Big oops ... need suggestions

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

The point is not the box,

not the splice,

not the wall surface,

not the wiring device,

not the device,

not the controller,

not etc., etc., etc.

The point IS on the wiring system. Beyond that point, the current is OUT of the wiring system. The current is LET OUT of the wiring system at the point that the current is taken.

A point on the wiring system at which current is taken to supply utilization equipment.
 
Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

Originally posted by allenwayne:
Larry in your case it would be A.Since the whip is only an extension of the wiring system and the actual contact point is the J box ,within the appliance from which power is waiting to be utilized.
Click to expand...
Allen's answer:
(A) The breaker.
 
Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

Originally posted by al hildenbrand: The point IS on the wiring system. Beyond that point, the current is OUT of the wiring system.
Click to expand...
Just to reset the clock, to get the discussion on the same page, I hope you will agree with me that you and I have never disagreed about this statement of yours.

I hope (and believe) you will also agree with me on the following statement: I submit that current can leave the wiring system, return to it, leave it again, and return to it again, as often as you like. You may this a common thing, or you may think it rare. But I think we both think that it may happen.

I further submit that within this statement lies the crux of our disagreement. I perceive that you would say current leaves the wiring system as it enters the light switch, returns to the wiring system on the other side of the switch, leaves the wiring system when it enters the light, and returns to the wiring system at the other end of the light. By contrast, I say that current remains within the wiring system until it gets to the light.
 
Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

Originally posted by iwire: If the DW had a factory installed FMC whip IMO the outlet would be the box I connect that whip to. If there was no whip IMO the outlet would be the JB on the DW that I connect my cable to.
Click to expand...
Originally posted by al hildenbrand:. . . in my opinion, the wiring coming to the water heater or the disposal, both of which are hard wired by field assembled installer supplied materials, is part of the Premises Wiring (System) until it becomes internal to the appliance.
Click to expand...
I can't give any real argument against this point of view. It runs contrary to my intuition, but this would not be the first time that has happened. ;)
 
Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

I am not going to reveal whether anyone succeeded in paying me off to not close this at 299, nor the identity of the person who offered the alleged bribe, nor the make and model of car I just bought. But the bids are open for allowing this thread to go beyond 399. :D
 
Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

If the premise wiring stopped lets say at the wall box and the utilization equipment wiring stops at the equipment then the section in between would be an unregulated 'no code zone'.

Certainly an NTL is not going to include an unseen connection as part of the listing.

I firmly agree with Al and I think Charlie also that an outlet is indeed the boundary between the NEC and NTLs or the AHJ. An outlet is not a specific device or piece of equipment.

I also agree with Charlie's assessment that the current can go into and out of the premises system but it does not get to the outlet until the final exit into utilization equipment.
 
Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

Originally posted by charlie b:
Originally posted by al hildenbrand: The point IS on the wiring system. Beyond that point, the current is OUT of the wiring system.
Click to expand...
Just to reset the clock, to get the discussion on the same page, I hope you will agree with me that you and I have never disagreed about this statement of yours.

I hope (and believe) you will also agree with me on the following statement: I submit that current can leave the wiring system, return to it, leave it again, and return to it again, as often as you like. You may this a common thing, or you may think it rare. But I think we both think that it may happen.

I further submit that within this statement lies the crux of our disagreement. I perceive that you would say current leaves the wiring system as it enters the light switch, returns to the wiring system on the other side of the switch, leaves the wiring system when it enters the light, and returns to the wiring system at the other end of the light. By contrast, I say that current remains within the wiring system until it gets to the light.
Click to expand...
Charlie, you are ever the consumate wordsmith. :)

Your words are a nice and agreeable summation of the discussion to this point.
 
Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

Charlie,
By contrast, I say that current remains within the wiring system until it gets to the light.
Click to expand...
I don't think it matters how many times the current leaves the wiring system...the only point that maters is where the current leaves the wiring system to supply utilization equipment, and that is at the outlet the feeds the equipment, not at the switch that controls the outlet that feeds the equipment.
Don
 
Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

I agree with you, Don. But I think that Al disagrees in the following way.

