Help with megger results of NM-B

Status
Not open for further replies.
mbrooke said:
All safe electrical installations follow the laws of physics. Neither the NEC nor BS7671 are just written using random numbers or words.
Click to expand...

I have no clue what your point is. Here in the USA we operate under various editions of the NEC. We don't use BS, or the CEC, or the IEC. I have no need to know what is in any foreign code when I perform my installations. If you're suggesting an electrician needs to be well versed in foreign codes, then that is just plain silly.
 
peter d said:
I have no clue what your point is. Here in the USA we operate under various editions of the NEC. We don't use BS, or the CEC, or the IEC. I have no need to know what is in any foreign code when I perform my installations. If you're suggesting an electrician needs to be well versed in foreign codes, then that is just plain silly.
Click to expand...



Electricians do not have to know foreign codes or be versed in them, however those writing the codes like CMP members as well as those making code proposals can learn a lot from them. Ditto to anyone who is trying to learn more about the physics/intentions behind the code.


For one studying foreign codes I have realized AFCIs will never reduce fires because arc fault mitigation techniques have already been deployed all over the world with little fire reduction.
 
peter d said:
Or explain why the British don't allow wire nuts. In both cases, it's just subjective judgment that is used.
Click to expand...

Actually nothing in BS7671 forbids wire nuts. If a UK electrician choose to use them technically he is not breaking any laws. However in reality wire nuts are avoided by most UK electricians. In this case I agree that it might be just subjective, a wire nut properly made with care can be just as safe (if not more) then a terminal block.
 
iwire said:
So the basic theory here is when people disagree with you they are nay sayers that trash the thread yet you are free to insult CMP members and others you disagree with.

Got it. ;)
Click to expand...


People can disagree and that is perfectly fine, however the issue at hand is mods letting people (even initiating) trash threads by allowing them to go on for pages questioning other people's credentials without any basis. No offense to anyone but I could say the the same for the two dozen folks who post here 12 to 16 hours a day or countless others asking basic code questions. I however do not because all of them have clearly demonstrated brilliance with advanced knowledge of the discussion at hand and second this forum would grind to a halt if such was take place in every thread.

When this discussion spilled over into another internet forum I was alerted by a moderator that if I or anyone else question another member's credentials would result in disciplinary action. How and why this is allowed here mystifies me.


yet you are free to insult CMP
Click to expand...

Granted I have been highly critical of the CMP, but I could say the same about you in those AFCI threads. The key difference was that both of us agreed on the topic at hand.
 
I invite judicial use of the "Ignore List" to mute unwanted invitations to leave, before the most interesting forum members are lost again, and this place returns to its former bore.

Menu function: "Forum Actions / General Settings / Edit Ignore List"
 
ramsy said:
I invite judicial use of the "Ignore List" to mute unwanted invitations to leave, before the most interesting forum members are lost again, and this place returns to its former bore.

Menu function: "Forum Actions / General Settings / Edit Ignore List"
Click to expand...

Wait, this has happened before? :blink::?
 
iwire said:
OK, this thread is about mega testing of NM-B, which of this specialized testing requirements you are pointing to would be involved with NM-B?
Click to expand...

Because we (the NEC) are evolving towards it Iwire

The IEC dwarfs the NEC btw. But their doctrines and influences are slowly making their way into the NEC

Case in point would be 210.12(B), and being contracted for a service upgrade 6' from original location.

You'll be installing this>>>>
siemensafcipanel_zpsbfbb08be.jpg


Onto old BX, K&T,cloth romex etc....

I have a LOT of experience doing this btw, and i AM a contractor who 'eats' callbacks nights, weekends etc .

Walk a mile in those shoes, and you'll learn quickly what would be prudent testing methodology

~RJ~
 
iwire said:
So the basic theory here is when people disagree with you they are nay sayers that trash the thread yet you are free to insult CMP members and others you disagree with.

Got it. ;)
Click to expand...


You're moderation skills have been shown to be hypocritical

I have no respect for you, nor did i @ ET



~RJ~
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top