Anybody else taking issue with this month's EC&M Illustrated "Catastrophe"?

[hbiss]

Anybody else taking issue with this month's EC&M Illustrated "Catastrophe"?

Just finished reading this months EC&M (June 2013) and I have to take issue with Russ LeBlanc and his interpretation of the NEC. The first item in his Illustrated Catastrophes column (page 38) titled Zip-A-Dee Doo-Dah illustrates how not to wire a doorbell transformer. Russ cites violations of Art 400 and 250. Sorry, but like it or not that transformer is cord and plug connected to a receptacle so the NEC doesn't apply. He might, however, be able to cite a violation of Art 400 as it applies to the LV secondary CL2 wiring as that appears to be zip cord that might or might not go through an opening and into the wall. Can't be positive since the bottom of the picture is cut off.


-Hal

 

[Volta]

I haven't looked at it yet. But I'm interested to know your thoughts about the NEC not covering items connected by a plug to a receptacle. There are many places in the Code that plug-connected equipment is referenced.

 

[PetrosA]

How could you not ding that cord connected transformer? What I saw in the photo is a transformer designed to be mounted in a 1/2" KO (with the cord wirenutted to the leads) screwed to the wall and plugged in. The mounting means it's designed for would put the primary side of the transformer in an enclosure, which it doesn't have in the photo and it would ground the transformer housing (assuming a grounded enclosure were available).

Article here

I'm not trying hard to defend Russ LeBlanc, but as far as code catastrophe writers go, he's definitely one of the better, more reasonable ones and I enjoy reading his articles and watching his videos. The "other" guy, well, he has a much too whiney voice for videos and is so nit-picking that I suspect he has OCD

 

[hbiss]

How could you not ding that cord connected transformer? What I saw in the photo is a transformer designed to be mounted in a 1/2" KO (with the cord wirenutted to the leads) screwed to the wall and plugged in.

Doesn't matter because once you connect it with a cord and plug that all goes out the window. I know it's a hack job but don't quote code articles that don't apply.

Food for thought: You say the transformer is designed to be mounted in a 1/2" KO. Then what are the feet for? Also, what would your opinion be if it were mounted by the feet in a 6x6x4 screw cover or hinged cover box with a 3 wire line cord coming out of it through a suitable strain relief connector and a bushed hole for the CL2 wiring?

@Volta- don't just say there are many references in the NEC. Let's hear the ones that you think apply here. Maybe I'm missing something.

-Hal

 

[iwire]

Doesn't matter because once you connect it with a cord and plug that all goes out the window.

I disagree that the NEC stops at the receptacle.

@Volta- don't just say there are many references in the NEC. Let's hear the ones that you think apply here. Maybe I'm missing something.

Here are three quick examples which in my opinion demonstrate that the NFPA believes the NEC applies beyond the receptacle.

422.44 Cord-and-Plug-Connected Immersion Heaters. Electric heaters of the cord-and-plug-connected immersion type shall be constructed and installed so that current-carrying parts are effectively insulated from electrical con-tact with the substance in which they are immersed.

422.45 Stands for Cord-and-Plug-Connected Appliances. Each smoothing iron and other cord-and-plug-connected electrically heated appliance intended to be ap-plied to combustible material shall be equipped with an approved stand, which shall be permitted to be a separate piece of equipment or a part of the appliance.

422.46 Flatirons. Electrically heated smoothing irons shall be equipped with an identified temperature-limiting means.

 

[MPdesign]

Lets look at it from a different angle:

Are 120 Volt wire-nuts which are not in an enclosure approved by NEC?

Circumventing the code by adding a cord is not an approved use.

 

[PetrosA]

Doesn't matter because once you connect it with a cord and plug that all goes out the window. I know it's a hack job but don't quote code articles that don't apply.

Food for thought: You say the transformer is designed to be mounted in a 1/2" KO. Then what are the feet for? Also, what would your opinion be if it were mounted by the feet in a 6x6x4 screw cover or hinged cover box with a 3 wire line cord coming out of it through a suitable strain relief connector and a bushed hole for the CL2 wiring?

@Volta- don't just say there are many references in the NEC. Let's hear the ones that you think apply here. Maybe I'm missing something.

