Misuse of Equipment

Misuse of Equipment

  • Total voters
    7
Status
Not open for further replies.
BackInTheHabit said:
What about NEC 2008 312.8 ?

I read it to say that the installation is a violation. Regardless wether or not it is listed or labeled for such, does this section ban such use?
Click to expand...

I see nothing in 312.8 that prevents this.
 
iwire said:
If the unit is not listed there is no NEC requirement to follow the manufacturers recommendations beyond voltage and current ratings.
Click to expand...

....my brain just went numb. Help me out here.

OK, so it's not listed. Is it labeled?

110.3 (B) again please.:-?
 
frizbeedog said:
....my brain just went numb. Help me out here.

OK, so it's not listed. Is it labeled?

110.3 (B) again please.:-?
Click to expand...

Sure, it is labeled. :smile:

It is labeled with its voltage and frequency which we must follow.

Where on the label tell us how to mount it? :smile:
 
iwire said:
Sure, it is labeled. :smile:

It is labeled with its voltage and frequency which we must follow.

Where on the label tell us how to mount it? :smile:
Click to expand...

Where on a Receptacle does it tell me where and how mount it or install it, other than the temp, voltage and the ever handy strip guage?

Surely there must be instructions somewhere. :wink:
 
Last edited:
chris kennedy said:
What is a "Phase coupler" and why would you want to in the first place?

Thanks
Chris Dumas
Click to expand...
The attached instructions give a function description.

[edit: oops, I missed #19]
 
Last edited:
OK, so maybe there is no specific code violation for the device, even though it is clrearly against the manufacturers installation instructions of "install... using the two mounting holes", however wouldn't all the wires behind the device have to be moved due to over 40% fill of cross section?
 
This question has been shopped around the last couple of weeks, and I still feel the same.
  • I would not do it this way
  • The manufacturer of the phase coupler probably never intended for you to do it this way.
  • BUT!... there is no violation.

The NEC restriction is only that the gutter space not be filled 40%, so this squares with the NEC just fine.

The manufacturer's written instructions state, "The main breaker must be turned off during installation and the coupler must be installed in a suitable junction box or equivalent enclosure." The panelboard cabinet is certainly a "suitable junction box or equivalent enclosure". It also happens to have a panelboard mounted in it, which is of no real consequence.

I say again: dumb, but legal. If the manufacturer doesn't like this install (and I already know they don't), they wrote their instructions wrong.

------------------

This whole business of Square D not wanting anything mounted in their panels is bunk. The new automatic transfer panel gets 3rd party equipment mounted inside it. Powerlogic panels get weird stuff mounted inside them.
 
iwire said:
What a surprise, I figured this was the first time Joe had brought this up. :grin:
Click to expand...
And so far, nobody other than Cavie agrees with him that there's any violation. I just think it's an ugly practice that should be avoided because so far nobody's shown me anything in the code or the manufacturer's instructions that specifically prohibits this installation. People have thrown out bits and piece from both, but nobody's specifically connected the dots, geometric proof style.
 
mdshunk said:
And so far, nobody other than Cavie agrees with him that there's any violation. I just think it's an ugly practice that should be avoided because so far nobody's shown me anything in the code or the manufacturer's instructions that specifically prohibits this installation. People have thrown out bits and piece from both, but nobody's specifically connected the dots, geometric proof style.
Click to expand...

Actually, the manufacturer does say to use mounting holes, which clearly have not been used. The manufacturer's instructions also include a diagram that indicates use of wire nuts and appears to indicate use of a seperate enclosure. Unfortunately, if I understand correctly, it does not seem the code requires following the instructions for any non-listed, non-labeled device.

Is there anything in the code that requires devices (listed, labeled or otherwise) to be "secured". As far as I can tell, the only thing holding this in place is gravity.
 
pbeasley said:
The manufacturer's instructions also include a diagram that indicates use of wire nuts
Click to expand...

And the instructions say that if you can't get all the strands under them to tape them up.:roll:
 
pbeasley said:
Is there anything in the code that requires devices (listed, labeled or otherwise) to be "secured". As far as I can tell, the only thing holding this in place is gravity.
Click to expand...
I don't know, but that's not really Joe's objection. I guess I've seen how this question has evolved over time, so never really addressed the issue of the device being secured. Joe doesn't like stuff in panelboard cabinets other than panelboards and breakers, and frankly neither do I. Fact is, without that ability, things such as load management monitors would never be able to exist. I think Joe needs to get out in the field some more and take a gander at all the stuff that needs to be mounted inside the panel every day. Heck, Cutler Hammer has a TVSS that mounts inside the panel, and you stick it in the gutter with double-stick tape.
 
mdshunk said:
This question has been shopped around the last couple of weeks, and I still feel the same.
  • I would not do it this way
  • The manufacturer of the phase coupler probably never intended for you to do it this way.
  • BUT!... there is no violation.

The NEC restriction is only that the gutter space not be filled 40%, so this squares with the NEC just fine.

The manufacturer's written instructions state, "The main breaker must be turned off during installation and the coupler must be installed in a suitable junction box or equivalent enclosure." The panelboard cabinet is certainly a "suitable junction box or equivalent enclosure". It also happens to have a panelboard mounted in it, which is of no real consequence.

I say again: dumb, but legal. If the manufacturer doesn't like this install (and I already know they don't), they wrote their instructions wrong.

------------------

This whole business of Square D not wanting anything mounted in their panels is bunk. The new automatic transfer panel gets 3rd party equipment mounted inside it. Powerlogic panels get weird stuff mounted inside them.
Click to expand...

This is more or less my opinion as well. I do feel it is a violation however, but as of yet cannot back it up with NEC articles. If I find them I will post them.

I think it would boil down to wether or not the AHJ "approved" of the install.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top