commercial receptacle limits

[Guest]

Re: commercial receptacle limits

Originally posted by don_resqcapt19:
Wayne,
Why should the handbook be the "official interpretation" of the NEC? <snip> Don

Because (in my opinion) it would make sense, because it would be helpful & promote safe installations: The Handbook is published by the NFPA. If the NFPA can't stand behind it, then they should discontinue in-house publication. The Handbook would be more useful if it had teeth. Having the NFPA stand behind the Handbook would add to the value of the NEC and also insure that only the best commentary is included in the Handbook.

It's like the IRS saying they don't warrant their telephone answers as being correct or to be relied on (not binding).

If the Handbook standards are bogus (paraphrased from above), then the Handbook is bogus. What is the value if it cannot be relied on? I would understand the argument if the Handbook was not published by the NFPA.

Originally posted by Roger: Handbook disclaimer, to follow Don's post. <big snip>

That disclaimer is to shift liability. Again, if the NFPA can't stand behind the statements in the Handbook then maybe they should reconsider their decision to publish it. If the NFPA stood behind the Handbook it would have to become a better document. IMHO it should be like left-hand/right-hand.

I guess the alternative is to un-privatize the NEC and its accoutrement's. I could say a lot more, but this is enough for now and for this venue. Please don't slay the messenger. I'm on your team.

../Wayne C.

[ October 06, 2003, 10:31 PM: Message edited by: awwt ]

 

[pierre]

Re: commercial receptacle limits

The handbook is written by a handfull of people, the official document is by CMP panels and many more. The official interpretation will come from the CMP members of the particular panel that covers the topic of the question being asked. That is the reason the Handbook is for guidance only, just like all of the other texts out there that cover the NEC.

Pierre

 

[Guest]

Re: commercial receptacle limits

It seems "weak" that you can buy them bundled together but you can't rely on half the bundle. I understand that the Handbook is written by five authors. If the CMP's gave it the green light it would make it a lot more powerful & useful document. It would be a win/win/win situation. My comments are solely because it's a bundled product and my comments do not apply to the 1000's of other 3rd party books out there-- only to the NEC Handbook.

../Wayne C.

[ October 11, 2003, 10:51 PM: Message edited by: awwt ]

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Re: commercial receptacle limits

Wayne,

It's like the IRS saying they don't warrant their telephone answers as being correct or to be relied on (not binding).

That is exactly how it is with the IRS. Their phone answers are not binding and you can be in trouble if you rely on them!!
Don

 

[iwire]

Re: commercial receptacle limits

I agree with Wayne (yeah it has to happen sometimes ) on this issue, it is weak that the NFPA does not make the handbook an official interpretation of the code.

Don you said it yourself, It is the NFPAs code and they can do whatever they want with it.

So if they had the mind to, the NFPA could have each panel go over the handbook and make sure it was a correct interpretation of the code.

What would stop them from doing this other than "we have never done it that way" mentality.

With all the talk about making the code more user friendly IMO this could be a huge step in that direction.

Can somebody tell me what the downside of doing this would be?

I sometimes wonder if the "code experts" do not want this to happen just for the fact it will even the playing field. :roll:

 

[bennie]

Re: commercial receptacle limits

Bob: Everyone says it's not for the money, yes! it is for the money.

 

[pierre]

Re: commercial receptacle limits

Bob
At over a $100 per book, do you think they want to have a group of volunteers spend more time they do not have, to look over a document that makes them a ton of money. Right or wrong, it is the bottom line that counts today. IF you could find a way yourself to make a lot of extra cash, with a relatively small effort, wouldn't that make you happy :roll:

I say remove the actual code from the handbook and have whats left as the book and sell it for 1/2 price. That would make me happier, and I bet it would sell better too.

Pierre

 

[ryan_618]

Re: commercial receptacle limits

Originally posted by pierre:

I say remove the actual code from the handbook and have whats left as the book and sell it for 1/2 price. That would make me happier, and I bet it would sell better too.

Pierre

Thats pretty close to what the McGraw-hills handbook is now. I don't recall how much I paid for it, but it was more than half of $100.

I don't think I'll buy it again though.

 

[iwire]

Re: commercial receptacle limits

Guys I am not disagreeing with you (everything is about the money ) but I do not understand why they would lose money by making the handbook an official interpretation.

I would think more people would buy the handbook if it became an official interpretation.

Leave the pricing as it is now, buy the basic book for $50 and if you wanted to the Offical Handbook for about a $100.

As for the time issue, don't they already spend time giving official interpretations by request now?

Who is responsible for those interpretations?

 

[iwire]

Re: commercial receptacle limits



[ October 14, 2003, 04:44 AM: Message edited by: iwire ]

 

[bennie]

Re: commercial receptacle limits

I want to retract my previous answer and change it to D, as many receptacles as will fit in the building is the correct answer, as long as the service is sized for 180 VA per outlet after demand factors are applied.

There is no reference to number of receptacles, only what load is to be counted when sizing the service.

 

[roger]

Re: commercial receptacle limits

Bennie 220.3 of section I is for "Computation of Branch Cicuit Loads". This could and would be used for sizing the branch circuit in any situation, sizing a service or adding a circuit to an existing building with a service designed for future growth.

Section II is where the feeder and service calcs come to play.

Roger