Power Bridge

[roger]

Why does it say "Inlets and Receptacles"?

Because the page actually has many more flanged devices on it, I only posted the inlet.

Roger

 

[PowerBridgeTech]

Did someone plug an extension cord in? This thread is on FIRE!

Did someone plug an extension cord in? This thread is on FIRE!

Apologies for attempting title humor.
I had no idea how passionate everyone is regarding this topic.
Thanks for the supportive post.
The comments, questions and subjective assessments all have good value to debate.

As a manufacture, we have asked these questions of AHJ inspectors around the country and Canada. The consensus is not far off from what has been posted here. Most agree there is not a specific section to defer for or against the installation of an extension, not direct wired as part of the premise wiring. It?s not a typical branch extension by definition. Seems to defy classification for now.

All agreed, as we do, what is installed inside the wall passing AC power must be code compliant and installed in a code compliant method and all components must have agency listing. PowerBridge meets compliancy as long as those conditions are met.

PowerBridge is essentially a Manufactured Wiring System as a kit not separate parts.
Trust me, we have spent considerable resources to defined section to point towards regarding the specific installation. Many sample kits have been sent to inspectors and all but 4 were not returned after review because those inspectors requested to keep the samples to install in their homes for their TV to have external source surge/conditioning. Go figure, this is the only method to accomplish this and the primary basis PowerBridge was innovated as a kit solution.

The NEC does not have a defined section or article to this type of ?dead-front extension? (coined term from an unnamed AHJ)
In the same context, the NEC does not have a defined section to NOT installing this type of installed extension either.

The other problem with definitions, the NEC does not define the term of duration of what is permanent and temporary use of a flexible cord used to supply energy from the front of the power source to the INLET. It was pointed out how many extension/appliance cord sets are 24/7/365 energized. Are these being used in a non-compliant manor? The UL standard for cord-sets does not define time duration of use either. This makes it a challenge for AHJ to call out the PowerBridge as not conforming to use of a cord-set.

The arguments regarding the flexible cord and how it is used to power the entire room or house is not the intended defined use of PowerBridge. That is not a claim we make to use this as a substitute for having circuit premise wired switches, lighting and outlet receptacles. The rating of the cord set (1850 watts) determines the use intended and certainly not intended to power a room or house circuit. Electricians will not lose jobs over this.

PowerBridge is a simple single recessed receptacle for connecting an appliance (TV) energized from in-wall CODE COMPLIANT building wire NM or MC depending on the AHJ requirement, to conform to NEC wiring methods allowed in those jurisdictions recognizing NEC. The single receptacle does not have dual terminals to branch down-line. The INLET does not have multiple wire connection points to energize more than one receptacle.

The PowerBridge Listing and Control report from ETL classify the specific intended use of the Power OUTLET (at TV display) and the Power INLET (at existing power source) to be installed to each other using proper code compliant material and methods.

The OUTLET and INLET are not listed from PowerBridge as separate components but as a KIT. They have specific labeling and instructions to the listed use as an IN WALL ELECTRCIAL APPLIANCE. Appliances are allowable to be energized by cord-sets.

I appreciate the debate and comments and look forward to learning more from the professional members.
If anyone wishes to read our White Paper and our ETL Control Report I will make available upon request.
Please email techsupport at powerbridgesolution com

Regards, Justin
PowerBridge

 

[tom baker]

I am not ready to offer an opinion, because I am not sure I understand the concept. Tell me if I have this right:
1. You permanently mount a standard (single or duplex) receptacle outlet high on the wall, at the location of the TV mounting chassis.
2. At the more usual receptacle height, and directly below item #1, you permanently mount a ?thingy that looks like a receptacle, but has male connections visible sticking out from the wall.?
3. Within the wall, you use an allowable wiring method to permanently connect items 1 and 2.
4. You now use something that resembles a conventional extension cord, plugging the male end into a standard receptacle outlet, and plugging the female end into item #2.
5. What this gains for you is the ability to have a new receptacle for the TV, without using an allowable wiring method within the walls to permanently connect the new receptacle as an extension of the circuit serving the existing one.

If that is how this system works, then how does it get past the second sentence of 406.6(B)? By my reading of the article 100 definition of ?receptacle,? that definition does cover ?Item 2? above.

CB that is correct, but one device is called an inlet. What is in question is the portable cord between a UPS and the inlet.
And the comparison to a generator powering a transfer switch via a cord is right on.
Perhaps a different wiring method between the UPS and inlet (for the power bridge) is needed, such as multiconductor tray cable which is a chapter 3 wiring method...

 

[ActionDave]

It's no more permanent than every other cord we leave plugged in 24/7/365. I have cords that have not been unplugged since we moved here over 10 years ago. Are they permanent? What if I plug in something attached to the wall?

Agreed- my dishwasher and garbage grinder both cord have cords on them and have not been unplugged since they were installed more than ten years ago, like fourteen. When do they become permanent?

