Misuse of Equipment

Misuse of Equipment

  • Total voters
    7
Status
Not open for further replies.
iwire said:
You know we don't take anyones word on anything here.

Can you find any documentation for that.

?
Click to expand...

No I can't. The phone call was made by the electrician that I was failing the inspection on. I was getting the info relayed to me be the electrician. after he hung up, he said "You are right, the rep said........"

He was installing photocells inside the panel with the eye sticking outside thru a ko in the botttom of the panel. SQ D said even external photo cells must be installed in a box than run to the panel...Why?..I don't know ...3rd base! I thought the external photo cell thing was a little over the top.
 
Any "violation" that takes a phone call to a manufacturer to sort out is unrighteous. If it ain't written for all to read on paper, it ain't a violation. I'm reasonably sure I can find someone on the other end of the phone at any manufacturer to tell me anything I wanted to hear, rightly or wrongly.
 
Cavie said:
No I can't. The phone call was made by the electrician that I was failing the inspection on. I was getting the info relayed to me be the electrician. after he hung up, he said "You are right, the rep said........"

He was installing photocells inside the panel with the eye sticking outside thru a ko in the botttom of the panel. SQ D said even external photo cells must be installed in a box than run to the panel...Why?..I don't know ...3rd base! I thought the external photo cell thing was a little over the top.
Click to expand...

So where does your comment about 110.3(B) come into play if it's not included in the listing and labeling?
(B) Installation and Use Listed or labeled equipment shall be installed and used in accordance with any instructions included in the listing or labeling.
Click to expand...

A manufacturers rep would still need to provide documentation to back up their statements.

Here's a news flash; It has become apparent that manufactures representatives make false statements regarding their products, it is mandatory that the products must have accompanying instructions for their proper use and installation. :smile:

Roger
 
Man if that is allowable you wont work for me..that is a violation just due to manufactures instructions..It states that the unit must be mounted using the 2 mounting holes..The instructions even show an outline using a separate cabinet..So what happened to installing according to manufacturers instructions..it would not of caused to much stress to install a 4 sq deep and some cable to the panel..it even states by manufacturer the PPC-1 in a suitable enclosure..So how is the panel a suitable enclosure when it can not be mounted correctly..

http://forums.mikeholt.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=1471&d=1207389237
 
Last edited:
cschmid said:
Man if that is allowable you wont work for me..
Click to expand...
I'm happy to report that I'm fully employed at the moment, but thank you for your kind offer. I might point out that I wouldn't work for you in the first place, because you don't read very well.
 
Marc thanks for the vote of comfidence..I do read and only a few agree it is allowable and I know you are not one to do it that way..Besides you would want more money than I can afford to pay..
 
cschmid said:
only a few agree it is allowable .
Click to expand...

No, only two claim it's an NEC violation.

Most seem to say it is not a violation of the current NEC.

This is an NEC forum, the questions here (IMO) are best answered with the NEC, not if someone likes it or not.

It appears to me that Marc would not choose to install it like that but still admits no violation.
 
cschmid said:
that is a violation just due to manufactures instructions..
Click to expand...

It might be, if the unit was listed, or if that instruction was on it's labeling.

The fact is it is not listed and the mounting instructions are not on the label so they are no more then suggestions.

Of course an AHJ is not required to approve unlisted equipment but that is kind of another issue altogether.
 
Bob valid points.. but is there a code that requires it to be printed on the device..I thought if it was listed in the paperwork provided buy the manufacturer than it needed to be followed..
 
cschmid said:
Bob valid points.. but is there a code that requires it to be printed on the device..I thought if it was listed in the paperwork provided buy the manufacturer than it needed to be followed..
Click to expand...

110.3(B) and instructions included in the listing of the product.

This product is not listed so that does not apply.

OR

Any instructions included on the labeling.

This product has a label that includes voltage and cycles but does not provide any mounting instructions.

