If you were an Inspector, Would you permit this install?

[Rockyd]

Let's consider why we are here doing this job -

There was a fire and the building department is requiring a rewire of the apartments.

If the fire was caused by the electrical, then this is going to be a hard sell.

If an inspector turns up the heat on an inspection, lots of things could go south for a borderline job. This job has earmarkings of a job that I don't believe would take a whole lot of shakedown to find item after item wrong. One of the points of interest was that the electrician was uneasy about having the camera drug out. If he kew he was bullet proof, he would have stood his ground.

Fugly may not be in the NEC, but would bet that if we went to this site, and inspected it, it wouldn't pass.

334.30 takes you to 300.4. There alone is enough to shoot down the installation if an inspector wants to go tough. I don't question the methodolgy, I question the application, and improper use of plates. Liability is a tough word and don't know how much trash installation there is here, but hope the inspector is looking out for the city inspection department. Only need one fire here.

 

[Pierre C Belarge]

Do you know what a drywall on lath skin over is? Your words here don't show that you do.

The lath on the face of the "two bys" is sandwiched between the drywall and the two by. The nail plates and NM in the OP photos are flush with the lath. That means the nail plates and NM are behind the drywall, without "high spots".

For the third time, how does notching make this installation safer or more NEC compliant? Citation(s) please.

I just searched for "fugly" in the NEC and the Handbook, , and had zero returns, so that point is not a NEC issue.

I know the pictures may be deceiving, but the surface of the nail plates and the wood lath are not even. The nail plates in most portions of the install are sticking out further than the wood lath.

 

[shockingpink]

just wondering.

just wondering.

is it safe? would you or would you let your kids sleep all night in a building with that wiring?? I don't know much but it doesn't look safe to me.

 

[al hildenbrand]

The nail plates in most portions of the install are sticking out further than the wood lath.

By how much?

 

[al hildenbrand]

If the fire was caused by the electrical, then this is going to be a hard sell.

If an inspector turns up the heat on an inspection, lots of things could go south for a borderline job.

And what NEC citation does one use to change the standards of the NEC, and by how much are the NEC requirements "taken south", for wiring in an occupancy that has had a fire? And what is the NEC passage that explains the extra importance of an electrical fire?

 

[al hildenbrand]

the surface of the nail plates and the wood lath are not even.

Consider the Adjust-A-Box? with its metal bracket. Most installers will mount this to the surface of a stud, and then use a nail or screw, or two, to secure the bracket to the stud face, before placing an additional set of fasteners on the side bracket.

The bracket and fasteners are proud of the stud. This is normal. Drywall spans this readily, with no difficulty.

Are the nail plates in the OP photos projecting further than that?

 

[iwire]

This one really got to you Al.

For what it's worth you convinced me and I withdraw my original post.

 

[electricmanscott]

I am totaly with Al and have been from the first page. I have NO problem with this. other than the old nail that should have been pulled out. I do think it's a crappy job but alot of work out there is crappy. That does not neccesarily make it dangerous.

Why do some of you guys who find an installton ugly immediately think fail? Without citing and actual violation.

Also I am SOOOOOOO sick of the whole "Listing violation" outcry. We should be able to use common sense as to whether or not somthing is used in a dangerous manner or not. Just more dumbing down for the mindless in our trade who need to have their hand held to get through a job.

 

[iwire]

I am totally with Al and have been from the first page.

Yes you have.

Why do some of you guys who find an installation ugly immediately think fail? Without citing and actual violation.

Many did cite code sections that they felt had been violated.

Also I am SOOOOOOO sick of the whole "Listing violation" outcry.

As far as that, well you going to have to work that out on your own.

Like it or not listing does mater, it here to stay and it will only get more prevalent.

We should be able to use common sense as to whether or not something is used in a dangerous manner or not.

Not going to work, as a long time member of these forums you know for a fact that peoples idea of commonsense is all over the place.

 

[electricmanscott]

There were violaions listed and I don't think some even applied ot that setup. Even one of Pierres did not.

As for listings I agree with the idea in general. The problem is the little things like drilling and extra knockout in something or reworking something to make it fit the installation better. People go crazy here and in the field with the whole "now you violated the listing" thing.. You know what I am talking about although no very good examples come to mind

 

[iwire]

There were violations listed and I don't think some even applied ot that setup.

I now agree and I was going with 'It's ugly, there must be a rule' type thinking.

You know what I am talking about although no very good examples come to mind

Yes, I do know and agree with you it really gets taken to extremes at times.

