Liquid Tape: An acceptable repair for damaged 480V wire?

[Jon456]

Here's the latest update on this fiasco. Our general manager informed the contractor that the liquid tape repair to these damaged conductors was insufficient and that a proper repair needed to be made, namely cutting out the damaged sections of wire and splicing in new wire. The following was his response:

"Regarding the inverter AC wires, we [repaired the wires to] inverter #4 that were recommended to be replaced in the April 21, 2014 report by [the third-party testing company]. As stated in [testing company] report, 6/13/14, these wires tested satisfactory as found and are operational and acceptable for service. No further work will be conducted on these wires."

So his position is that because the wires passed a megger test, then his repair is good. Of course, I could have wedged a styrofoam packing peanut between the damaged insulation and the metal edge of the LB outlet and that too would have passed a megger test.

We've told him that we're not accepting this work and, if he still refuses to make a satisfactory repair, that we will hire another contractor to do the work and bill him for the costs. So at this point, it looks like we may be headed for litigation. Are there any other code references or regulations that we can use to support our stand on this issue?

 

[FionaZuppa]

so what was the wire leaking to which led to a 400A breaker trip?? a 400A short certainly must have done some arcing damage ???
as for passing tests to say it is good, ....... no, not any 'ol method/hack that passes a test would be acceptable. i am not an electrician but i suspect the method would have to be, at minimum, industry best practices. is using liquid tape (along with a shield) a industry best practice for use on this type of repair in this type of application??

next time make sure the contract has verbiage "any wire that is found to have unacceptable insulation abrasion will not be accepted".

 

[kwired]

All I can say is this guy doesn't seem to care enough to make the customer happy, which if anything will effect potential future business with the customer. Had he done impressive work even if a little expensive there may be a good chance of long term business relationship. Instead he invites a litigation situation and even if he wins or gets off somewhat easy - word gets around to others and doesn't do him any good. If anything maybe he is "cheap" and that gets him work - but with all the bottom feeders and then he is constantly dealing with similar complaints whether he is right or wrong, not my cup of tea for certain.

 

[K8MHZ]

All I can say is this guy doesn't seem to care enough to make the customer happy, which if anything will effect potential future business with the customer. Had he done impressive work even if a little expensive there may be a good chance of long term business relationship. Instead he invites a litigation situation and even if he wins or gets off somewhat easy - word gets around to others and doesn't do him any good. If anything maybe he is "cheap" and that gets him work - but with all the bottom feeders and then he is constantly dealing with similar complaints whether he is right or wrong, not my cup of tea for certain.

Kind of makes me wonder how he got all those good references and now all of a sudden he is a Grade AAA Hack and a Shyster.

In one of the threads, the OP said this hack was highly recommended. Whoever recommended him should be getting an earful.

 

[kwired]

Kind of makes me wonder how he got all those good references and now all of a sudden he is a Grade AAA Hack and a Shyster.

In one of the threads, the OP said this hack was highly recommended. Whoever recommended him should be getting an earful.

Probably recommended by a "bottomfeeder"

 

[Jon456]

All I can say is this guy doesn't seem to care enough to make the customer happy, which if anything will effect potential future business with the customer. Had he done impressive work even if a little expensive there may be a good chance of long term business relationship. Instead he invites a litigation situation and even if he wins or gets off somewhat easy - word gets around to others and doesn't do him any good. If anything maybe he is "cheap" and that gets him work - but with all the bottom feeders and then he is constantly dealing with similar complaints whether he is right or wrong, not my cup of tea for certain.

Absolutely correct. Ours was not just a typical solar install. At 1 MW capacity, we are the largest single power producer in our county. Our installation made big news, both locally and regionally, in print and on TV, and has been written up in trade articles. Btw, when I stated earlier that this was approximately a three-quarters of a million dollars contract, I was referring just to the contractor's payment. The entire installation was a $3M project.

