Cheap parkinglot poles

Status
Not open for further replies.
mdshunk said:
It's perfectly legal to run up a tennis court post if you use a cable method inside the post and not conductors.
Click to expand...

Not so sure Marc, read 410.15(B) and it's exceptions, looks like that would be limited to 8' poles.
 
Don't even try to claim that you never knowingly violate code. I'm just one of the few that have the xxxxx to admit it.


Sometimes I speed too.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
iwire said:
Not so sure Marc, read 410.15(B) and it's exceptions, looks like that would be limited to 8' poles.
Click to expand...
I did, and that's why I wrote what I wrote. When you use a cable inside, the pole is not being "used as a raceway to enclose supply conductors". It's only being used to support the luminaire. The luminaire, when wired with a cable method, could just as easily have that cable on the inside or the outside of the pole. Changing to UF cable in the FS body at the base of the pole is the workaround to make it compliant.
 
Last edited:
220/221 said:
Don't even try to claim that you never knowingly violate code. I'm just one of the few that have the balls to admit it.
Click to expand...

I've pointed out many times that what gets discussed here and what actually happens on job sites are worlds apart. This forum is the theoretical world of 100% code compliance. (And there's nothing wrong with people knowing the right way to do a job.) But you point out a fact of all jobs - there is no such thing as a perfectly code compliant job.
 
mdshunk said:
I did, and that's why I wrote what I wrote. When you use a cable inside, the pole is not being "used as a raceway to enclose supply conductors". It's only being used to support the luminaire. The luminaire, when wired with a cable method, could just as easily have that cable on the inside or the outside of the pole.
Click to expand...

OK, I will drop it, but that was not what was being done.
 
peter d said:
I've pointed out many times that what gets discussed here and what actually happens on job sites are worlds apart. This forum is the theoretical world of 100% code compliance. (And there's nothing wrong with people knowing the right way to do a job.) But you point out a fact of all jobs - there is no such thing as a perfectly code compliant job.
Click to expand...

There is also a large difference between a job with violations and an EC intentionally violating the code just because it does not make sense to them.
 
iwire said:
There is also a large difference between a job with violations and an EC intentionally violating the code just because it does not make sense to them.
Click to expand...
I sometimes violate the code just because the plans said to. Makes for nicer change orders. That depends on the project deadline, however.
 
iwire said:
There is also a large difference between a job with violations and an EC intentionally violating the code just because it does not make sense to them.
Click to expand...

I am well aware of that, and I'm not saying we should go out and intentionally violate the code because we don't like the rules. If 22O wants to run his business like that, then fine, there is not much any of us can do about it, and I don't think he would care anyway.

But I agree with what 220 said, there are times when all of us have had to make a choice to intentionally violate the code (for whatever reason, but money would probably be the main reason), and have done so. Right or wrong that's how it is as we don't live in a perfect world.
 
I guess I am the jerk for expecting a bit more at an NEC Forum.
Click to expand...

See....we agree sometimes :wink:


High expectations do not make you a jerk but you have to be careful of that high horse. Different viewpoints are critical for balance and growth.
 
220/221 said:
Different viewpoints are critical for balance and growth.
Click to expand...
Funny you say that. I was just reading a book earlier this evening "In Search of Excellence: Lessons from America's Best-Run Companies", in which the author said:

Tolerance for failure is a very specific part of the excellent company culture - and that lesson comes directly from the top. Champions have to make lots of tries and consequently suffer some failures or the organization won't learn
Click to expand...
 
We all try to follow the rules yet some of the rules are questionable and there is a whole new set of rules on the osha side of the fence.
If we all followed all the rules all the time we would never get anything done. It has been this way for the last 30+ years that I know.
Most of us are here to be more familiar with the code ad neauseum yet there is always a fine line we straddle between the rules and making things safe and doing things safe and making money to support our families.
If anyone here told me that they are totallycode compliant I would not believe it for a second Yet the people here are at the top of the food chain they are the ones who care enough to try to be as compliant as they can be. We are only as good as those before us who have taught us what we know. Some learn quickly and some dont. I am just a stupid cow what do I know??
 
The thing that kills me is this is a NEC forum, so yeah, its ALL about the NEC, not about how much we dont really care if it meets NEC requirements or not. IMO, 220 has some issues, I've seen his posts on different forums, and some are great posts, but his attitude just stinks IMO.
 
mdshunk said:
220/221 has a fleet of nice trucks and, if I'm not mistaken, drives a pretty new Porsche as a personal vehicle. George has to fix his own alternator on his rattletrap. I know who I listen to.
Click to expand...
A pair of brothers I know have a fleet of flashy trucks, drive big brand new big Ford pickups, and pay for them through unscrupulous business practices. The other day I saw one of them loading material in his brand new truck, ostensibly spending money he didn't feel like paying me and twenty other guys two years ago. The other one only has a year or so more driving a desk before he can lie on his own paperwork and take his master's exam.

I'll keep working on my car and getting my money by earning it, thanks. ;)
 
peter d said:
Don't be so hard on yourself. You're a very smart cow. :)
Click to expand...
I still dont have a cheap pole how smart could I be? There have been a lot of good suggestions though.
The landscapers are clearing all the brush aka poison ivy/ poison oak for me to get a closer look at that plastic/fiberglass 14' pole that is there to get some info on it.
This cow doesnt do poison ivy and double that for poison oak I tried clearing some by hand about 5 yrs ago big mistake. Looked like frankencow for a few days till the prednesone kicked in.
I wish IWIRE would come back his input is always welcome here.
 
peter d said:
Don't be so hard on yourself. You're a very smart cow. :)
Click to expand...


Cow28168.gif

avatar_14599.gif
 
stickboy1375 said:
The thing that kills me is this is a NEC forum, so yeah, its ALL about the NEC, not about how much we dont really care if it meets NEC requirements or not. IMO, 220 has some issues, I've seen his posts on different forums, and some are great posts, but his attitude just stinks IMO.
Click to expand...


This is the Contracting and Estimating/Management forum.


When you say "It's all about the NEC" you mean "The NEC is absolute" and I will always disagree. One of my favorite examples is the accepted use of unfused, exposed SE. That is just flat out dangerous but it's legal so all the code thumpers will defend the practice.

As far as my issues.........we all have issues pal.
 
220/221 said:
One of my favorite examples is the accepted use of unfused, exposed SE. That is just flat out dangerous
Click to expand...

But as you pointed out to me, that is YOUR perspective not a fact. :grin:

The reason the NEC still accepts it is simple, no one has put in a proposal with real substantiation of a danger with the practice.

Literally 100 of thousands of SE installations and no pile of ashes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top