I wouldn't be concerned with any load where long term loading average is substantially below conductor ampacity. Consider this reasoning: Conductor current affects heating, i.e. I?R loss. So let's say I? oc delta-R (substituting "oc" as the symbol for proportional). I do know they are approximately proportional, as is delta-R to delta-t (temperature change). Can you see where this is going?
Breaker with 90? terminations
- Thread starter augie47
- Start date
- Status
That's my point exactly. Unless specific numbers are used though to review and make conclusions from, everything else is like shooting at shadows at best. We both may be of the same opinion that enough latitude has been provided in the testing standards to be on the very safe side. We all may agree that it is like splitting hairs and really is of no consequence but then the guestion is as professionals we are responsible for following the codes, manufacture's installation instructions, knowing what the intent of the testing requirements are, etc. regardless of what we may find to be unreasonable. It is a question as to whether or not we are qualified/allowed to make our own decisions.
I've never succumbed to the notion I am not allowed to make my own decisions... even when others have told me otherwise and enforced the matter (such as driving within the speed limit). However, consequences as a result of those decisions do sometimes come to bear on future decisions. :happyyes:
Being qualified is a matter of whether you subscribe to a particular convention.
For the particular case at hand, there doesn't appear to be any others saying we can't and there doesn't appear to be a convention established.
I've never succumbed to the notion I am not allowed to make my own decisions... even when others have told me otherwise and enforced the matter (such as driving within the speed limit). However, consequences as a result of those decisions do sometimes come to bear on future decisions. :happyyes:
Being qualified is a matter of whether you subscribe to a particular convention.
For the particular case at hand, there doesn't appear to be any others saying we can't and there doesn't appear to be a convention established.
If the AJH approves the protect that's all that's needed. Sometime to know too much can be a negative to defy fact reason and logic as to what is reasonable.
I believe I said that earlier.
It is often said ignorance is no defense when it comes to breaking the law...
...but in reality, criminal law process says ignorance or mistake of law or fact is a defense to a crime when it can be shown that the defendant did not have a guilty state of mind. :angel:
I think that we beat this up pretty bad so let's put it bed.I believe I said that earlier.
It is often said ignorance is no defense when it comes to breaking the law...
...but in reality, criminal law process says ignorance or mistake of law or fact is a defense to a crime when it can be shown that the defendant did not have a guilty state of mind. :angel:
- Status