I can tell you that he has already lost a lot of future business just with us alone. While I primarily work at one particular facility, our parent company owns a number of commercial properties. We are already in the process of installing another solar array at one large office building, and planning for an array at another. Also, within a year we will be constructing a new large facility that will also have rooftop solar arrays. And we are in the permits stage for a large ground-mount solar farm in another city. Back during the early stages of this project, we had been talking to this contractor about having him do the installation for some of these other projects. Now we won't touch him with a ten-foot pole.

While we won't go out of our way to publicly "name & shame" this contractor, I assure you he won't be getting any recommendations from us. Of course, he does get to enjoy all the publicity our project has already given him, but if a potential customer does their due diligence and contacts us for a referral, well...

 

[Jon456]

Kind of makes me wonder how he got all those good references and now all of a sudden he is a Grade AAA Hack and a Shyster.

In one of the threads, the OP said this hack was highly recommended. Whoever recommended him should be getting an earful.

I honestly wonder about that too. I was not involved in the early planning stages, nor in the contracts awarding for this project. So I don't know the details what those references were and how he was selected. I do know that he's done some government contracts for Caltrans. But that's not saying much... just look at the SF Bay Bridge fiasco!

 

[Jon456]

so what was the wire leaking to which led to a 400A breaker trip?? a 400A short certainly must have done some arcing damage ???

We don't know. That fault had cleared itself a year ago without any intervention from the contractor. I suspect that the three short-to-ground events that did occur last year burnt away enough metal in the wire and/or conduit to prevent further arcing. I don't know if the contractor even found that bad spot and put liquid tape on it. I doubt it because I can see no evidence of arcing around the wires visible from the open LB. If I were a betting man, I'd wager that those trip faults occurred deeper within the conduit (between the LB and the inverter).

One of the requirements we stipulated to the contractor before these repairs took place was that we have someone (the general manager or myself) present to witness the discovered damage and to observe the repair or replacement procedures. The contractor ignored that and made the repairs to the #2 & #4 inverter AC wires without notifying us until after the work was completed.

as for passing tests to say it is good, ....... no, not any 'ol method/hack that passes a test would be acceptable. i am not an electrician but i suspect the method would have to be, at minimum, industry best practices.

I agree!

is using liquid tape (along with a shield) a industry best practice for use on this type of repair in this type of application??

I certainly don't think so. I wouldn't even use liquid tape to repair a 14ga 115V/15A branch circuit conductor, let alone a 500 MCM 480V/400A wire. But I'd like something more "concrete" than just professional opinion. That's why I'm seeking some type of published information to support our position.

 

[FionaZuppa]

that stipulation was made where, on paper with sig's, or just witnessed verbal, email, other ???


from some Goole searching it seems Liquid Tape can only be used for the purposes listed in its UL rating.

lets say this goes to litigation
several factors come in here

1. what LT was it exactly that was used to make the repair? is it UL listed for this type of repair?
2. was the repair done by an experienced professional individual? there's a diff between "individual" and "contractor", etc.
3. was the repair inspected by some other individual who did not perform the actual repair?
4. is this a common way to make such repair (aka "industry best practices" for this specific situation)?
5. is there any contract verbiage that would allow the repair to be done in this fashion?
6. did the professional doing the repair do any testing/measurements that would show evidence that the LT was used properly?
7. since the repair has compromised the OEM wire this is a rated factor that cannot be changed unless wire is completely replaced

give each of those 20 points. #7 is a negative 20 though. so, you are starting with -20 because the OEM wire is "damaged" OEM wire. add points for any Q that has A=yes. 50 points or less the wire should have been replaced, above 50 points then you might consider it an acceptable repair. in this list i might give #4 a 30 point rating because it is more substantial than doing the repair the wrong way. in other words, the contractor perhaps had good intentions of doing the repair using industry best practices but goofed up doing the work, etc.

for #5, there may be inverse verbiage in contract, if so the points for this Q also get inverted to negative, etc.

