Pics of panel rough-in

[e57]

I've seen the pics of that NM job around for a while. While it looks neat, in comparison to most, I couldn't do it like that here. (Local/regional type thing I guess) Most areas around here would consider MN below 8' "Subject to Physical Damage". And it's not 'written' in to any code - but it has been a type of cultural interpetation passed from one inspector to the next for eons, and spreads from city to city and near-by towns... So in situations like that with a bunch of circuits to surface mounted panels and Home Works type stuff (Like pictured) - we hit a gutter at >8' and nipple down in to the panels. And makes for a clean look. As well as being able to get rid of the grounds at the gutter by mounting a bar or so in there.

 

[peter d]

I am sure the electricin(s) spent a LOT od time doing the romex art work. Makes for a nice conversation, but if they were my employees I'd probably get rid of them for taking days to complete a job that should only take a few hours with conduit.

If I remember correctly, these pictures are from a high-end custom home where money was (presumably) no object. I highly doubt the EC would spend days on this install unless they were very well paid to do it.

And I also highly doubt you could do a comparable install (same number of homeruns) in a "few hours" with EMT.

 

[peter d]

Most areas around here would consider MN below 8' "Subject to Physical Damage".

That sounds like paranoia to me.

 

[donselectric]

why didnt you just use a 2 in nipple

 

[360Youth]

OK, here goes. I'll run the risk and post photos. One is a house panel I am curently working on. I still have to run island stove circuit through the spare and I noticed the other day I forgot to put the smokes on AFCI. This is a smaller more manageable house and panel, so it is much easier to keep neat. The other photo is a 100 amp 3-phase ATS we just installed for a WWTP.

View attachment 364

View attachment 362

View attachment 363

 

[mdshunk]

Looks nice, 360. What's with the big loop-dee-doo's of wire in the bottom of the transfer switch?

I see the transfer switch is mounted on a wooden ped. Is this an agricultural installation?

 

[celtic]

I see the transfer switch is mounted on a wooden ped. Is this an agricultural installation?

The other photo is a 100 amp 3-phase ATS we just installed for a WWTP.

I think that means a "log flume".

 

[mdshunk]

I think that means a "log flume".

:grin:

You guys.... I didn't get it, until I looked up WWTP in acronymfinder.com. I was thinking "White Water...something". Waste Water Treatment Plant. Okay... log flume. Ick. The big loops are still a violation, in any event.

 

[celtic]

LOL

I know that because I've been there ...you get used to the smell right AFTER coffee

 

[LarryFine]

I think that means a "log flume".

Okay... log flume. Ick.

Oh, ga-ross!

 

[360Youth]

I think that means a "log flume".

I like that one. My favorite though is when one of the plants ruptured a tank which flowwed into a neighboring trailer park and some of the area opperators nicknamed it the "Poo-nami.":grin:

As far as the loops, what is the violation (reference, not doubting you). The loops are to maintain additional conductor in case there is a future problem and I (or whomever) wouldn't have to make a splice. My basis is the degree of the bend, but I guess it could be a 360 degree issue. Let me know for future work. There is not the same loop in the other wires because replacement of those conductors are simple vs a 60+ conduit run from the generator.

 

[360Youth]

LOL

I know that because I've been there ...you get used to the smell right AFTER coffee

Ever been in one. Smell plus heat. UUGH! One of my most vivid memories is repairing a pump setup in the bottom of a 15 tank in the middle of the summer and when I stepped off the ladder into what I thought was ankle deep "water" it was actually about 3" above the rim of my boot. Got paid a nice bonus, but....

 

[George Stolz]

The big loops are still a violation, in any event.

Code reference?

 

[celtic]

Ever been in one. \

Close enough for me on the O? deck ...and that was ripe even with them OFF.


"Poo-nami" LMAO... my wife just stumbled in ...."What's so funny?" ...she's laughing now too

 

[Smart $]

Ever been in one. Smell plus heat. UUGH! One of my most vivid memories is repairing a pump setup in the bottom of a 15 tank in the middle of the summer and when I stepped off the ladder into what I thought was ankle deep "water" it was actually about 3" above the rim of my boot. Got paid a nice bonus, but....

Yeh, I've been there, but?quite thankfully?did not get a bootfull :grin:

Below is a solids processing machine's control panel, in which I did all the field terminations.

 

[mdshunk]

Code reference?

110.12.

If you care to use NECA 1 (NEIS) as your guideline for 110.12 workmanship issues (as referenced in the FPN), NECA 1, Section 9, Article N prohibits this practice.

 

[e57]

Smart$ Nice.... Bet that costs a hunk of change$$$$

IMPO wish din rail were more commonly used.... Much of the control work I see is much less astetic or organized.

 

[George Stolz]

110.12.

If you care to use NECA 1 (NEIS) as your guideline for 110.12 workmanship issues (as referenced in the FPN), NECA 1, Section 9, Article N prohibits this practice.

How are we to make proper use of expansion couplings then?

 

[mdshunk]

How are we to make proper use of expansion couplings then?

Expansion couplings are to allow the expansion and contraction of the raceway. The conductors do not expand and contract (or, at least do so very little in comparison with the raceway). The enclosures, which are connected by the raceway, are still the same net dimension apart from each other. The length from the terminals in one enclosure to the terminals in the other enclosure does not change. If we're talking about earth settlement here, that's a violation all of its own.

 

[360Youth]

110.12.

If you care to use NECA 1 (NEIS) as your guideline for 110.12 workmanship issues (as referenced in the FPN), NECA 1, Section 9, Article N prohibits this practice.

Sorry, I don't see it. If you are talking about (C), NEC is refering to the equipment, not the conductor. Even then, I would ask for a definition of "bent." If you are calling into question "neat workmanship," I did open my post with, "Well, here it goes...":grin: