How to Endure the NEC-An Answer

[bennie]

Re: How to Endure the NEC-An Answer

Excellent suggestion Karl, I have many examples, I don't think the server is large enough for all of them

My favorite...427.57 refers to 427.4 which refers to 240.4(B), for the purpose of determining overcurrent protection for heating equipment.

My suggestion...427.57 Overcurrent protection for heating equipment shall include conductors with a 125% ampacity increase. The overcurrent device can be the next size up, if ampacity does not match a standard size.

Exact wording can be modified a bit, but I am sure the instructions for overload protection of heating equipment is more clear, than thumbing through three sections.

 

[charlie]

Re: How to Endure the NEC-An Answer

Karl, you have just pointed out how Code proposals are made. Now if these could have been proposals for the 2005 NEC . . .

 

[physis]

Re: How to Endure the NEC-An Answer

The dictionary (article 100) could reflect more than 5 or 6 percent of the vocabulary.

[ May 14, 2003, 04:25 AM: Message edited by: physis ]

 

[physis]

Re: How to Endure the NEC-An Answer

Bryan,

I'm going to take a stab at 500.2.

Is that a current limiter (a resistor) or solid state driven current source?

No it's a resistor because its ok if it catches on fire itself.

I'm still dizzy.

[ May 14, 2003, 04:49 AM: Message edited by: physis ]

 

[physis]

Re: How to Endure the NEC-An Answer

At the risk of further irritating those who have heard this enough from me.

90.1(A) Practicle Safeguarding. The purpose of this code is the practicle safeguarding of persons and property from hazards arising from the use of electricity.

My proposal:
90.1(A) Legal means. This code is primarily intended to facilitate litigation in the event something goes wrong. As an accidental and unavoidable consiquence this code, at times, may be used by those involved in the design, construction and maintenence of electrical systems covered herein.

Of course this is a melodramatic exageration. But one based on an actuallity.

The most reasonable position (in my opinion) in support of the NEC's inherent difficulties is that it needs to be used legally.

I don't think 90.1(A) is true. I think the purpose is to encapsulate the electrical industry in legal code and the argument for that being a means to practicle safeguarding is a shaky one.

Seriously though I think this is what it should say.

90.1(A) Authority. The purpose of this code is to provide legal means to enforce the directives of the NFPA regarding the installation, construction and use of electrical systems as covered in this code.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Re: How to Endure the NEC-An Answer

The reason that it uses the words "practicle safeguarding" is because it is impossible to make the use of electricity 100% safe. It is really part of the cost/benefit analysis that is part of every safety rule. There are, of course, rules that could make the use of electricity safer, but the cost to implement these rules would out weigh the benefit. "Practicle safeguarding" means make it "reasonably" safe at a "reasonable" cost.
Don

 

[physis]

Re: How to Endure the NEC-An Answer

Don,

The point I'm trying to make isn't "what does practicle safeguarding" mean. It's that I don't beleive that to be the "purpose" as 90.1(A) states.

And Don, thank you for your tolerance.