 

[FionaZuppa]

But I'd like something more "concrete" than just professional opinion. That's why I'm seeking some type of published information to support our position.

with lack of heavy documentation you will need to get the professional opinion (in writing) of a few well respected professionals. this will more than likely answer Q #4.

 

[Jon456]

that stipulation was made where, on paper with sig's, or just witnessed verbal, email, other ???

For the replacement of our facility's main feeders, a Contract Change Order (CCO) was written and signed by both parties. That document stipulated that the contractor shall "Provide procedures and equipment to be used for Owner approval prior to wire pull."

However, the repairs to our inverter AC lines were done without a new CCO. The stipulations to the contractor (i.e., providing us procedures in advance, allowing us to witness damage, and for us to approve and observe repairs) were made both in writing (via email) and verbally. The contractor verbally agreed to comply, but then "sneaked in" to our site and performed the repairs without notifying us.

from some Goole searching it seems Liquid Tape can only be used for the purposes listed in its UL rating.

We still don't know what Liquid Tape product the contractor used. We have asked him in writing to tell us what products and procedures he used to make the repairs, and so far he's refused to even address this matter (other than to say he's not going to do any more work on those wires).

I did look up the Liquid Tape product manufactured by Gardner Bender, and they specifically state that it is not UL listed. I spoke with a Southwire Corp. engineer and he stated that, without a UL listing, such a product would not be approved for repairing the wire.

 

[mgookin]

Does the application of liquid tape result in equal or better than what you paid for?
As in does it make it "like new" conductors?

 

[Jon456]

Does the application of liquid tape result in equal or better than what you paid for?
As in does it make it "like new" conductors?

Of course not. So if it comes to litigation, we can probably argue that point against his contract. But I'm looking for something in terms of code non-compliance, industry best-practices, or professional expert opinion that this repair is not acceptable.

 

[FionaZuppa]

i think if you wanted to push the issue to make it right, you have enough data to mention "litigation". however, you should not wait for litigation to make it right. either contractor does the re-work or you get the work done. be sure to do good documention on the findings along with the work done, you then go to litigation to recoup your costs. its very important to start your documentation now, what you know and when you know it, a detailed timeline of events, and i mean everything including your time on this thread, etc.

the contractor is saying "no, it is a proper repair". you then ask contractor some of those Q's i listed. the goal is to make the installation proper !! do not try and bash the contractor, you are after evidence to prove the contractor's stance. lack of evidence simply means contractor is wrong, etc. if you can get contractor to see why its wrong contractor will likely re-do the work properly, etc.

be warned though, you may want a complete re-do but there may in fact be a proper industry accepted repair method, thus you may not get what you really want. this is why (hopefully) there is some contract verbiage that limits or prohibits repairs of certain types....... obviously the contractor did not abide by some of the verbiage you listed.

 

[GoldDigger]

My greatest concern is whether the contractor in fact ever pulled and inspected the cables. If he did not, then there is absolutely no assurance that any hidden problems were corrected. I would put most of my emphasis on that, and go on to the other questions to back that up.

 

[FionaZuppa]

My greatest concern is whether the contractor in fact ever pulled and inspected the cables. If he did not, then there is absolutely no assurance that any hidden problems were corrected. I would put most of my emphasis on that, and go on to the other questions to back that up.

is it a requirement to do this? OP needs supporting evidence that this should have been done. we all know why it should have been done, but hard documentation from authority would help, lacking such documentation the professional opinion of others will prevail.

 

[GoldDigger]

is it a requirement to do this? OP needs supporting evidence that this should have been done. we all know why it should have been done, but hard documentation from authority would help, lacking such documentation the professional opinion of others will prevail.

Seems to me to be basic common sense, and therefore difficult to support.

If there was a documented problem and the problem went away without any corrective action and the only area where corrective action was later taken showed absolutely no signs that it was the location of the original problem (although there was wire damage), then there is no evidence that the problem has been corrected. QED.

The OP can probably get a statement to that effect from Southwire too.

 

[Jon456]

Seems to me to be basic common sense, and therefore difficult to support.