Are you using a listed screwdriver for that listed screw that holds that listed clamp to the listed..................

 

[electricmanscott]

Yes, I do know and agree with you it really gets taken to extremes at times.

Are you using a listed screwdriver for that listed screw that holds that listed clamp to the listed..................

Yep, you get it.

 

[r_merc]

Nail Plate

Nail Plate

Well I know that In my jurisdiction the inspector would turn me down if nothing else for not installing the nail plate IAW thier listing. Im sure that Sheet rock screws are not the manufacturers recommended installation method. Most likely 10d nails.

 

[electricmanscott]

Well I know that In my jurisdiction the inspector would turn me down if nothing else for not installing the nail plate IAW thier listing. Im sure that Sheet rock screws are not the manufacturers recommended installation method. Most likely 10d nails.

Cripes. :roll:

Care to share this listing with us?

 

[al hildenbrand]

Well I know that In my jurisdiction the inspector would turn me down if nothing else for not installing the nail plate IAW thier listing. Im sure that Sheet rock screws are not the manufacturers recommended installation method. Most likely 10d nails.

I'll second E Scott's inquiry.

I'd love to see any text from that Listing, or, for that matter, the "manufacturer's recommended installation method".

So many know it so well. . .I must live in a black hole. . .I've never seen it. . .please help an old electrician.

 

[LJSMITH1]

Bottom line is that the nail plate is not being used as designed or probably listed by UL. We make a version of this plate and it is only designed to 'protect' the cable behind the area it is fastened in front of. It is not approved for supporting ANY cable, and I would be very surprised if those plates shown are approved for that application.

Furthermore, the plates have sharp edges which will more than likely cut through insulation if the NM cable is tugged on. Any strap, staple, or hangar rated for NM must have smooth, and burr free edges to prevent such damage.

As for the type of fasteners, the installer does not typically have to use a particular type (i.e. 10D Common nail, drywall nail, screw, etc.), just something that works.

I say FAIL due to mis-application of the plates as hangars/straps.

 

[al hildenbrand]

Bottom line is that the nail plate is not being used as designed or probably listed by UL.

Based upon what UL language or published manufacturer's installation instructions?

It is not approved for supporting ANY cable, . . .

Based upon what UL language or published manufacturer's installation instructions?

I say FAIL due to mis-application of the plates as hangars/straps.

Based upon what UL language or published manufacturer's installation instructions?

Furthermore, the plates have sharp edges which will more than likely cut through insulation if the NM cable is tugged on. Any strap, staple, or hangar rated for NM must have smooth, and burr free edges to prevent such damage.

I can tug on a cable under this strap, and under a number of situations, the strap will not only cut the insulation, but strip the cable. What is going to tug the wire in a closed framed wall in a normal dwelling?

 

[LJSMITH1]

UL2239 covers "protector plates" and it is very specific about their use. Protector plates are not "straps" or "hangars" as defined in UL2239. They are not pull tested or impact tested as required in UL2239 if they were listed as a strap or staple. As a matter of fact, the only applicable tests for a protector plate are material thickness/type, plating thickness, and installation.

In addition, UL2239 makes specific reference to products used in accordance with "maufacturers installation instructions". I have not seen a protector plate doubling as a strap or a staple.


I hope that explains it a bit more clearly.

 

[weressl]

If you were to inspect this installation, would you permit this installation?
Remember to cite a code section(s) for the violation - or the permission to install (if there is a section that permits this type of install).

Backround:
The building is very, very old. There was a fire and the building department is requiring a rewire of the apartments. Some of the framing is 2x4s on the flat.

Yes.

In Kabul. This would be an improvement over anything else they have.......

 

[al hildenbrand]

I hope that explains it a bit more clearly.

Do you have segments, passages, or snippets of the actual text that you can provide?

2007 UL Guide Information for Electrical Equipment​

The so-called "White Book"​

Conduit and Cable Hardware (DWMU)​

This category covers conduit straps, staples, and similar types of hardware for installation in wiring systems in accordance with ANSI/NFPA 70, ??National Electrical Code?? (NEC). The mechanical strength of these products is investigated with consideration given to the intended installation.

REQUIREMENTS​

The basic standard used to investigate products in this category is ANSI/UL 2239, ??Hardware for the Support of Conduit, Tubing, and Cable.??

I have a simple logic conundrum.

If, as you say, nailplates are included in "Hardware for the Support of. . .Cable", then what text says what it does or doesn't do in the way of support?