...to me is is no different then a TV being plugged in and saying the TV is part of the fixed wiring system. It is not part of the system in my eyes.

Still agree, however, I wish my TV was part of the permanent wiring system. It would cut down on my wife rearranging the furniture!!

 

[RICK NAPIER]

I don't think this would be code compliant but wouldn't it make sense for the manufactorer to go to the NFPA for an opinion?

 

[iwire]

I don't think this would be code compliant but wouldn't it make sense for the manufacturer to go to the NFPA for an opinion?

Sure seems like it.

Not sure that would be binding on the AHJ for Washington.

 

[roger]

Chicken! :grin:

That doesn't mean anything, it's not a "tripple dog dare".

Anyways, let me ask a few questions to the naysayers.

At what time and point does this installation become a code violation?

Is it a violation when the two boxes, devices, and NM is installed in the walls with no power applied?

If the answer is yes, then where can I find in the NEC that it is a violation to have wiring installed in a building with out power to it?

Is it a violation to use an inlet to feed in wall wiring?



Roger

 

[charlie b]

Is it a violation when the two boxes, devices, and NM is installed in the walls with no power applied?

Not in my opinion. I equate it to leaving Christmas lights on the gutters year round. Neither constitutes an electrical installation. The thing that is an electrical installation is the thing that brings power to the utilization devices.

Is it a violation to use an inlet to feed in wall wiring?

In my opinion, yes. I have already cited the relevant article: the second sentence of 406.6(B). I have not yet seen a convincing argument that (1) The ?inlet? does not meet the definition of a ?receptacle,? and (2) The female end of the power cord does not meet the definition of an ?attachment plug.?

I will say this about the strength of my reasoning: If the state of Washington, or any other AHJ, were looking for an NEC article that they could cite as the basis for forbidding the use of this equipment, I believe they would win any court case if they were to use 406.6(B) as their basis.

 

[roger]

Not in my opinion. I equate it to leaving Christmas lights on the gutters year round. Neither constitutes an electrical installation. The thing that is an electrical installation is the thing that brings power to the utilization devices. In my opinion, yes. I have already cited the relevant article: the second sentence of 406.6(B). I have not yet seen a convincing argument that (1) The ?inlet? does not meet the definition of a ?receptacle,? and (2) The female end of the power cord does not meet the definition of an ?attachment plug.?

I will say this about the strength of my reasoning: If the state of Washington, or any other AHJ, were looking for an NEC article that they could cite as the basis for forbidding the use of this equipment, I believe they would win any court case if they were to use 406.6(B) as their basis.

Okay, considering your argument of 406.6(B) where could this inlet device "Attachement Plug" be used?

Attachment Plug (Plug Cap) (Plug). A device that, by insertion in a receptacle, establishes a connection between the conductors of the attached flexible cord and the conductors connected permanently to the receptacle.

That tells me that the inlet "Attachment Plug" must be supplied by a receptacle and is not a receptacle itself.

Roger

 

[jim dungar]

... I have not yet seen a convincing argument that (1) The “inlet” does not meet the definition of a “receptacle,” and (2) The female end of the power cord does not meet the definition of an “attachment plug.”....

How about the definitions in the UL white book for ATTACHMENT PLUGS (AXGV)?

Attachment Plug — A male contact device for the temporary connection of a flexible cord or cable to a receptacle, cord connector, or other female outlet device.

Male Inlet (Equipment Inlet, Motor Attachment Plug) ​

​

​

​

​

— A male contact device to be mounted on utilization equipment to provide a detachable electrical​

connection to an appliance coupler or cord connector.
​

 

[CarlAshcraft]

Who can install the PowerBridge?

Who can install the PowerBridge?

My main source of business is A/V installs. This being said, this product is not new to me. On paper the product could be a useful product. I agree there are many arguments on whether or not this product is code compliant. I have presented the product to my AHJ and have not been able to get a clear answer on whether or not it is code compliant. The product has a UL listing, but are the individual parts UL listed or is the complete product UL listed?

My biggest complaint about this product is who they are marketing the product to. When this product originally came out on the market it was stated on the PowerBridge website "No Licensed Electrician Needed for install". After seeing that comment on their website. I spoke with several of the product reps at various electronic shows and none of them seemed to care whether or not a licensed electrician should install their product. That comment on PowerBridge's website has since been removed, but they still market this product as a solution that can be installed by an unlicensed individual. All of this being said, I have posted this product and the question of "Who can install this product?" on many different forums it seems as though most people would prefer not to answer. In my opinion, once the product is installed it carries 120v on the line thus making it required to be installed by a licensed electrician. Other arguments I have heard are that it is not directly connected to the house electrical system therefore not required to be installed by a licensed electrician.

So the question I have is:

Who can install this product?

 

[LarryFine]

Okay, considering your argument of 406.6(B) where could this inlet device "Attachement Plug" be used?

Good point.