If there was a documented problem and the problem went away without any corrective action and the only area where corrective action was later taken showed absolutely no signs that it was the location of the original problem (although there was wire damage), then there is no evidence that the problem has been corrected. QED.

You're right. And that's not just common sense, but logical deduction, as you do aptly demonstrated! Unfortunately, the contractor is lacking both skills. (Frankly, I hate writing all these negative things about him because it makes it sound like I just have it in for the guy. But the truth is, he really does lack common sense, logic, and the basic knowledge that is required for this type of work.)

My greatest concern is whether the contractor in fact ever pulled and inspected the cables. If he did not, then there is absolutely no assurance that any hidden problems were corrected. I would put most of my emphasis on that, and go on to the other questions to back that up.

He absolutely did not pull or inspect any wires to that inverter. I know this because our inverter monitoring system showed that our #4 inverter was offline for only 45 minutes on the day he made the repair. When we first learned that the inverter was off for such a short time, we initially assumed he had done some additional testing. But then he later told us that he had repaired those wires and his work there was complete. That's when I grabbed the ladder and opened the LB to see what he had done and discovered the Liquid Tape and LFMC jacket "repair" he had made.

 

[Jon456]

i think if you wanted to push the issue to make it right, you have enough data to mention "litigation". however, you should not wait for litigation to make it right. either contractor does the re-work or you get the work done.

This is not the only dispute we have with him. One of the (18) 350 MCM copper feeders from the PV service disconnect to the PV distribution panel was megger tested at 600M ohms (whereas all the others are over 2.2G ohms). The contractor claims that because it tested over than 300M ohms, that the wire is acceptable for service. We disagree. So far, he has refused to accept responsibility for this damaged feeder or for the damaged wires to Inverter #4.

We've already put him on notice that if he doesn't correct these, then we will hire another contractor to make the repairs and bill him for the costs. But that is where the litigation may come in.

be sure to do good documention on the findings along with the work done, you then go to litigation to recoup your costs. its very important to start your documentation now, what you know and when you know it, a detailed timeline of events, and i mean everything including your time on this thread, etc.

I have plenty of documentation, not the least of which are the threads & posts in this forum which are all date stamped and now part of the public record. :thumbsup:

the contractor is saying "no, it is a proper repair". you then ask contractor some of those Q's i listed.

Thank you for taking the time to list those questions. If it comes to litigation, we will use your list of questions when deposing him.

the goal is to make the installation proper !! do not try and bash the contractor, you are after evidence to prove the contractor's stance. lack of evidence simply means contractor is wrong, etc. if you can get contractor to see why its wrong contractor will likely re-do the work properly, etc.

Our goal is not to bash him; our goal is simply to get our plant working as designed and to the standard of workmanship that we paid for. Unfortunately, it's impossible to get this contractor to admit he is wrong. He never accepts responsibility, instead blaming others. If he makes a statement that is demonstrably false, instead of admitting his mistake, he simply digs in his heels or changes the subject. I've caught him lying, even when there was no real reason to lie. So we know from experience that we will not be able to get him to "see the light," and that even if we do produce iron-clad evidence that he's wrong, he will never admit it. So the best we can do is to force him to do the work under threat of financial penalty. Or hire someone else and charge him for our expenses.

be warned though, you may want a complete re-do but there may in fact be a proper industry accepted repair method, thus you may not get what you really want.

If we were being hard-nosed about this, we would demand he pull the entire 700' wire run from the inverter all the way back to the PV distribution panel. But all we want is for the wire to be inspected and replaced as needed from the LB down to the inverter, which is about a 30 foot section. I think we are being more than reasonable. Consider that this was an all-new installation which should have had clean, uninterrupted runs of XHHW wire (which we paid extra for the upgraded insulation). Yet now our project is like Frankenstein's monster with numerous splices everywhere.

 

[dledinger]

next time make sure the contract has verbiage "any wire that is found to have unacceptable insulation abrasion will not be accepted".

Get rid of "unacceptable".