-Hal

How can you treat that as a cord and plug setup? A cord and plug still has to be part of a listed assembly (which this certainly isn't) to be treated as such. If we're not allowed to add a properly sized cord and plug to a disposal with the proper connector just because it's not sold by the disposal manufacturer, then treating this as a corded transformer is stretching the limits way beyond the outer reaches of reason.

I have no idea what the feet are for, but once you mount this type of transformer in an enclosure, lots of issues disappear. I still wouldn't wirenut it in an enclosure (I'd want to see terminal blocks mounted there), but that's just me and has nothing to do with code. I would also do something to bond the transformer case to ground. I'm still not sure whether it would fly, since it seems that we're less and less often allowed to field fabricate assemblies anymore.

 

[iceworm]

Here are three quick examples which in my opinion demonstrate that the NFPA believes the NEC applies beyond the receptacle.

422.44 Cord-and-Plug-Connected Immersion Heaters. Electric heaters of the cord-and-plug-connected immersion type shall be constructed and installed so that current-carrying parts are effectively insulated from electrical con-tact with the substance in which they are immersed.

422.45 Stands for Cord-and-Plug-Connected Appliances. Each smoothing iron and other cord-and-plug-connected electrically heated appliance intended to be ap-plied to combustible material shall be equipped with an approved stand, which shall be permitted to be a separate piece of equipment or a part of the appliance.

422.46 Flatirons. Electrically heated smoothing irons shall be equipped with an identified temperature-limiting means.

Bob -
I agree the NFPA believes the NEC applies beyond the receptacle. Hair dryers and vending machines are two more examples. I just don't see how any of this is enforceable. Well, except that if one goes to Wallmart or Sears, all the appliances offered likely meet these requirements.

In this state, the NEC only applies to new construction. Once that inspector walks away, one can plug in anything one wants. The NEC has a lot to say, but has no jurisdiction.

ice

 

[GoldDigger]

I have no idea what the feet are for, ...

To support the junction box firmly by the transformer instead of vice versa?
Or maybe because the manufacturer recognizes that it will sometimes be hacked into existing installations as a replacement (connected to Knob and Tube, of course.)

PS: If the NEC applies to the fixed-in-place limited power wiring on the secondary side of the transformer, and I think most would agree that it does, then it should also apply to the connection of the transformer itself according to manufacturer's instructions.

 

[iwire]

Bob -
I agree the NFPA believes the NEC applies beyond the receptacle. Hair dryers and vending machines are two more examples. I just don't see how any of this is enforceable. Well, except that if one goes to Wallmart or Sears, all the appliances offered likely meet these requirements.

In this state, the NEC only applies to new construction. Once that inspector walks away, one can plug in anything one wants. The NEC has a lot to say, but has no jurisdiction.

ice

Ice as you said in this state

It is my opinion that the AHJ has the power to determine where the NEC stops and how they will enforce it.

 

[iceworm]

Ice as you said in this state

I'd guess it is the same in most states - but I don't know that.

QUOTE=iwire;1497120]It is my opinion that the AHJ has the power to determine where the NEC stops and how they will enforce it.[/QUOTE]
Of course they do. I absolutely agree. In any event, it sounds like it coud be the next knock-knock joke:

Knock-knock
Who's there?
(City, county, state) electrical inspector. I'm here to check your smoothing iron, hair dryer, and coffee cup immersion heater.
Really :rotflmao:
(Bummer - I don't have a good punch line yet. Maybe someone else will pitch in.)

Okay - I'm back up off the floor.

So, Commerical, industrial, public areas (probably including apartment buildings - don't know) have:
DEC - food prep, sanitation, water
Mechanical inspector - boilers
Osha
Alas, no electrical inspector

And any of these could in theory check for NEC compliance - and hopefully they do catch anything gross like cover plates or panel covers missing, exposed wiring. You think they will check the nameplates on all of the cord and plug appliances? I doubt it.

I certainly don't see any AHJ or any of the above demanding entrance into a residence for flat iron inspection.

