I just did a quick google search and the couple of switches I looked at did not have anything in their instructions that idicated that the screws were suitable for stranded wire. They also did not indicate that they were not eiter.

Chris

 

[CopperTone]

i pulled a switch out of the box out of the truck today and it says right on the front of the switch - use solid conductors only. Reusing the switch - the switch says the same thing - so I do believe that 110.3 (B) would apply here. Stupid as it may sound for the inspector to fail an inspection on.

 

[Twoskinsoneman]

i pulled a switch out of the box out of the truck today and it says right on the front of the switch - use solid conductors only. Reusing the switch - the switch says the same thing - so I do believe that 110.3 (B) would apply here. Stupid as it may sound for the inspector to fail an inspection on.

Well when I was designing electrical for communication vehicles we ran all stranded due to flexibility concerns. Landing stranded on the screw terminals was one of the hardest things for our techs to learn. I was constantly worried about loose connections or little single strands straying away from the recep.