garage circuits
- Thread starter shaun
- Start date
- Status
- Location
- Massachusetts
Re: garage circuits
My fault for assuming only one City of Danbury.
Re: garage circuits
Oneway, Slow down and read my post again, where did I say anything about a formal interpretation?
Bothways, why would you want a 500MCM EGC for a feeder with a 600MCM grounded conductor, do you have stock in a copper mine?
Roger
Oneway, Slow down and read my post again, where did I say anything about a formal interpretation?
Bothways, why would you want a 500MCM EGC for a feeder with a 600MCM grounded conductor, do you have stock in a copper mine?
Roger
- Location
- Massachusetts
Re: garage circuits
It's Texas, bigger is better.
- Location
- Windsor, CO NEC: 2017
- Occupation
- Service Manager
Re: garage circuits
Now, as for your "general" statement, there's something you should know: General statements go over like a turd in a punchbowl around here. If you make generalistic requirements over the jobs you inspect, I believe you will receive a large load of advise around here that will hopefully persuade you to stop doing so.
This is an excellent place to come for perspective, and it's good to see another inspector arrive.
[ August 12, 2005, 04:29 PM: Message edited by: georgestolz ]
James, welcome to the forum.
Now, as for your "general" statement, there's something you should know: General statements go over like a turd in a punchbowl around here. If you make generalistic requirements over the jobs you inspect, I believe you will receive a large load of advise around here that will hopefully persuade you to stop doing so.
This is an excellent place to come for perspective, and it's good to see another inspector arrive.
[ August 12, 2005, 04:29 PM: Message edited by: georgestolz ]
- Location
- Windsor, CO NEC: 2017
- Occupation
- Service Manager
Re: garage circuits
James, my arguement is this: When you depart from the rules, what do you base judgements on?
[ August 12, 2005, 05:54 PM: Message edited by: georgestolz ]
James, my arguement is this: When you depart from the rules, what do you base judgements on?
[ August 12, 2005, 05:54 PM: Message edited by: georgestolz ]
peter d
Senior Member
- Location
- New England
Re: garage circuits
Unless you have local ammendments, you have ZERO authority to require more than the NEC. If you don't like NEC minimums, all I have to say is that you're gonna have to get over it.
How would you feel if a police officer pulled you over and gave you a ticket for doing 60 in a 65 mph zone? The police officer felt that on that day, the speed limit should be 60 because he felt that was safer than 65. Of course, a judge would throw this out of court in an instant. By requiring more than the NEC without a written ammendment or law, you are doing exactly as that police officer.
And getting tougher. Why are you second guessing the NEC by requiring more? Many dead bodies and thousands of hours of research went into developing it. The sole purpose of NEC minimums are to guarantee a safe installation, and exceeding it rarely, if ever, makes it safer.Originally posted by bothways:
Whew, you guys are tough. No more general statements from me.
Unless you have local ammendments, you have ZERO authority to require more than the NEC. If you don't like NEC minimums, all I have to say is that you're gonna have to get over it.
How would you feel if a police officer pulled you over and gave you a ticket for doing 60 in a 65 mph zone? The police officer felt that on that day, the speed limit should be 60 because he felt that was safer than 65. Of course, a judge would throw this out of court in an instant. By requiring more than the NEC without a written ammendment or law, you are doing exactly as that police officer.
Re: garage circuits
most States also have a law "too fast for conditions" maybe that's the same as NEC's 90-4
[ August 12, 2005, 06:31 PM: Message edited by: augie47 ]
love the analogy and definitely agree with the intent....however....
most States also have a law "too fast for conditions"
maybe that's the same as NEC's 90-4 [ August 12, 2005, 06:31 PM: Message edited by: augie47 ]
jimwalker
Senior Member
- Location
- TAMPA FLORIDA
Re: garage circuits
There is no reason to going beyond min.nec unless the customer asks for it.Monday i will trim a house that exceeded nec in many areas such as no #14 wire but in other areas wanted only what code forced them to do.For reasons i do not understand they scimped on kitchen outlets ,i was forced to add one to meet code and that upset them.Have thru the years suggested when possable to upgrade some things,some took the advice some rejected.If i am trying to get the job of wiring many homes for a GC i bid min.,if they wanted more they would have put it in the specs.Only thing i ever refused to do is use GE panels.No one ever had a word to say when i said i use square d homeline or cutler hammer.Some might prefer GE and i respect it as there right.A garage can do fine on 15 amps but if the owner starts telling me about the hoppy he has with building things i will suggest not only #12 but several outlets.
