Enduring the NEC

[Ed MacLaren]

Re: Enduring the NEC

All technical reference documents should be correct, and composed with approved English words.

Approved by who, Bennie - you? me?

The NFPA is not an approved organization to establish a sense for a word.

If new words or terms could not be devised to meet the needs of evolving technologies, we would all still be talking like Chaucer -

Who so shall telle a tale after a man,
He moste reherse, as neighe as ever he can,
Everich word, if it be in his charge,
All speke he never so rudely and so large;
Or elles he moste tellen his tale untrewe,
Or feinen thinges, or finden wordes newe.

Canterbury Tales. Prologue. Line 733.

Ed

[ May 02, 2003, 12:51 AM: Message edited by: Ed MacLaren ]

 

[hurk27]

Re: Enduring the NEC

Ed I think that the wording of laws in general have been purposely written in the way they are hard for the general public to understand because this keeps the public from knowing on what the law makers are sneaking in on us. this has been brought out a few times as to what the public was told a law was for to what we found out later it was really for. another snow job. but as for the NEC one would think that it would be written in a more plain language. Yes this would allow for some DYS's to understand it but maybe they would not make so many mistakes.

[ May 02, 2003, 01:45 AM: Message edited by: hurk27 ]

 

[iwire]

Re: Enduring the NEC

Unfortunately you can not write the code in trade slang. The words must be carefully chosen to make sure the meaning can not misunderstood.

Like the use of the word Neutral, I often call the grounded conductor Neutral but many times that is technically incorrect.

The grounded conductor is not a Neutral in many cases

The ungrounded conductor we often call "hot" but what does that mean?

Hot in relationship to what? You can not say it is Hot to ground, on ungrounded systems this would be incorrect.

With so many people trying to find loopholes in each article the words used must be more technical than trade slang.

I do not think that the wording in the code is that hard to understand (it is much clearer than how laws are written) you can always go to Article 100 to refresh your memory.

For me the hard part is how spread out things are, but Bill makes a good point.

By bill addiss

The linking back and forth between areas is a pain, but could you imagine if the rules for overcurrent protection (Art 240) or Grounding (Art 250) were repeated everywhere they were applicable? Or Wiring Methods, Conductor Ampacity, Box Fill, etc, etc,? I can't picture how big that book would be.

We would need a hand truck to carry the book.

Bennie I can not find the words overcurrent or ampacity in Webster's dictionary but they have long been used in the code.

As long as a definition is included in article 100 I would think they can use any words they want and still be legally enforceable

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Re: Enduring the NEC

Bennie,
The code making panels do not write the code. The submitters of the proposals write the code.
Don

 

[charlie]

Re: Enduring the NEC

Qualified wireman can't afford to miss work to sit on the panels.

Bennie, many master electricians sit on the Code Making Panels (even I held a masters license at one time). Also included in the list of members of the panels are the IBEW, IEC, IAEI, and ABC. Yes, we are all representing our own special interests, we are also interested in safety and good Code. The alternate member on my panel for the IBEW is an active wireman.

Since the NEC is adopted into law, it is necessary to have very concise language in order to hold up in court. If you take time to look at the ROP, you will find numerous places where the proposal is to insert or remove a comma. The panel must, at times, rewrite a proposal a little in order to make it make sense.

 

[bill addiss]

Re: Enduring the NEC

Unfortunately you can not write the code in trade slang. The words must be carefully chosen to make sure the meaning can not misunderstood.

Bob makes an important point here.

Although I don't agree with everything in the NEC, or it's current style I think it has a good basic format for what it is trying to do.

Bill

[ May 02, 2003, 01:23 PM: Message edited by: bill addiss ]

 

[gwz2]

Re: Enduring the NEC

The NEC is not a PERFECT document, but it is the best electrical code that is published by any other organization.

I think, because it is a consensus ( hope I've used the correct spelling ) of many electrical people and not just the thoughts of a few.

 

[physis]

Re: Enduring the NEC

Yeah, conductors are grounded grounding and ungrounded. If all the letters in the alphabet looked as similar to each other only a few of us would be qualified to read and we'ld have to be licensed and we'ld be charging people lots of money to read things to them.

 

[physis]

Re: Enduring the NEC

I can see this is a bit of a can of worms. It looks like there's alot of respect and also alot of discontentment for the code. I agree that it's very difficult to use English to describe anything clearly, German would probably be better but then I'ld be complaining about that. I'm sure the NFPA tries hard to make the code the best document they can. But why say "shall not be located behind or on the sides or above or below".
Is there a good reason for not just saying must be located in front of? I kinda think it sounds more impresive to them to use unnecessarily long sentences.

I want to thank all you guys for your input. And don't stop the debate I'm getting a kick out of it. It seems like I'm not alone on this.

 

[russellroberts]

Re: Enduring the NEC

Ed once made a comment in another forum that helped me with code study. It was something to the effectof " The code cannot be learned like a theory" just being familiar with it and knowing what code section to start looking in has been a big help to me.

 

[physis]

Re: Enduring the NEC

Yeah, I think exposure and repetition are the answer.