Al believes the switch is not part of the premises wiring system. So the current leaves the wiring system when it enters the switch.

Al further takes note that the switch does pass current on to the utilization equipment.

Al and I appear to agree that the current does not go directly from the switch to the utilization equipment, but rather it first passes through (more of) the wiring system.

Al concludes that the definition of outlet is met by (1) Current leaves the wiring system at the switch, and (2) Current taken from the switch does go to utilization equipment.

I disagree in that (1) I think the switch is part of the wiring system, and (2) Current is not "taken" from the wiring system until you get to the light fixture.
 
Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

I think that some very interesting point have been brought to light by both sides. I can see and understand the points made by both sides.

Through this discussion I think that other questions have been answered (for me at least) and other questions have arisen.

I would like to see more debate brought forth or at least six more post.
:)
 
Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

Originally posted by don_resqcapt19:
. . .the only point that maters is where the current leaves the wiring system to supply utilization equipment, and that is at the outlet the feeds the equipment, not at the switch that controls the outlet that feeds the equipment.
Don
Click to expand...
"Outlet" is ambiguous as to physical location of the utilization equipment. Hence, the physical location of the UE falls away because the definition is focusing on the current that is crossing the boundary between wiring system and not wiring system.

The current in the switch is the current that supplies the utilization equipment. The current in the switch is entirely and 100% "taken" by the utilization equipment because the switch and the wiring and the controlled outlet only "carry" the current.

I haven't yet examined the changes in the language of what is currently known as 404.14, but I note that the 1978 NEC states:
1978 NEC
380-14. Rating and Use of Snap-Swtches. Snap switches shall be used within their ratings as follows:

(a) AC General-Use Snap Switch. A form of general-use snap switch suitable only for use on alternating-current circuits for controlling the following: </font>
  • <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">(1) Resistive and inductive loads, including electric-discharge lamps, not exceeding the ampere rating of the switch at the voltabe involved.</font>
  • <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">(2) Etc. . . .</font>
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">
Click to expand...
Note the inclusion of the words "use. . .for controlling" in the passage.

The 1978 Code Cycle saw the introduction of the Definition of Premises Wiring (System), and that definition says the wiring, internal to controllers, is not part of such wiring as makes up the system. I submit that the creation of the Definition of Premises Wiring (System) was created with full knowledge that a switch controlling a light is, in fact, a controller.

The Definition of Premises Wiring (System) creates the leaving of current at a controller, and when the controller is a switch, and the UE a luminaire, the "current taken" at the point, on the wiring system that is the switch, and the point on the wiring system that is the connection to the UE, as defined in "Outlet", is indistinguishable because no physical location of the UE is given.

And, lest this be glossed over, the language is encompassing enough to deliberately include current taken from DC, AC, single phase and multiphase wiring systems of many, many configurations. "Outlet" defines, in one short collection of language, the boundary between wiring system and not wiring system for a large number of types of different systems, hence the narrow focus on "current".
 
Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

Originally posted by jwelectric:
I would like to see more debate brought forth or at least six more post.
:)
Click to expand...
Mike, you are incorrigible! :D
 
Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

Originally posted by charlie b:
Al concludes that the definition of outlet is met by (1) . . . (2) Current taken from the switch does go to utilization equipment.
Click to expand...
Almost, but not quite.

Current is taken from the point on the wiring system that connects to the controller, and that current is taken by the utilization equipment.

I am not saying the current is taken from the switch.
 
Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

Originally posted by jwelectric:
Would a no fuse disconnect at an AC unit be an outlet?
:confused:
Click to expand...
You could also phrase the question: "Could a general duty switch, with or without fuses, be an outlet?". The answer is in this discussion's end. . .

I say: "Yes."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top