Formulas in the NEC Code Book

[vermathrax]

First of all, i didnt mean to insinuate that the tests should be a gimmie. however,back to my original question,if its on the test should it be in the book? when you wire a structure do you not have all the material needed?or do you have to make things yourself to complete the job?just because you have the formulas in the book does not mean you know how to use them.just like if you have all the materials needed for a job, does not mean you know how to do anything with them. i would rather have 100 electricians who can use the code book to find answers and apply those answers, than 1 great test taker who can remember formulas to do the, math but has no common sense to wire anything.and i dont believe swinging a bat and working a voltage drop formula are even compareable. and as an ex- military police officer,you first have to be able to find the gun you are useing before you can clean it. :)

[George Stolz]

I guess I'll just save up for some tattoo's.

I wonder what they'd do if someone walked in with formula tattoos...?

Sorry Bob, didn't mean it like that. I just wanted to see it from your angle better.

While I agree with the economic perspective, I think the same gains can be made from making the formulas available in the book, IMO.

[petersonra]

In some respects this is like the question of open book versus closed book tests.

If the goal of licensing is to restrict competition (and if one is honest about it, that is certainly a substantial part of it), then why allow a code book on the test?

If you have to look it up, you obviously do not know the material very well. :-)

IMO, it should be about whether the individual can actually perform the work in a safe and appropriate manner. Personally, I think there should be a physical skills part of the test. Make them bend a few pieces of conduit and wire up a few pieces of switchgear as part of the test.

I seem to run across a lot more workmanship issues that offend me than I do code issues, although I run across a few of those from time to time as well.

Stupid is another issue I run across that offends me. Like the idea that you can solve all known power problems by making the bond wires bigger or adding ground rods.

[iwire]

Originally Posted by georgestolz

I think the same gains can be made from making the formulas available in the book, IMO.

George I am curious how we (or the NFPA) would decide what things they should instruct us in and what things they should not? :?

IMO knowing how to bend conduit or other aspects of our work are as important as the formulas.

[iwire]

Originally Posted by petersonra

Personally, I think there should be a physical skills part of the test. Make them bend a few pieces of conduit and wire up a few pieces of switchgear as part of the test.

Many of us feel the same about EEs. :lol:

They should have to do the work before they are allowed specify it.

I am not holding my breath on that one. :lol:

[iwire]

Originally Posted by petersonra

If the goal of licensing is to restrict competition (and if one is honest about it, that is certainly a substantial part of it), then why allow a code book on the test?

IMO that has little to do with it.

Why would my state be interested in restricting competition?

The state may like collecting my yearly fee I will give you that.

[vermathrax]

so is there a common ground on this subject i.e. only put ohms law in the book and leave the rest out? most engineers can recite the code book at any given time because they look things up everyday.

most field electricians dont use the formulas everyday because most of the time that stuff is done for them before the reach the job.

to keep it so the code book doesnt become an electrical field manual for dummies,would just ohms law be too much?

[Pierre C Belarge]

Preparing for a test and field usage for the everyday application is two distinctly different subjects.

Lets take test prep first.
The NEC is a "code" book, and when one signs up to take a test, code is only part of the test. There usually are instructions that explain what percent of the test involves code, general knowledge, business law, etc...
It is up to the test taker to prepare oneself for the test, not for the test provider to prepare the test taker. Knowing there will be other information that is required on the test is a help. My experience from 4 years of test prep is 90% of the individuals who are preparing for a test have not opened any book (including the NEC) for any consistancy, for years... some not at all if they did not have a formal apprenticeship. These are the ones who usually complain the most about the test. Then they expect a class to solve all of those problems.
In our area, the applicant has to prove 11 1/2 years in the field in order to apply for the test (I know that is a lot, I agree). In that time a lot should have been learned... yet they may have "skated" for years not realizing that in a few years they may want to or have to take a test.
For these people, I say you have a difficult road ahead of you in preparation for a test. Don't complain, it is wasted energy...put that energy into the prep for the test, take classes, open the different books you need to and work hard. The benefit of passing a license test are endless: freedom to control your future, prestige, potentially tons of money, being able to help others, it goes on and on.
Buckle down, study (for some that may take many months), give up your free time to help yours and your family's future.

For those who are in the field.

Add to your code book whatever you need, there is no law against it. You should see my code book. I have tons of stuff added to it.


To all, I say

GOOD LUCK!!!

[George Stolz]

Originally Posted by iwire

George I am curious how we (or the NFPA) would decide what things they should instruct us in and what things they should not? :?

The same way they do everything else, by committee discussion on proposals. The existing annexes were probably proposed by someone, then it was discussed, voted on, commented on, and then added to the NEC.

This is a perfect example of the system; since you think minimalism is best, and I'm somewhere in the middle, and others would want to see pictures (on the other end of the scale), then everyone should offer their best argument for their opinion when the time comes.

I guess we have to trust the judgement of the CMP's, in the end.

[petersonra]

Originally Posted by vermathrax

to keep it so the code book doesnt become an electrical field manual for dummies,would just ohms law be too much?

No offense, but any electrician that cannot remember Ohms law probably ought to find another occupation.

I think that kind of stuff more properly belongs in a code handbook perhaps.

Or buy a copy of Ugly. All kinds of useful stuff. Fits in your tool box.