Inspector cited this?

[jap]

The screw body is a clearance fit through the hole in the plate and the non conducting tab on the wall wart will tend to center it in the hole.
Sometimes grounded, but not reliably.

Tapatalk!

There's the answer right there. We'll just need to start Lag Bolting the Wall Wart to the receptacle so it can chew through the cover and into the receptacle for positive grounding.

 

[GoldDigger]

There's the answer right there. We'll just need to start Lag Bolting the Wall Wart to the receptacle so it can chew through the cover and into the receptacle for positive grounding.

Hmm. If you go that way, you will need a very finely threaded lag bolt to get the required number of threads in contact with the thin plate.

 

[iwire]

Over 100 posts, wow.

 

[MasterTheNEC]

Yes, and I contributed at least 1 post to the madness ( I think ):jawdrop:

 

[kwired]

I disagree with this statement. Section 110.3(b) has it`s place ...I might agree with you more if you said the same statement for 90.4.

Alright I take that back and change it to 90.4.

If an inspector does cite 110.3(B) he better know what the instructions are for the item in question though, and not just assume he knows, because if I know what they say and he is wrong.... not saying I will always know, but many times I do.

If an inspector cites 90.4 he better have a good explanation as to why and not just "because I can".

 

[MasterTheNEC]

Alright I take that back and change it to 90.4.

If an inspector does cite 110.3(B) he better know what the instructions are for the item in question though, and not just assume he knows, because if I know what they say and he is wrong.... not saying I will always know, but many times I do.

If an inspector cites 90.4 he better have a good explanation as to why and not just "because I can".

NOW....DAT I AGREE !

 

[jap]

Hmm. If you go that way, you will need a very finely threaded lag bolt to get the required number of threads in contact with the thin plate.

Why?

The original 6-32 cover screw doesnt do that or we wouldnt be having this conversation.

I'm sure my Lagbolt would catch more on the sides and underneith of it's head than a small 6-32 would that is so precisely centered in the cover hole by the nonconductive Wall Wart Support.

JAP>

 

[roger]

The easy solution would be for the wall wart instructions to include "not to be used on flush type metallic plates" :roll:

Roger

 

[K8MHZ]

The easy solution would be for the wall wart instructions to include "not to be used on flush type metallic plates" :roll:

Roger

The proper solution would be to not allow listing of a product that requires an electrical installation as a means of securing and supporting. We can't legally tie strap even light weight stuff to metal conduit, but it's OK to have to remove a screw and replace it with one that did not come with the cover?

That's ridiculous. No way should warts with screw mounts like the OP's be able to get listed.

I heard there was or is going to be something in the NEC that requires the use of the fasteners that came with the device. If it made it, there is your violation.

 

[roger]

The proper solution would be to not allow listing of a product that requires an electrical installation as a means of securing and supporting.

So, who are you going to take on to accomplish this?

I hope you can get it done so that this thread can die. :thumbsup:

Roger

 

[GoldDigger]

Why?

The original 6-32 cover screw doesnt do that or we wouldnt be having this conversation.

I'm sure my Lagbolt would catch more on the sides and underneith of it's head than a small 6-32 would that is so precisely centered in the cover hole by the nonconductive Wall Wart Support.

JAP>

The original screw makes contact with the plate almost entirely from the underside of its head. Neither the original screw nor your lag bolt will have its head in contact with the cover plate as long as the wall wart tab is in the way.

Tapatalk!

 

[jap]

The original screw makes contact with the plate almost entirely from the underside of its head. Neither the original screw nor your lag bolt will have its head in contact with the cover plate as long as the wall wart tab is in the way.

Tapatalk!

Your right,,, I should have said an oversized lagbolt would contact the side of the cover hole moreso than the original 6-32 Ever would. Thanks,

JAP>

 

[MasterTheNEC]

@roger

You have the power to kill it....swing that sword!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk

 

[roger]

@roger

You have the power to kill it....swing that sword!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk

My trigger finger is twitching

Roger

 

[PetrosA]

Ok, patent pending

Just have one of these made up for it.

 

[GoldDigger]

Ok, patent pending

Just have one of these made up for it.

Nice design!
Unless the wall wart instructions specifically called for it, you could probably get away with using a 4-40 for the outer screw, but with an oversized head.
Would you slot the primary screw or put a hex shape on the outside?

Tapatalk!

 

[mgookin]

Very nice indeed. One thing I see is that the middle part seems like it will push the wall wart away from the faceplace which might cause the plug to not sit tight. Maybe make that a flathead screw and as digger says, use a smaller diameter secondary screw so you can run your threads into the shaft of the flathead.

I ask people on every prospective patent - How big is the market?
Does every hospital room do this?
4 per room?
2 per hospital?
1 per county?

 

[PetrosA]

You'll notice I don't give any exact dimensions of parts

I don't have a wall wart handy, but I seem to remember that most of the time when you screw them tight to the plate, it kind of lifts the other end of the wall wart off the plate, so I think you need to bring the surface up to at least the height of the receptacle face (which usually stands out like 3/16" or more from the metal plate). I also think a 4-40 screw might work, but I'm afraid that would drastically increase the machining costs and weaken the screw and it wouldn't be cool if these broke off in a $25 receptacle.

My thought for machining this would be to do the bottom screw in two parts - a male threaded rod and a female threaded sleeve that would get threaded over the male threads and joined using a spot welding technique. That way you're not trying to cut a tiny number of threads into a fragile screw head. the joint on the first screw doesn't need to be super strong, just strong enough to keep the sleeve from moving.

 

[kwired]

perhaps a screw similar in design as "scaffold" nails ??

 

[Little Bill]

I used to work on a machine that had a threaded insert. It was threaded on the outside and had a slot in the top to tighten it into the machine. The inside of the insert was also threaded so the cover screws went into that. The insert wasn't just for the other screw to go into, it also held something in place.
Both pieces had to be secured in the same location so "stacking" the screws (for lack of a better term) was the best way to accomplish this.

Looked eerily similar to Peter's drawing!