Attachment Plug ? A male contact device for the temporary connection of a flexible cord or cable to a receptacle, cord connector, or other female outlet device.

Male Inlet (Equipment Inlet, Motor Attachment Plug) ​

? A male contact device to be mounted on utilization equipment to provide a detachable electrical connection to an appliance coupler or cord connector.
​

Gender indicated; works for me!

 

[al hildenbrand]

The OUTLET and INLET are not listed from PowerBridge as separate components but as a KIT. They have specific labeling and instructions to the listed use as an IN WALL ELECTRCIAL APPLIANCE. Appliances are allowable to be energized by cord-sets.

Thank you, Justin.

It will further the discussion here if you can tell us the UL Category Code for the Power Bridge, please. If you aren't sure what I'm referring to, it's an alphabetic or alphanumeric code usually only four or five characters long. With that Category Code, we can reference the UL White Book (Guide Information for Electrical Equipment).

 

[LarryFine]

So the question I have is:

Who can install this product?

I can. So far, I have only installed mine, not the packaged kit, and I will continue to do so.

A homeowner can if he/she may do their own electrical work. Local permit and inspection requirements still apply.

 

[charlie b]

How about the definitions in the UL white book for ATTACHMENT PLUGS (AXGV)?

OK. When the 2014 NEC comes out with an equivalent revision to its article 100, I will withdraw my use of 406.6(B) as objection to this device. As I said earlier, I don't see a safety issue here. All I see is a set of words that, at the moment, tend not to allow the use of this equipment.

 

[al hildenbrand]

Who can install this product?

In my State, even low voltage installers and low voltage contractors are licensed.

That said, there is a third category of installers that you didn't include in your post. The Do-It-Yourselfer, who is the owner / occupant of a detached single family dwelling, is entitled, in many jurisdictions, to pull their own electrical permit and do their own electrical installs.

Stick around. This thread is still rolling, in my opinion, and more information will develop, I suspect.

 

[charlie b]

Okay, considering your argument of 406.6(B) where could this inlet device "Attachement Plug" be used?

Nowhere, I suppose. Or perhaps I don't quite understand the nature of an inlet device. I haven't been looking closely at the discussion and the equipment cut sheets for things other than the original topic of this thread. Does the NEC address an "inlet device" anywhere?

 

[CarlAshcraft]

In my State, even low voltage installers and low voltage contractors are licensed.

That said, there is a third category of installers that you didn't include in your post. The Do-It-Yourselfer, who is the owner / occupant of a detached single family dwelling, is entitled, in many jurisdictions, to pull their own electrical permit and do their own electrical installs.

Stick around. This thread is still rolling, in my opinion, and more information will develop, I suspect.

Florida also requires low voltage installers to have a license. Which brings up another point. The low voltage licenses in Florida restrictions are based on voltage. Which again even if you have an LV license in my opinion this product is not covered by that license either.

 

[al hildenbrand]

Does the NEC address an "inlet device" anywhere?

There are 34 instances of "inlet" in the NEC + Handbook commentary.

There are 16 instances of "flanged surface inlet".

Maybe the most interesting is:

2008 NEC
Article 626 Electrified Truck Parking Spaces
626.2 Definitions.

Cord Connector. A device that, by inserting it into a truck flanged surface inlet, establishes an electrical connection to the truck for the purpose of providing power for the on-board electric loads and may provide a means for information exchange. This device is part of the truck coupler.

Some of the more interesting, IMO, are:
406.6(D) - note the term "cord connector"
410.62(C)(3) - again, note the term "cord connector" and the absence of "attachment plug"
520.53(M)
551.46 (A)(1)
551.46 (B)
Figure 551.46(C) - where "attachment plug caps" are shown as male and differentiated from "receptacles".
552.44(B)
625.2 Definitions: Electric Vehicle Connector; Electric Vehicle Coupler; Electric Vehicle Inlet
626.25 - First sentence where "cord connector" and "attachment plug" are both used with "flanged surface inlet".
626.25 (B)(2)
626.25 (3)
626.25 (4)(a)
626.25 (4)(b)
626.25 (5) - note "cord connector" and "attachment plug" not used interchangeably.

Parenthetically, I hope I got all these citations typed correctly. Please help if you note a discrepancy.

 

[wwhitney]

The ?reverse receptacle? has its blades recessed deeper into the wall space than the front surface of the receptacle. When you bring the female end of the cord close to the blades, the front face of the cord cap has to cross beyond the front face of the receptacle, before the two components come into actual contact. At the moment the border is crossed, the cord cap has been ?inserted in? the receptacle. So I say again that the definition of ?attachment plug? encompasses the female end of the cord.

So If the "reverse receptacle" were not recessed, you would not see a code violation?

BTW, I would say that common usage informs the definitions in Article 100, so that a receptacle is a female device, and an attachment plug is a male device, even if the definitions do not spell that out.

Cheers, Wayne