strange instructions

[readydave8]

"After installation destroy these instructions."

Any comments?



By the way, I posted to this forum because it is a General Electric panel.

 

[GoldDigger]

My guess is that the instructions tell the installer how to enable the non-interchangeability lockout, and if left for the owner to examine would allow them to defeat that provision and install cheaper breakers.
Just a SWAG.

 

[ActionDave]

Further proof nobody reads instructions.

 

[Tony S]

Mr Bond,

eat this communiqué after reading. (All 100 pages.)

 

[templdl]

Further proof nobody reads instructions.

Then, what about those tags attached to pillows where it is not to be removed under penalty of law (the death penalty?) except by the consumer?

 

[K8MHZ]

I think it's so when it's time to swap out the panel for an upgrade, GE won't be blamed for the nails holding it in.

 

[ggunn]

"After installation destroy these instructions."

Any comments?

View attachment 13459

Good morning, Mr. Phelps...

 

[growler]

I think it's so when it's time to swap out the panel for an upgrade, GE won't be blamed for the nails holding it in.

Now we know who to blame.

 

[qcroanoke]

I think it's so when it's time to swap out the panel for an upgrade, GE won't be blamed for the nails holding it in.

That's easier to get out than drive pins, Man I hate them.......

 

[GoldDigger]

It would probably be easier to guess the reason for that warning if we could see the rest of the instructions. The part that we see on the first sheet does not seem particularly interesting.

 

[readydave8]

It would probably be easier to guess the reason for that warning if we could see the rest of the instructions. The part that we see on the first sheet does not seem particularly interesting.

sheet was tore but I think you are right about non-interchangeability.


so if I had put the panel in, and used screws to mount instead of nails, I would be in violation due to manufacturers instructions?

 

[ADub]

so if I had put the panel in, and used screws to mount instead of nails, I would be in violation due to manufacturers instructions?

Im positive some people on this site would say yes


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[GoldDigger]

sheet was tore but I think you are right about non-interchangeability.


so if I had put the panel in, and used screws to mount instead of nails, I would be in violation due to manufacturers instructions?

That is always a good topic for controversy here on the Forum.
It would seem to depend on whether the particular instructions in question are part of the listing approval of the product.
Some instructions are critical to safety and may have been evaluated by the NRTL as part of the listing process. Others are not safety critical and some of the material that comes with the product is more marketing than instructions.

You be the judge, and then the AHJ will be the higher court.

I wonder if an inspector could ask for proof that you destroyed the instructions and could red tag you if they were left in the panel?

 

[Fulthrotl]

It would probably be easier to guess the reason for that warning if we could see the rest of the instructions. The part that we see on the first sheet does not seem particularly interesting.

that's 'cause they were destroyed, as instructed. duh.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGSUjuSBt1A

 

[K8MHZ]

I'm just a noob, but did they install a panel empty tub first and then put the rest of it together on the wall back then?

Or is that still a secret?

 

[bphgravity]

Take notice of the reference to the NEMA recommended method for removing the knockouts. The illustrations and instructions came from NEMA Engineering Bulletin No. 55 that was first published in 1954.

This Bulletin is still available to this very day here: http://www.nema.org/Technical/Documents/Bull_55_reaffirmed_12_15_111.pdf

 

[K8MHZ]

Take notice of the reference to the NEMA recommended method for removing the knockouts. The illustrations and instructions came from NEMA Engineering Bulletin No. 55 that was first published in 1954.

This Bulletin is still available to this very day here: http://www.nema.org/Technical/Documents/Bull_55_reaffirmed_12_15_111.pdf

Great link but, having read them.....

#1 assumes the center knockout is only attached on one side.

How do you get from #2 to #3 without busting out the other rings? Especially if you have to place the linesman pliers on top of another knockout, risking punching that through?

I have tried the 'NEMA' way more than once. Sometimes it works, other times it doesn't. Maybe paint was thinner and dies were sharper in 1954.

 

[iwire]

I have tried the 'NEMA' way more than once. Sometimes it works, other times it doesn't. Maybe paint was thinner and dies were sharper in 1954.

Exactly.

To be fair it must be tough to keep the dies set correctly. I imagine there is not much range between falling out and never coming out.