Enduring the NEC

Status
Not open for further replies.
physis

physis

Senior Member
First, be aware that I'm posting this out of frustration. Please forgive my less than happy attitude.

I live in California and have to become licensed by the state to be an electrician any more. That's ok but now I have to hone my knowledge and understanding of the industry. The NEC has never been my primary source material but now, in order to be more up to speed to get licensed, I'm trying to use the NEC exclusively.

This stupid book is driving me nuts. I'm offended by it's very nature. Electrical engineering described through the language of lawyers? This is right up there with the square wheel. Talk about dissipating energy as heat instead of spinning the armature. Shouldn't somebody put a lable on the NEC and list -it's- efficiency rating.

The end result of the NEC is admirable but the process to arrive at it is literally a maze. Most of my life aldebra and a little trigonometry has been the language of electricity. Having to discern a relatively mundane piece of information from a thread that spreads in 5 different directions through 20 different articles seems at best rediculous. At worst dangerous in that it isn't unlikly that a misinterpretation could lead to an unsafe installation. It's like 500 words on ten different pages (and less periods than pages) to say 4 feet.

Yeah, I admit it, I've developed a bias about the NEC. But haven't any of you felt like this at some point?

You guys talk better code than I talk English. Any insights that might help in my endeavor to endure this document?

Here's an example from the NEC:

[70-686] Index - Conductors - Dimensions of:
Chapter 9 Table 4

[70-617] Chapter 9 Table 4:
Dimensions and Percent Area of Coduit and Tubing

I find [70-622] Chapter 9 Table 5:
Dimensions of Insulated conductors and Fixture Wires.

Is this a typo or did I miss an exeption in some unrelated section? Or am I just too lawyer jargoned out to think clearly?

Am I really the only one who has a problem with the way this thing is written?

Anyway, thanks for tolerating my frustration and I'm sorry for the length.
:mad: :confused:
 
T

torint

Member
Re: Enduring the NEC

I like using the NEC.....nope I LOVE using the code book. Its the way that I have been taught...the only way that I know. I only do this kind of work one way...the right way, the way of the NEC. Any other way is the wrong way. Don't let the "jargon" discourage you. Just learn how to use it and interprete it correctly. If a guy is not using the NEC as a reference and not working within its perameters then that person's work is suspect to being dangerous. Whenever I go on a service call, I look at the work that was done before me. When I see NEC violations I'm immediatly on guard for shock hazards. :eek: I can go on and on but I won't. The other guy's will chime in and let you know how important the NEC is.
 
B

bphgravity

Senior Member
Location
Florida
Re: Enduring the NEC

The secret to code understanding is to first become familiar with the style and format in which it is writen. Go to this link to download the NEC style manual:

http://www.nfpa.org/nec/thenec/index.asp

Also, look closely at the sections and the numbering in each. The format for each section is consistant throughout the entire code. Study the chapters and the section headings instead of the code itself. The key is to know were to find the information and not necessarily what the information is. Take one section at a time and filter out the stuff that seems irrelevent and hightlight the stuff that is important or seems interesting to you. Start with Article 90, and move on to the areas that interest you first instead of trying to "read" it like a book. The code is definitely not designed for entertainment sake, but as a reference manual for properly trained persons. Don't give up. Don't keep looking for the flaws. Tryt not to consider the intent or the lobying interest that may be benefiting from the particular code. With time, looking up information and basic memory of the code becomes natural and indeed enjoyable. See the below link for more tips:

www.mindconnection.com/_links/lnkcode.htm

[ April 30, 2003, 05:12 PM: Message edited by: bphgravity ]
 
T

txsparky

Member
Location
Conroe, Texas
Re: Enduring the NEC

The NEC is a good thing :D I would suggest that you also buy the NEC Handbook to better help you understand what you are reading.

A picture is worth a thousand words,
Donnie

[ April 30, 2003, 05:57 PM: Message edited by: txsparky ]
 
G

gent

Member
Re: Enduring the NEC

I feel the same way about the NFPA's NEC. I am used to the legal jargon of the Standard and ICC building codes and I think the chasing down sections to get a complete answer is not the best way to work a code. That said... it's a good code when you learn it, and the handbook on CD is great. Hyperlinks to the noted sections, pictures, search ability.... spend the money on the cd instead of aspirin.
 
physis

physis

Senior Member
Re: Enduring the NEC

For Torint:

I appreciate the thoughts and I applaud your enthusiasm for the "code". But you see my problem isn't with the "code". I like the code too. I'm just dealing the learning curve associated with the language. The references I'm used to using are derived from the NEC.

As far as the NEC being the only safe method, I don't know. 220.22 says I can use, what I would call, a skinny neutral conductor on the service entrance for a single family dwelling. I don't think you could talk me into using a neutral conductor that's smaller than the ungrounded conductors. What am I going to save? 20 bucks? I guess it's safe (the NEC tells me it is). I know I can invision problems with it. But you are still right because the code doesn't prevent me from using equally sized grounded and ungrounded conductors.

