Fine Homebuilding "adding an outlet"

[tom baker]

In the latest issue of fine home building, there is an article about adding an outside outlet (ok receptacle).
A drawing shows the romex run into an existing box and then to the outside box, but for the existing box no clamp is shown, as if it is stapled but its not, so a clamp is required.
Some discussion is made about the proper circuit and GFCI, etc.
As much as I like fine homebuilding this article, if I followed it, and had an inspection, would be a violation.

 

[jimwalker]

Re: Fine Homebuilding "adding an outlet"

Do you really think a homeowner will pull a permit ? Very few electricians would pull one for something that small.And while it is a violation do you really believe it poses any fire or shock hazard ?

 

[pierre]

Re: Fine Homebuilding "adding an outlet"

Jim
When following the NEC, where do you draw the 'line'? Do you follow it only when it is convenient? The reason we follow code, even the small insignificant parts, is that is what separates us from the people who do not follow code - helps distinguish us as PROFESSIONALS!

How about NM cable is not permitted outdoors, as that would be a wet location, and NM is not permitted in wet locations. But maybe that is okay as it will not start a fire - give me a break.

That is how anarchy starts. You do not like one part of the code, Joe doesn't like another part, Bob doesn't like another part - so which parts do we follow?

Pierre

[ January 28, 2004, 01:38 AM: Message edited by: pierre ]

 

[hurk27]

Re: Fine Homebuilding "adding an outlet"

Tom this could be one of those iffy ones as 334.30(B)(1) just fished between points, it doesn't say it still needs to be secured at the box and for that matter if the box is a single gain plastic nail-on there is no requirement to secure it to the box.

Also I e-mailed the editor on another issue and got a reply just today: look at this thread it has there e-mail address:

Low voltage wiring

[ January 28, 2004, 02:48 AM: Message edited by: hurk27 ]

 

[noxx]

Re: Fine Homebuilding "adding an outlet"

Tom, because the wire is fished, it shall be considered secured. Of course, whether that consideration allows you to omit a connector as if it was stapled within 8 inches, well that's a question for your AHJ.

Personally when fishing wire into an existing metal box, I use a snap-in nonmetallic connector with the body of the connector inside the box, proving of course there is room. Fishing into a plastic box usually requires damaging the box, I tend to cut them out carefully, fish, then replace with a cut-in type.

Jim - Without being inflammatory I just want to say that its not for us to decide if a code violation is "safe". There is no perfectly safe installation, the safest installation is 100% code compliant, any other installation is less safe (to what degree is a matter of pointless debate). Only by being in complete compliance may we remove liability from ourselves for any misfortune in both legal and moral arenas.

 

[earlydean]

Re: Fine Homebuilding "adding an outlet"

There ain't no such thing as "considered secured". A cable is either secured or it is not secured. The code allows cables that are fished to be exempt from the requirements for securing if and only if there is a clamp at the box. It don't matter what the AHJ says, it ain't code compliant.

 

[jimwalker]

Re: Fine Homebuilding "adding an outlet"

"How about NM cable is not permitted outdoors, as that would be a wet location, and NM is not permitted in wet locations. But maybe that is okay as it will not start a fire - give me a break."
Are you saying the inside of this outside box that will have a bubble cover is in a wet location? Give me a break!!!!!Then just what is the point of the bubble cover if it still a wet location in that box even after i put the cover on.Lets see now-----------ok its wet outside and inside.
As long as that NM enters that box with out being exsposed to the out doors then where is the violation? The inside of the box is not outdoors.

Yes if that clamp is missing you could tag the job.And when the guy staples his romex and it is 56 inches between staples tag that too.

 

[iwire]

Re: Fine Homebuilding "adding an outlet"

Originally posted by jimwalker:
Yes if that clamp is missing you could tag the job.And when the guy staples his romex and it is 56 inches between staples tag that too.

Jim what does that mean? :roll: :roll:

Cable connectors are required at boxes if an inspector sees a cable with out a connector he better fail it or they are not doing the job.

56 inches between staples tag that too.

Damn right that is further than code allows, it should fail.

We all should know the distances between supports for the wire type we are using, if I was an inspector and saw the supports where constantly outside the limits I would fail you.

