BX as a ground.

Status
Not open for further replies.
al hildenbrand said:
Respectfully, a Branch Circuit extension is another thread. Post 320. Substantiation:
Click to expand...
Al, your substantiation just shows that in each case you have refused to answer the question about branch circuit extension. Thank you for taking the time to prove that point for us.

Also, if post 199 is the heart of your position, then I think post 316 rebuts it solidly. Sorry I didn't notice that earlier, post 199 was rather verbose, although I'm sure some of my posts were equally verbose.

Cheers, Wayne
 
iwire said:
I picked up a feed for an under cab light and a DW from this old BX.

Would not use it as an EGC much more comfortable with my scotch 33 ground clamp to the waterline.

Now I don't do this hack work on the job but I show you this mess as a way to show I won't use old BX as an EGC.
Click to expand...

That is garbage, you should be ashamed of yourself. :happyyes::happyyes:
 
al hildenbrand said:
Asked and answered. Respectfully, a Branch Circuit extension is another thread. Post 320.
Click to expand...


It seems when the questions get hard you decide it is outside the scope of this thread.


I dare not put words in your mouth so I am asking.

Is it your position that if change the receptacle on a BX circuit you have an EGC but if I want to extend it I do not have an EGC?
 
wwhitney said:
Al, your substantiation just shows that in each case you have refused to answer the question about branch circuit extension.
Click to expand...
Oh, I answered the question, in spite of your opinion about it.

And I disagree with you about what it shows. To me it shows how doggedly you chase your tail.
 
iwire said:
Is it your position that if change the receptacle on a BX circuit you have an EGC but if I want to extend it I do not have an EGC?
Click to expand...
My position is "Where a grounding means exists" refers to all grounding means as installed to the Code in effect at the time of its install. My position is that nothing in the Code, in the current edition or in "superseded" editions has removed the status of "existing grounding means" by direct rule.

The OP question about receptacle replacement is on point and narrow. The underlying, overarching question is "What Code rule instructs the reversing of the 'existing grounding means' status of installed, grounded Armored Cable type BX?"
 
iwire said:
Very lame Al, very lame.



As far as I am concerned this refusal of yours is an admission your argument has been wrong.
Click to expand...


And it is my opinion your not "understanding" my answer says you can't show the Code rule.
 
K8MHZ said:
I like 33 as much as the next sparky, but I would have at least used a metal ground clamp. That would be for sure better than using BX.
Click to expand...

That tape has been there for at least 12 years and shows no sign of unwrapping.

Again, not what I would do in any other structure. :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top