Do you agree/disagree ??

[Twoskinsoneman]

This is what I would call a real good explanation of what.....the section means

concur :grin:

 

[mivey]

concur :grin:

I hope when you two ask the jwelectric-trained waitress to fill your drinking glasses with water that you have an ample supply of napkins around. :grin:

 

[M. D.]

I think we should have a single count for blank plates I know most don't employ straps or yokes but some do and they trap the heat :roll:

Sorry M'am I can't put that screwless blank plate on that pan box ,.. oh,... it's because that strap puts me over the conductor fill allowance "....

Not buying what you're selling Mike

 

[mkgrady]

Not buying what you're selling Mike

I won't agree with Mike unless and until this thread goes to 50 pages

 

[jwelectric]

http://forums.mikeholt.com/showpost.php?p=1108434&postcount=104

I don't see one word that you posted in this link from the NEC that exempts a strap that supports a light fixture. All I see is a bunch of rambling about physics and the space occupied by some solid object.

My request is a simple request for all the brilliant minds of this discussion forum. Please show me one word of text that exempts a light fixture mounted to a strap on a lighting outlet box or even a statement from the Code Making Panel on a proposal that would back your opinion. Show me something other than your opinion and I will recant my post. Until then all I have to go on is what is printed in 314.16(B)(4) and this section does not make mention that the strap must be inside the box or even hold something that is inside the box.
All the other four sections are very clear on the component is to be inside the box but this one makes no mention of the inside to the box. Even the main section ?(B)? makes no mention that anything is required to be inside the box in order to be counted.

All this talk of something is required to be in the box in order to be counted as volume fill is nothing more than the assumption of the one making the statement until words can be pointed out that makes that statement, so show me the words. Until that time all I have is the words as they are printed and I think they are very clear.

 

[jwelectric]

I won't agree with Mike unless and until this thread goes to 50 pages

Ever known of me being in a short discussion?

 

[iwire]

So if I understand what you are saying you are saying that either the light fixture is neither a piece of equipment or it is not supported by that yoke.
Or it might be that you are saying that the device or equipment must be contained within the strap instead of contained by the strap such as a fence contains the cattle in the pasture.
Help me out here just a little so I might get a better understanding of just what your comment is meaning.

Mike I have made my opinion crystal clear, for you to say I have not is disingenuous.

 

[George Stolz]

Please show me one word of text that exempts a light fixture mounted to a strap...

"...contains..."

Whew!

The goal here being to keep posting the same quote out of the NEC until the OVERWHELMING majority who now disagree with you suddenly wake up and see the light?

Well, some people favor one tactic over another, it's all very personal, really. I think I'm probably an artful dodger working on mastering kung fu.

 

[jwelectric]

Mike I have made my opinion crystal clear, for you to say I have not is disingenuous.

Maybe this is the biggest problem as I have only quoted what is written in the code and the written word is all I am looking for. Show me where it states that the strap is required to be inside the box in order to be counted toward fill.
I have repeatedly posted the section in question and have repeatedly gotten a lot of "opinions" as an answer when I am seeking verbiage that is written in black and white that can be read.

The section in question clearly states that;
The conductors must be inside the box (1)
The clamp must be inside the box (2)
The hickey or stud must be inside the box (3)
The grounding conductor must be inside the box (5)
But not one word that the strap that supports the equipment is required to be inside the box. (4)

All I am asking is instead of giving me opinion give me verbiage that states the strap must be inside the box in order to be counted. If the verbiage can not be shown then I suppose all we have is what is written and we can all see what is written.
What is written is that a strap that supports a device or a piece of equipment is counted as a double volume allowance.

 

[jwelectric]

"...contains..."

Whew!

Nice try but a little short.
The strap containing something is not requiring that anything be inside the box.
Show me where "For each yoke or strap containing one or more devices or equipment," is requiring anything to be inside the box. It may be that I am having a little problem understanding English but I just can't seem to get the words inside the box from this statement.

 

[LarryFine]

It may be that I am having a little problem understanding English but I just can't seem to get the words inside the box from this statement.

How would a strap or yoke containing no device affect box volume? It's under box fill, is it not?

 

[mivey]

I don't see one word that you posted in this link from the NEC that exempts a strap that supports a light fixture.

At this point, that does not surprise me. For some reason, you are trapped in a mindset where you reject anything that does not follow your interpretation.

My request is a simple request for all the brilliant minds of this discussion forum. Please show me one word of text that exempts a light fixture mounted to a strap

We could show you 1,000 words but if you refuse to listen, it will never make a difference. But here is one word: Fill

Show me something other than your opinion and I will recant my post.

Been there. Done that. You didn't.

so show me the words.

How do you show words to a blind man? You have refused to walk in light so you grope around in darkness, shaking your fist at the universe for being in opposition to you.

and I think they are very clear.

Ever wonder why the universe disagrees with you? Do you wonder why the "brilliant minds" (exclude me if you want, but at least consider the other members) see it very clearly a different way?

I will see if I can think of another way to put it so you can understand. Maybe someone who was previously confused on the issue like you will have the perspective to help you make a breakthrough.

For now, I can't think of a way to make it any simpler than what has already been posted.

 

[mivey]

What is written is that a strap that supports a device or a piece of equipment is counted as a double volume allowance.