It's just difficult to relearn all this stuff in a different language. It takes so much energy to read this book.

Thanks again for your patience.
 
T

torint

Member
Re: Enduring the NEC

If you have the big handbook with illistrated pictures, you will find that its a breeze to understand. I have only purchased illustrated handbooks. They cost a little more but the information with the pictures are justified. I'm going to purchase the CD rom in 2005. Good Luck :)
 
B

bennie

Esteemed Member
Re: Enduring the NEC

I agree with Scott. Example of jibberish...The use of "ed" and "ing".
 
B

bill addiss

Senior Member
Re: Enduring the NEC

physis,

I agree that it can be a tedious process trying to figure out something from the NEC, but I can't think of a better way to present the information.

Think of an installation as having many different materials and procedures, each having their own rules regarding safe usage and a many different possibilities depending on what is used with what.

The only sane way to present the information is to separate things into areas based on Specific Installations, Occupancies, Materials, etc. and include the rules for each within those areas. The linking back and forth between areas is a pain, but could you imagine if the rules for overcurrent protection (Art 240) or Grounding (Art 250) were repeated everywhere they were applicable? Or Wiring Methods, Conductor Ampacity, Box Fill, etc, etc,? I can't picture how big that book would be. :)

Tedious, yes, but if you follow the branches you will learn the rules. After awhile you get to know what is out on those branches, and then you're set. .... until they change it that is :roll:

keep at it, it will get easier,

Bill
 
tshea

tshea

Senior Member
Location
Wisconsin
Re: Enduring the NEC

After you "read" the NEC and really 'loose it', sign up for a course at the community college. Having an "expert" explain the nuances of the NEC helps to understand the code. You'll find that the experienced instructors are a huge help. They have been there and done it. They also work full time teaching and have techniques to get you to understand the NEC better. I took a course in the last millenium and it helped me to understand the code that I went on to teach it for a couple of years. You become familiar with the exceptions and the cross references.
Good luck!
 
E

Ed MacLaren

Senior Member
Re: Enduring the NEC

Example of jibberish...The use of "ed" and "ing".
Click to expand...
What "jibberish"? I think Bennie is pulling someone's leg.

I'm sure he knows that there is a great difference between, for an example, grounded conductor, and grounding conductor.

It has been my observation, during 30 years of teaching, that the individuals who have the most problems with the code are those who do not have a clear understanding of the equipment and systems that the code regulates. Learn the basic principles, circuits and equipment first, and the code will make much more sense.

Ed
 
G

gent

Member
Re: Enduring the NEC

90% of the world says "neutral" instead of "grounded" and "ground" instead of "grounding" (soon to be changed to "bonding" to increase confusion). The NEC like all NFPA books is written by the manufacturing engineers and is not an easy text. I really don't see why you have to refer to four chapters to find out about rules for receptacles. I think that was the point of the original post.
 
tom baker

tom baker

First Chief Moderator & NEC Expert
Staff member
Location
Bremerton, Washington
Occupation
Master Electrician
Re: Enduring the NEC

I agree with Eds post, there is a huge difference between a ing and ed for a "ground". Knowing the defintions is critial for understanding the code.
The term ground wire has no meaning in the NEC.
The jibberish is explained in Art 100. I feel the most important parts of the NEC are
Section 90.3
Art 100
Art 110
In the introduction to every one of Mikes texts he has a section on how the read and understand the NEC, it will help you endure the NEC. Also his Understanding the NEC is excellent. Part 1 is 429 pages and covers Art 80-460.

[ May 01, 2003, 06:07 PM: Message edited by: tom baker ]
 
B

bennie

Esteemed Member
Re: Enduring the NEC

For a word to make sense it must have a sense designation. Only words with a sense designation are approved for the English vocabulary. The sense of a word is the meaning.

There is over 4 million words in the English vocabulary, that have a sense designation.
The words "grounded" and "grounding" do not have a sense designation, therefore they are nonsense, (Jibberish)

The NFPA is not an approved organization to establish a sense for a word.
 
B

bennie

Esteemed Member
Re: Enduring the NEC

The words bond, bonding, and bonded, have a number of approved senses. Not one of them pertain to the activity required of an equipment ground conductor.

We are in a highly technical and dangerous profession. All technical reference documents should be correct, and composed with approved English words.

I have heard that the NEC is written on a college level. I'm sorry, I don't buy that...A high school student turning in an essay, using the same format, will be handed an application for McDonalds.
 
L

luke warmwater

Senior Member
Re: Enduring the NEC

The English language itself is hard to grasp. Check out Ghallager or George Carlin for their indepth views on how confusing it really is.
I'm with Ed on this one.
 
B

bennie

Esteemed Member
Re: Enduring the NEC

Don: Review the make up of the panels. The manufacturing representives, and salesman, union reps., and special interest groups, use the NEC for their own special interest.

Qualified wireman can't afford to miss work to sit on the panels.

[ May 01, 2003, 11:39 PM: Message edited by: bennie ]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top