There are things that separate professionals from the guys that are just doing it for the buck.

I need more than a paycheck to be satisfied with my work.

[ January 28, 2004, 05:33 PM: Message edited by: iwire ]

 

[noxx]

Re: Fine Homebuilding "adding an outlet"

Earl you're correct in that my choice of wording was off, remnant of an earlier argument I'm afraid. Not sure where in my coffee-free brain "permitted to be unsupported" became "Shall be considered secured".

Regardless, in practical application the answer remains to use a listed connector at any box with a 1/2" or large KO while fishing, or replace plastic boxes, as the damage done to a plastic box by fish-work destroys the ability of the integral plastic clamp to hold the cable securely.

 

[george t. everett]

Re: Fine Homebuilding "adding an outlet"

The box shown in the picture is a Carlon old work box, they have clamps to secure the cable.

 

[jimwalker]

Re: Fine Homebuilding "adding an outlet"

"if I was an inspector and saw the supports where constantly outside the limits I would fail you"
Bob what does CONSTANTLY mean? Would you let me have 1 wire that was missed by 2 inches?
If yes WHY? :roll:

 

[iwire]

Re: Fine Homebuilding "adding an outlet"

Constantly or consistently what ever word works for you.

If I was an inspector and saw one or two spots where there was a support missing I would simply say (we must be present when inspection takes place) put more supports on that cable.

If however I saw that the installation was pushing the limits in many places I would leave tell you you failed for xxx.xx and you would have to pay for a second trip out for re inspection.

Inspectors can only enforce the code but that does not stop them from forming opinions on contractors. A contractor that can not find the time to put in the required supports is a contractor that is taking other short cuts and will get a longer, closer look.

Of course you have the drive by inspectors so you can cheat all you want. :roll:

 

[roger]

Re: Fine Homebuilding "adding an outlet"

Bob,

Of course you have the drive by inspectors so you can cheat all you want.

LOL


Roger

 

[jimwalker]

Re: Fine Homebuilding "adding an outlet"

There Bob goes again twisting and changing.I never said we have drive past inspectors.We have fast walk thru.
And Bob wasn't it you that wanted to go by the book? So if i miss one staple then you must flunk it.Would most inspectors? I think not.Your the don't bend an inch man not me :roll:

 

[roger]

Re: Fine Homebuilding "adding an outlet"

Jim, I read Bob's post again and I don't see where he twisted anything.

He did say

Of course you have the drive by inspectors so you can cheat all you want.

which is pretty close to how you've described your inspectors before.

I have seen people "quote" you, but that is not changing your words.

Roger

 

[jimwalker]

Re: Fine Homebuilding "adding an outlet"

Drive by = fast walk thru ?????????? :roll: :roll: :roll:
And thats not changing ?
If you don't know the differance between driving and walking i am getting off the sidewalk

[ January 28, 2004, 08:18 PM: Message edited by: jimwalker ]

 

[roger]

Re: Fine Homebuilding "adding an outlet"

Originally posted by jimwalker:
Drive by = fast walk thru

Jim, you even admitt it.

Roger

 

[jimwalker]

Re: Fine Homebuilding "adding an outlet"

Roger play fair if your gonna quote use the entire thing.Drive by = fast walk thru ??????????
Any idea what ????? means ?

 

[roger]

Re: Fine Homebuilding "adding an outlet"

Jim, sorry, it appeared as though your ????? meant you were wondering yourself.

You are the one who have led us to believe that this is how your inspectors work, not anyone else here.


Roger

 

[jimwalker]

Re: Fine Homebuilding "adding an outlet"

To Roger and everyone else.I will try to clear this up.Our inspectors have a heavy load ,often over 20 inspections.They do catch violations.All i was trying to say is between drive time and office time as well as answering there cell phones,they can not spend more than 20 minutes total per inspection (averaged)and that is for 21 inspections (often more).That 20 minutes must include drive time and recording results.I think they find most of the violations (trained eyes)but do feel its a bit less than they should spend.Now lets end this subject over inspectors as its not going anywhere.I never once said they didn't do there job.Perhaps not as good as they could with more time.Will add that were needed if they see violations or sloppy work they do spend more time.
Lets all try to not slam each other.We are here to get others help and opinions.