And if the strap that is filling the volume does not contain a device, but only supports a device external to the volume, then you use the 314.16(B)(3) "Support Fittings Fill".

 

[mivey]

I hope when you two ask the jwelectric-trained waitress to fill your drinking glasses with water that you have an ample supply of napkins around. :grin:

What happened to the picture of the little man?

 

[Rick Christopherson]

We are at a point where a perfectly safe installation can be failed by an inspector for no other reason than "you mounted that fixture without the fixture bar, that's a lisitng violation!!!" But inspector, what is the actual problem or hazard? Well there isn't really one but this piece of paper tells me it has to be this way so I have to follow the paper. " :roll:

It is the last sentence of your last post that keeps us from living in total chaos throughout our wonderful land.

This mindset of yours is just downright scary; not on its merits, but because you actually believe it to be true.

Anyone that focuses solely on the words in code without the cognitive ability to understand the meaning and intent of those words is a danger to the industry. The fact that you are an instructor in this industry makes it even worse.The NEC contains errors, even known errors, and testament to this is that continual revisions are made to correct or clarify existing statements that do not change on their intent, but only on their erroneous wording.

You claim that you are simply quoting code and not asserting your opinion, and this is patently false. You are in fact asserting your opinion any time you make an interpretation of code. When you assert that the mounting bracket for a luminaire constitutes a strap, that is in fact, an interpretation. It makes no difference if it is correct or incorrect, it is nevertheless an interpretaion of code, and that is inarguably opinion, unless you happen to be on the board.

The fact that you don't find it eye-opening that you have such a large percentage of knowledgeable posters spanning apparently more than just one forum almost exclusively disagreeing with you, is rather shortsighted and disturbing. If you were truly as wise as you believe yourself to be, this would cause you to pause and take stock of your position, but that does not appear to be the case.

 

[jwelectric]

We could show you 1,000 words but if you refuse to listen, it will never make a difference. But here is one word: Fill.

So you just picked a word out of thin air and this is supposed to be quoted from the NEC.

Again I have a simple request-----
Show me verbiage from the NEC that exempts the strap for a light fixture from conductor fill.
The reason no one has done so to this point is simple, there is none.

How would a strap or yoke containing no device affect box volume? It's under box fill, is it not?

Yes sir the yoke or strap is outlined in 314.16(B)(4). It is very clear in so much as it says that a strap or yoke that contains a device or a strap or yoke that supports electrical equipment.

There is no where I can find where it states that the NEC has to make any sense to me. It is not on me to explain why a strap or yoke that does not have a device or equipment that extends into the box would count toward box fill. The only worry I have is in accepting the verbiage as it is written until the next round of code proposals if there is something I disagree with.

 

[George Stolz]

Again I have a simple request-----
Show me verbiage from the NEC that exempts the strap for a light fixture from conductor fill.
The reason no one has done so to this point is simple, there is none.

I feel so silly, I didn't realize you didn't see those posts, so let me try it again:

314.16(B)(4) Device or Equipment Fill. For each yoke or strap containing one or more devices or equipment...

It's right there at the beginning of the sentence. For the sentence to apply, then the device or equipment must be contained within the yoke or strap, and luminaires seldom (if ever) reside inside their mounting strap.

There is no where I can find where it states that the NEC has to make any sense to me. It is not on me to explain why a strap or yoke that does not have a device or equipment that extends into the box would count toward box fill.

It is, if that is the interpretation that you are willing to wager all your credibility on when others are reading the same words and tendering a different interpretation. Then you have an out, you can adopt either interpretation.

The only worry I have is in accepting the verbiage as it is written until the next round of code proposals if there is something I disagree with.

One thing that I have come to see over time, is that regardless of what the words actually say, quite often your read on the intent is correct, and our competing proposals on issues reveal that. Once we are done, then the code winds up clearer. Unfortunately, you will have to acknowledge that you are tendering an opinion before you would have reason to submit a proposal, IMO.

 

[Twoskinsoneman]

What happened to the picture of the little man?

Don't see a lot of actual pics in these types of forums. Thought maybe it would be prudent to ditch the one of mr studly until I thought it through...

 

[Twoskinsoneman]

That's it George. If you can stretch the use of the word "contain" to mean simply supported than you can see it from JW's view point. IMO the definition of contain would not include sufficient language to imply a fixture strap "contains" the fixture. To me the use is more like "enclose" than "support" and that is why I think the fixture strap should not me included.........BESIDE the common sense argument that the strap is not IN the box so it can't feasibly be counted as FILLING the box. :roll:

con?tain (k

n-t

n

)tr.v. con?tained, con?tain?ing, con?tains 1. a. To have within; hold.

 

[mivey]

So you just picked a word out of thin air and this is supposed to be quoted from the NEC.

Now I know you are just trying to be argumentative. It is not "out of thin air" as fill and containing come directly from the NEC section you keep posting:

314.16(B)(4) Device or Equipment Fill. For each yoke or strap containing one or more devices or equipment...

The NEC does not define fill or contain, and since you want to be this guy: What "is" is and argue over the common meaning of a word, let me remind you what the code says about it non-covered definitions in the code: ""It is not intended to include commonly defined general terms"

Again, this was covered in post #104 (as well as many other posts).