I'm not disagreeing with anything you said. I don't see any practical, universal, enforcement, jurisdiction.

ice

 

[hbiss]

Ok. After a search all I can find that applies to this situation is 250.114. So the hack should have used a three wire line cord and wirenutted the ground pigtail too. Then, other than the secondary CL2 wiring- if it goes into the wall- it would be NEC compliant.

-Hal

 

[Volta]

...
@Volta- don't just say there are many references in the NEC. Let's hear the ones that you think apply here. Maybe I'm missing something.

-Hal

Fair enough, I was lazy/tired.

So I was only talking about plugs load side of the receptacle in general, but I bet I can find items specific to the picture, which I've now looked at.

Electrical Connections.
....
Connectors and terminals for conductors more finely stranded than Class B and Class C stranding as shown in Chapter 9, Table 10, shall be identified for the specific conductor class or classes.

I don't know how many strands are in that cord, but if 18 AWG and greater than 16 strands per conductor, this'll probably apply.

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.

Equipment Connected by Cord and Plug. Under any of the conditions described in 250.114(1) through (4), exposed, normally non–current-carrying metal parts of cord-and-plug-connected equipment shall be connected to
the equipment grounding conductor.

I know that you posted this one, but I am trying to list in book order.

Cord-and-Plug-Connected Equipment. Non–current-carrying metal parts of cord-and-plug-connected equipment, if grounded, shall be connected to an equipment grounding conductor by one of the methods in 250.138(A)
or (B).

'Course, they should probably say if required to be grounded.

Uses Permitted.
(A) Uses. Flexible cords and cables shall be used only for
the following:...
(3) Connection of portable luminaires, portable and mobile
signs, or appliances...
(6) Connection of utilization equipment to facilitate frequent
interchange...
(8) Appliances where the fastening means and mechanical connections are specifically designed to permit ready removal
for maintenance and repair, and the appliance is intended or identified for flexible cord connection...

IMO this would not meet any of the three.

(B) Attachment Plugs. Where used as permitted in 400.7(A)(3), (A)(6), and (A)(8), each flexible cord shall be equipped with an attachment plug and shall be energized from a receptacle outlet or cord connector body.

Uses Not Permitted. Unless specifically permitted in 400.7, flexible cords and cables shall not be used for the following:
(1) As a substitute for the fixed wiring of a structure...

Pull at Joints and Terminals. Flexible cords and cables shall be connected to devices and to fittings so that
tension is not transmitted to joints or terminals.

Well, that's one pass through the book. If I was an inspector I would fail it.

 

[hbiss]

Yes, looks like 400.10 would apply here but all he would have to do is ty-rap the cord to the transformer. Still not good. And if an inspector came around all he would have to do is pull the plug and there would be nothing to look at.

-Hal

 

[hurk27]

Yes, looks like 400.10 would apply here but all he would have to do is ty-rap the cord to the transformer. Still not good. And if an inspector came around all he would have to do is pull the plug and there would be nothing to look at.

-Hal

But a transformer without a junction box on it I doubt very much was intended to have a cord connected directly to it, I have seen door bell transformers that had a cord come right out of the transformer from the factory, but in the above case I would simply say this was not the case and would site:

400.7(A)(8)

400.7(A)(8) Appliances where the fastening means and mechanical connections are specifically designed to permit ready removal
for maintenance and repair, and the appliance is intended or identified for flexible cord connection...

As well as the articles that require splices to be in enclosed as well as a few other articles already mentioned

Nuff said

 

[GoldDigger]

400.7(A)(8)

Well, I will not try to dispute that a doorbell transformer (and the whole doorbell system) is utilization equipment, but I think it falls well short of the common understanding of appliance.
The code (2011) :

Appliance. Utilization equipment, generally other than industrial, that is normally built in standardized sizes or types and is installed or connected as a unit to perform one or more functions such as clothes washing, air conditioning, food mixing, deep frying, and so forth.

Somehow, I do not see "announcing visitors or obnoxious solicitors" as quite the same level of function as the ones listed.
Also a system that requires field wiring to suit the owner's taste and floor plan is not, IMHO, installed or connected as a unit.
So there is no hope that it would be considered as allowed by 400.7(A)(8), even without taking into account the red text.