Help with megger results of NM-B

[romex jockey]

If you don't like a website there is a way to avoid it.

I'd rather there were less veiled threats and alienation from sorts who's >>>>JOB<<<< it is to keep the peace here.

~RJ~

 

[jumper]

Gentleman, I would ease up on sniping one another or this thread is going to be closed.

It has already strayed far from the original post, not uncommon, but please keep it civil.

 

[readydave8]

compared to the 1980s?

Lots of things cost more than they did in the '80s

 

[mbrooke]

Lots of things cost more than they did in the '80s

Of course. Have you seen, for example, how appliance makers and auto makers have cut back on material or changed to cheaper ones (like plastic) to compensate for higher raw material prices? Heck gas has been high enough to stimulate electric cars and hybrids.


Capitol cost reduction is concern today more then ever.

 

[peter d]

Which we must ask, why is our trend to increase while everyone else decreases?





Of course, thats why any electrician regardless of the code at hand should be aware of voltage drop. Even with our conservative wire you can still get excessive voltage drop under the right conditions. Benefit is less cost, material and labor.

So your answer is we should be able to run #16 to water heaters. :roll:

 

[mbrooke]

So your answer is we should be able to run #16 to water heaters. :roll:

Going to an ampacity table based on conditions of use will save copper in most installations. I know you may not agree, but others certainly would.

 

[peter d]

Going to an ampacity table based on conditions of use will save copper in most installations. I know you may not agree, but other certainly would.

I'm all for saving money and reducing material cost. I often wire to code minimum. But what you propose is ridiculous.

 

[mbrooke]

I'm all for saving money and reducing material cost. I often wire to code minimum. But what you propose is ridiculous.

Why is it ridiculous when it does just that?

 

[peter d]

Why is it ridiculous when it does just that?

Because it's not likely to ever be allowed by the NEC.

 

[mbrooke]

Because it's not likely to ever be allowed by the NEC.

As said, IMO if people speak up it can happen.

 

[kwired]

Because it's not likely to ever be allowed by the NEC.

They put AFCI's in the NEC

Of course if you had the money to back up your requested change you have a better chance of getting what you want.

 

[peter d]

They put AFCI's in the NEC

Of course if you had the money to back up your requested change you have a better chance of getting what you want.

Manufacturers have far too much influence over the NEC to ever allow ampacity requirements to be relaxed (read: less copper and aluminum for them to sell.)

 

[mbrooke]

Manufacturers have far too much influence over the NEC to ever allow ampacity requirements to be relaxed (read: less copper and aluminum for them to sell.)

I agree with you here, and this is our real problem.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Except that the CEC and IEC are irrelevant to American wiring systems and are just as subjective as the NEC in many ways.

Not sure you can really say that about the CEC, as there is an intent between CSA and NFPA to bring those codes much closer together. The change in a few of the values in the NEC ampacity tables a couple of code cycles ago, was part of that process.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Performance testing is an NEC requirement , So is an assured EGC program, there is no 'T&A allowed' , nor would a 'bang test' be advised at high amperages unless one has unlimited funds for equipment and ER visits

The particular meter or method w/meter is not detailed in the NEC, as it's assumed a competent electrician can operate and knows the limitations of more than a mere continuity check

One can either pursue the informational notes , or google this for a world of our trade rags offerings if not.

~RJ~

There are very limited actual requirements in the NEC for performance testing.

There is no requirement to have an assured EGC program in the NEC.

Informational notes are just that...information...not requirements.

 

[GoldDigger]

Sometimes people confuse OSHA requirements with NEC requirements.

 

[kwired]

There are very limited actual requirements in the NEC for performance testing.

There is no requirement to have an assured EGC program in the NEC.

Informational notes are just that...information...not requirements.

Assured EGC program is an alternative to GFCI protection in some instances though.

 

[Tony S]

The only sure way is calculate the minimum resistance permitted. There can’t be a one size fits all figure.

 

[romex jockey]

I'm all for saving money and reducing material cost. I often wire to code minimum. But what you propose is ridiculous.

If you are an EC this might be a concern, if you are not then the letter of the NEC is the only thing you should be subscribing to

~RJ~

 

[iwire]

Assured EGC program is an alternative to GFCI protection in some instances though.

Only in limited temporary installations and is anyone talking about those?