 

[cm]

Re: Enduring the NEC

Hurk makes a good point, a good law is written so the person with time, money and the best lawyer can get what they want if it wasnt that way we would have communism by a click township commisiners ,electrical board,inspector etc kinda clicktatorship

 

[roger]

Re: Enduring the NEC

Physis,

Yeah, I think exposure and repetition are the answer.

Your own statement is your answer.

So, with your education and youth, if you are so frustrated with the NEC, I hate to think of the problems you will encounter in the future.

Roger

 

[goodcode]

Re: Enduring the NEC

The NEC is not intended for installation design or as an instruction manual for untrained persons, see 90.1(C). That being said, an individual with an electrical background, not based on the safety driven provisions of the NEC will initially have trouble navigating the NEC. The key's to being effective with NFPA-70, the NEC are: (1) an indepth understanding of the arrangement of the NEC as detailed in 90.3, this document is organized in a detailed outline format (2)an indepth understanding of the scope and definitions of Article 100 along with definitions included in individual Articles (3) a serious degree of familiarity with the Table of Contents (4) an understanding of the structure of an individual Article including parts of an article, sections, subsections, subdivisions and so on. The NEC is written under the rules of the "NEC Stlye Manual" available online at www.nfpa.org (tell them Charlie sent you)
The NEC as Don and Charlie pointed out is literally revised and written by the users. The members of the Code Making Panels act only as informed jurors in a trial of law to accept or reject in some form, a submitted change. A review of an individual panel committee list will reveal that the makeup is diverse, and a single group or organization is incapable railroading the process. The Technical Correrlating Committee and Panel Chairs are charged with observing and maintaining that balance.
Bennie mentioned that qualified wireman do not serve on the CMP's. That is not true Bennie many qualified wiremen do proudly serve as CMP members. I know because I have that privilege and have been an inside wireman for over 22-years. The best proposals we receive at the panel level come from wireman like Bennie. Users of the NEC submit proposals which identify areas of the NEC which need to be addressed. All proposals receive the same attention at the panel level.
Those unhappy with the NEC should submit proposals and comments to improve the document. The NEC is a consensus document, and a work in progress.
Take the NEC a step at a time, read it, use it, question it and it will become as useful and as comfortable as an old pair of sidecutters.

 

[charlie]

Re: Enduring the NEC

My good friend, "Goodcode", is also involved in the Code making process. I am looking forward to having a few beers with him again. For what it is worth, we do not agree on every issue and sometimes we vote in different directions. That does not prevent us from being good friends but it does underscore the process. We both have different agendas but, I assure you, all of us on the various panels put safety as our number one priority. We all want to write good Code that is safe and useful.

 

[physis]

Re: Enduring the NEC

I'm going to mention again that I don't hate the NEC. It's the way that it's written that bothers me.

One specific difficulty I have is that if you read what you think is everything on a particular item it's seems not just possible but likely that someone can point to another code that turns everything you read up side down. And this other code was never mentioned in all the other stuff you read.

Here's an example that came up a couple days ago:

250.66(A) says a grounding electrode conductor as permitted in 250.52(A)(6) doesn't have to be larger than 6AWG copper.

250.52(A)(6) doesn't mention the exclusion of not "made" grounding electrodes. In my humble interpretaion it actually tells you a water pipe is acceptable under 250.66(A) given some dimension and material qualifications.

Elsewhere in 250 you can find where 250.52(A)(6) is refering to made electrodes. But you won't see it from here. This is the kind of "surprise, you got it totally wrong" stuff I have a problem with.

You'ld probably say, well, your problem is that your not using the NEC right. I would say it's way too easy to use it wrongly then.

I know a lot of you guys are proud of your knowlege of and involvement with the NEC and that's great. But it's a lot easier to miss where I'm coming from when you already understand it rather thoroughly.

And the argument that there isn't a better way to write it I just don't buy. Microprocessors are far more complex than ground rods and their data sheets aren't convoluted.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Re: Enduring the NEC

And the argument that there isn't a better way to write it I just don't buy. Microprocessors are far more complex than ground rods and their data sheets aren't convoluted.

But data sheets are not used as legal documents, the NEC is.
Don

 

[physis]

Re: Enduring the NEC

I knew that was coming. There's no law that says something has to be confusing to be legally enforcable or actionable.

That also helps illustrate my point. If an electrician explains how to safely install a grounding electrode you'll probably end up with a good ground path. If a lawyer explains how to install a grounding electrode you might end up with an exhaust pipe duct taped to a telephone pole.

[ May 07, 2003, 02:29 PM: Message edited by: physis ]

 

[wirefuzzer]

Re: Enduring the NEC

The code can be a pain but you must remember that most AHJ use it as a legally binding document ergo the legalese jargon. the other replys posted before mine are valid ways of learning to navigate the code. If you can afford the NEC hand book on cd it will allow you to find keywords and the information you are seeking quite a bit quicker.Always remember the devil is in the details read carefully and be sure to read the introduction and article 90 there is the explination of the codes layout and was instramental in my understanding of how to find out what I needed as far as location of appropriate articles good luck and be patient
!

 

[heybud]

Re: Enduring the NEC

I have to say I got a kick out of the exhaust pipe thing