Is this a/c disconnect up to code? - I don't consider it safe

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

Jgkopp

Member
Location
San Clemente
This is located within a residential backyard setting. What is to stop a child from opening up this disconnect cover (no tools needed) and then touching the live 240 volt electrical inside? In the video you can see how easy it is to open this cover. It's also about 3' high off the ground. I am just asking if this is up to code because I don't know.

We install a pull out type disconnect that requires considerable strength to remove the pull out and there is a plastic plate inside so one does not have access to the electrical if one just opens the front cover.

Thoughts?

5XRAko.jpg



Video:
https://youtu.be/7-KO3dGm0ZA
 
Yes this type is code compliant. How else do you change a fuse. No different than a intermatic timer.
 
Veering off first look, I would double check to see if the ground strip is bonded to the box and can't really tell if the line terminals are discolored due to excessive heat from loose knife blade contact.
 
If that kind of disconnect is a violation, there are probably 10 million violations like this out there...

If you truly believe a pull out is child safe, THAT'S a problem! If you want ANY piece of electrical equipment to be "child safe", LOCK IT UP.
 
I see your concern, but I agree that this is allowed by code, and its a common install.

I guess the reasoning is that children too young to understand the danger should be supervised, and older children should be taught the danger. Also, mounting height could also help keep these out of reach of small kids - 48" would be better than 18".

And it seems that's a little different than the reasoning we have inside the house where tamperproof receptacles are required. It does bring up the possibility of an interesting situation: I don't believe the NEC would prevent someone from installing one of these inside a house right beside a receptacle that is required to be tamperproof. That makes no sense whatsoever.

Maybe a proposed change to the NEC is in order.
 
I personally despise the pull-out type of disco, I've seen too many that loosened up and started arcing, but they're cheep. :p
 
steve66 said:
I see your concern, but I agree that this is allowed by code, and its a common install.

I guess the reasoning is that children too young to understand the danger should be supervised, and older children should be taught the danger. Also, mounting height could also help keep these out of reach of small kids - 48" would be better than 18".

And it seems that's a little different than the reasoning we have inside the house where tamperproof receptacles are required. It does bring up the possibility of an interesting situation: I don't believe the NEC would prevent someone from installing one of these inside a house right beside a receptacle that is required to be tamperproof. That makes no sense whatsoever.

Maybe a proposed change to the NEC is in order.
Click to expand...

Thank you Steve for this line of thought. There are gates at the top of staircases that are harder to open then this disconnect cover. I have noticed some of the newer disconnects are built so that the handle has to be turned off or at least pulled down a little so one can open the cover. This would be a better situation. Yes we will at least put a black zip tie through the lock hole to secure the cover after servicing equipment when we come across these. This includes pull outs with missing or broken dead plates. Kid safety is something we all need to keep in mind. They don't know what not to touch.

John
 
With easy to open covers in places where there is concern of youngsters gaining access, not just for a disconnect like the one pictured in OP but any easy open cover with hazards behind it, I always put a bolt with a locking nut (those with the nylon insert so they can't be easily turned without a tool) through the lock hasp.

If someone goes through the trouble to use tools to gain access hopefully they are smart enough to realize there may be hazards once they gain access behind the cover.
 
Jgkopp said:
This is located within a residential backyard setting. What is to stop a child from opening up this disconnect cover...
Click to expand...

It's called parenting. I'm sick of parents complaining that we should have stricter laws and regulations just because they are too lazy to supervise and teach their kids.

I don't see what the problem is here. That disconnect has a hasp, put a padlock through it. Or is that too difficult for today's parents to figure out?

-Hal
 
Jgkopp said:
Thank you Steve for this line of thought. There are gates at the top of staircases that are harder to open then this disconnect cover. I have noticed some of the newer disconnects are built so that the handle has to be turned off or at least pulled down a little so one can open the cover. This would be a better situation. Yes we will at least put a black zip tie through the lock hole to secure the cover after servicing equipment when we come across these. This includes pull outs with missing or broken dead plates. Kid safety is something we all need to keep in mind. They don't know what not to touch.

John
Click to expand...


As an electrician, I'm unable to leave a piece of equipment with missing parts in operation. The UL listing is voided. I become liable.
 
Safety IS important. That said...

hbiss said:
It's called parenting. I'm sick of parents complaining that we should have stricter laws and regulations just because they are too lazy to supervise and teach their kids.

I don't see what the problem is here. That disconnect has a hasp, put a padlock through it. Or is that too difficult for today's parents to figure out?

-Hal
Click to expand...

I agree. It's also called the School of Hard Knocks. If a kid gets into 120V, s/he probably wont do it a second time. 240V tho, lock it up, simple as that. There's a integral lock mount to the cover, a padlock costs a $1 from Dollar Tree, and takes more time to remove from the theft-resistant packaging than it does to install.

Even as curious as I was as a kid, I doubt I would have opened an AC disco and stuck my hand across live 240V... probably because I'd already been whacked by 120V and high voltage DC shock from automotive/lawnmower/jetski/motorcycle coils, and had seen the sparks fly from an automotive battery...
 
On second viewing, arent discos with an on/off handle supposed to only be openable when the handle is down/off?

Also, to address other posts, Ive never seen a disco of this type where the ground lug(s) werent bonded to the can to ground it.
 
JFletcher said:
On second viewing, arent discos with an on/off handle supposed to only be openable when the handle is down/off?

Also, to address other posts, Ive never seen a disco of this type where the ground lug(s) werent bonded to the can to ground it.
Click to expand...

As I recall, "Heavy Duty" safety switches do have an interlocking cover and "General Duty" do not.
I thought the issue was discussed in a UL guide but I am unable to find it.
 
JFletcher said:
On second viewing, arent discos with an on/off handle supposed to only be openable when the handle is down/off?

Also, to address other posts, Ive never seen a disco of this type where the ground lug(s) werent bonded to the can to ground it.
Click to expand...
Not all are interlocked with cover, as mentioned it may be a general duty/heavy duty thing that has the differences as far as listing requirements go.

I think the far right screw on the grounded conductor bus in the OP's model is a box bonding screw. They didn't have to be green colored back when that series was being made.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top