Legal use of connector? (Or, Spot the Violations!)

Status
Not open for further replies.
480sparky

480sparky

Senior Member
Location
Iowegia
Is this a legal use of the connector?

DSC_1010a.jpg


DSC_1011a.jpg
 
I think the last time I looked at a chart for those connectors, it only noted the min and max cable diameters and not necessarily any certain cable type(s). I guess you'd have to check Arlington's chart. They make one that looks like that with an oval gland opening for UF cable, but you can't tell from the pic what kind of gland is in that connector.
 
I just checked Arlington's website. The nonmetallic connectors with the yellow washer are strictly cord connectors, and the size chart clearly says "cord range". Their similar connectors without that washer note "cable range" on the size chart. I'd have to say the one pictured is not intended for use with cable; only cord.
 
Hey! At least he didn't put a cord cap on it and plug it into the socket extension. How many times have you seen THAT.
 
This is one of those scenarios that many people believe either that it is absolutley acceptable OR believe that its a violation.

I am on the side where if a fitting is not used as listed (cable type, size, environment, etc.) it is a straight up violation. However, quite a few folks on this forum will challenge my opinion, telling me that the UL white book doesn't prohibit the application, or that there is no code violation, or they have done it this way for 30 years, etc..etc...

The bottom line is that it will raise a question because it is not what is typically used in this type of application. What is done to answer that question is up for grabs.
 
iwire said:
The real volition is using a lighting outlet as a receptacle outlet.
Click to expand...

It is listed as such, but I would be interested in what Code section prohibits the use of such device today. (Since it is an 'add-on' device, it can be easily removed upon the AHJ's observation and reinstalled when after he left.);)

More problematic to me is that the device - lampholder - itself is overheated as it is evidenced from the discoloration and on its way to become a firehazard.

You volition is to nitpick?:D
 
Last edited:
weressl said:
More problematic to me is that the device - lampholder - itself is overheated as it is evidenced from the discoloration and on its way to become a firehazard.
Click to expand...

That often happens with the nonmetallic lampholders. I have no doubt that you understand what happens when you heat up urea. :)

For that very reason I avoid the non-metallic lampholders and use the trusty porcelain ones that have been made since the dawn of electricity.
 
whereas said:
It is listed as such, but I would be interested in what Code section prohibits the use of such device today.
Click to expand...

410.47 requires that lampholders be installed as lampholders only. A carry over from way back in the day but commonly interpreted as preventing what is shown in the picture.

Typically these sockets are only rated 600 watts with 18 AWG conductors, start plugging in other loads and that the current can quickly exceed the lamp holders rating.


More problematic to me is that the device - lampholder - itself is overheated as it is evidenced from the discoloration and on its way to become a firehazard.
Click to expand...

Perhaps from overload? ;)

You volition is to nitpick?:D
Click to expand...

There is that pot calling the kettle black again. :grin:
 
iwire said:
410.47 requires that lampholders be installed as lampholders only. A carry over from way back in the day but commonly interpreted as preventing what is shown in the picture.
Click to expand...

I agree, but how is the HO to know that when he sees appropriate approval markings on the device?

iwire said:
Typically these sockets are only rated 600 watts with 18 AWG conductors, start plugging in other loads and that the current can quickly exceed the lamp holders rating.
Click to expand...

That of course is not the reasoning why these should not be used, rather the electrocution hazard is given in the handbook. Receptacle strips have no limitation how much load can be added to them eitehr.

iwire said:
Perhaps from overload? ;)
Click to expand...

I wonder if there was wattage limitation printed on those old sockets....? I think each wattage range of lamps could have been easily limited by socket size. Now it's too late, as we slowly saying goodbye to traditional Edison sockets........


iwire said:
There is that pot calling the kettle black again. :grin:
Click to expand...

Wouldn't miss it for nuthin':D
 
weressl said:
I agree, but how is the HO to know that when he sees appropriate approval markings on the device?
Click to expand...

Not the CMPs problem, kind of like asking how is a taxpayer supposed to know about a new tax law that was passed.



That of course is not the reasoning why these should not be used, rather the electrocution hazard is given in the handbook.
Click to expand...

The handbook is entitled to their opinion and I am entitled to mine, I think the risk of fire is a safety issue. :smile:


Receptacle strips have no limitation how much load can be added to them eitehr.
Click to expand...
;)

The conductors are sized to handle the full current expected form the receptacle they can plug into and required to have built in overload protection.



I wonder if there was wattage limitation printed on those old sockets....?
Click to expand...

I don't know.



Now it's too late, as we slowly saying goodbye to traditional Edison sockets........
Click to expand...

Kind of off topic but IMPO lamp types and sockets are entirely out of control. It is all but imposable to carry enough lamp and ballast types on the truck to satisfy the customer. A lot of the new office buildings we are involved in will have 50, 60 etc different fixtures types specified. Looks great, a pain to service.
 
Jim W in Tampa said:
Wonder if it is over on box fill too.
Click to expand...
shouldn't be overfilled. Looks like 2 14-2's and a 14-3 for a grand total of 10 conductors times 2 for #14 = 20 cubic inches. I'm pretty sure those 8-b boxes are at least 20 cubic inches right?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top