There is no reason to going beyond min.nec unless the customer asks for it.Monday i will trim a house that exceeded nec in many areas such as no #14 wire but in other areas wanted only what code forced them to do.For reasons i do not understand they scimped on kitchen outlets ,i was forced to add one to meet code and that upset them.Have thru the years suggested when possable to upgrade some things,some took the advice some rejected.If i am trying to get the job of wiring many homes for a GC i bid min.,if they wanted more they would have put it in the specs.Only thing i ever refused to do is use GE panels.No one ever had a word to say when i said i use square d homeline or cutler hammer.Some might prefer GE and i respect it as there right.A garage can do fine on 15 amps but if the owner starts telling me about the hoppy he has with building things i will suggest not only #12 but several outlets.
peter d
Senior Member
- Location
- New England
Re: garage circuits
Really? Then what does he mean by this:
Right. :roll: Maybe you should take your own advice.
Re: garage circuits
peter d, you apparently are misunderstanding what bothways has stated earlier. I myself cannot answer for him as i don't know him, yet if one inferred an idea of what he meant, one might ponder the thought and come to the conclusion that the CODE being the minimum is like the shoulder on a winding mountain road. Now why would you "peter p" want to drive your family, friends and anyone else who might trust and depend on you for their safety and wellbeing, why I ask you , would you want to drive the shoulder on that winding road when you could very easily drive down the lane has more room, is more identifiable and safer. Why are you so willing to compromise safety, if someone suggest or requires something more safer why are you fighting it. BE PROUD to BE AN ELECTRICIAN.
peter d, you apparently are misunderstanding what bothways has stated earlier. I myself cannot answer for him as i don't know him, yet if one inferred an idea of what he meant, one might ponder the thought and come to the conclusion that the CODE being the minimum is like the shoulder on a winding mountain road. Now why would you "peter p" want to drive your family, friends and anyone else who might trust and depend on you for their safety and wellbeing, why I ask you , would you want to drive the shoulder on that winding road when you could very easily drive down the lane has more room, is more identifiable and safer. Why are you so willing to compromise safety, if someone suggest or requires something more safer why are you fighting it. BE PROUD to BE AN ELECTRICIAN.
peter d
Senior Member
- Location
- New England
Re: garage circuits
Why am I fighting it? Because an inspector has no authority to require more than what the NEC requires.
There are three fundamental issues at play here:
1) No inspector or AHJ can require more than the NEC or whatever local code is in effect. Nor can an inspector enforce their personal preferences or design specifications.
2) Following the minimum NEC requirements is an absolute guarantee of a safe, but not necessarily efficient, electrical installation.
3) The NEC is solely concerned with safety, and not good design. Requiring more than the NEC does not necessarily guarantee a safer installation.
These are the basic principles of the NEC as I see them. If you don't see it that way, then we will have to agree to disagree.
When did I say that I was willing to compromise safety? Please quote any part of this thread where I said that.
Why am I fighting it? Because an inspector has no authority to require more than what the NEC requires.
There are three fundamental issues at play here:
1) No inspector or AHJ can require more than the NEC or whatever local code is in effect. Nor can an inspector enforce their personal preferences or design specifications.
2) Following the minimum NEC requirements is an absolute guarantee of a safe, but not necessarily efficient, electrical installation.
3) The NEC is solely concerned with safety, and not good design. Requiring more than the NEC does not necessarily guarantee a safer installation.
These are the basic principles of the NEC as I see them. If you don't see it that way, then we will have to agree to disagree.
- Location
- Windsor, CO NEC: 2017
- Occupation
- Service Manager
Re: garage circuits
Once we leave the bosom of the NEC's tables on an installation, and install larger grounding or bonding conductors, we are venturing into the design realm of our business, safety has already been attained.
The NEC is not a design standard. See 90.1(C).
The NEC is written for enforcement by an AHJ. See 90.4.
In this particular case, the conductor sizes listed in tables 250.66 and 250.122 are correct for the amount of fault current that can be produced by the current-carrying conductors involved.
Fault current is a totally different animal. The NEC knows this. Does Bothways?
Why is exceeding the NEC "safer"?
Once we leave the bosom of the NEC's tables on an installation, and install larger grounding or bonding conductors, we are venturing into the design realm of our business, safety has already been attained.
The NEC is not a design standard. See 90.1(C).
The NEC is written for enforcement by an AHJ. See 90.4.
In this particular case, the conductor sizes listed in tables 250.66 and 250.122 are correct for the amount of fault current that can be produced by the current-carrying conductors involved.
Fault current is a totally different animal. The NEC knows this. Does Bothways?
- Status