Personally I think we have made a mountain out of a mole hill. :smile:

If you have ever installed sub metering CTs you will find they are also floated on the conductors in the panel. There are no mounting means.
 
I guess I read the whole nine pages and did not keep track of how many were for or against..I know marc says he would not install it that way but does agree it is legal, you agree it is legal, and so on an on..So you are saying Joe and MY self are the only ones who agree it is not legal..it clearly violates space requirements (it is more than 40% of the area)..

So why would you manufacture a product that has been around for about 9 yrs and not have it UL listed..I don't find the listing but find it hard to believe this company does not have it listed..will do more looking..But if you need to research it this hard to find the info then I do question whether you can say it is a violation on anything more than space..

the link below will give more info on what this device does..

http://www.pulseworx.com/downloads/upb/UPBDescriptionv1.4.pdf
 
iwire said:
If you have ever installed sub metering CTs you will find they are also floated on the conductors in the panel. There are no mounting means.
Click to expand...

Bob you can't install CTs in a meter base. If you don't believe me read this

It clearly states that only conductors are allowed in that space :grin: :grin: :grin:
 
From the UL white book.


The Listing Mark of Underwriters Laboratories Inc. on the attached tag, the reel, or the smallest unit container in which
the product is packaged, with or without the UL symbol on the product, is the only method provided by UL to identify
these products manufactured under its Listing and Follow-Up Service. The Listing Mark for these products includes
the UL symbol (as illustrated above) together with the word ?LISTED,? a serial number, and the product or category
name.
Click to expand...
 
As an inspector, one has a duty and an obligation to enforce the rules of the NEC in effect within one's jurisdiction. The interesting component of these types of issues, is the compelling urge when something like this comes up, for an untrained inspector to "read between the lines" and superimpose an interpretation that lacks clarity, just like the code intent of the specific provision might lack clarity. This is double-trouble. This is where an inspector without proper training makes up rules because he/she can't understand the rules in question. This is done a lot in my area in upstate New York. 3rd party inspection agencies hire inspectors without training and communities by and large are not requiring any demonstration of competence. I live in a rural area. Not necessarily up with the times.

With regard to this specific example of the electronic unit installed within a cabinet I can understand the concern. 110.3(A) points out terms like "examination" and "suitability". It says (in an unenforceable fineprint note) that "suitability of equipment may be evidenced by listing or labeling". There are a number of considerations under 110.3(A), not the least of which is (5) "heating effects" and (8) "other factors that contribute to safeguarding...".90.4 states it's the AHJ that has the responsibility for making interpretations.
It almost seems like in this example, the AHJ will be "granting the special permission contemplated" by doing his/her best to understand the unclear rules.
But, most importantly, IMHO, there is not a clear mandatory provision that specifically prohibits this un-listed, un-labeled equipment to be mounted in the cabinet, providing all other rules are maintained.
 
joe tedesco said:
"312.8 Enclosures for Switches or Overcurrent Devices.

Enclosures for switches or overcurrent devices shall not be used as junction boxes, auxiliary gutters, or raceways for conductors feeding through or tapping off to other switches or overcurrent devices, unless adequate space for this purpose is provided. The conductors shall not fill the wiring space at any cross section to more than 40 percent of the cross-sectional area of the space, and the conductors, splices, and taps shall not fill the wiring space at any cross section to more than 75 percent of the cross-sectional area of that space.

COMMENTARY:

Most enclosures are intended to accommodate only those conductors connected to terminals for switches or overcurrent devices within the enclosures themselves. Where adequate space is provided for additional conductors, such as control circuits, the total conductor fill in the enclosure may not exceed 40 percent of the cross section of the wiring space in the enclosure and no more than 75 percent if splices or taps are necessary.

Application Example
Click to expand...

One illustration of this article.

View attachment 1482
Riser Panels
? Offset interior provides ample wire gutter space for high rise applications
? Factory-installed main lugs (125 A), convertible to main circuit breaker
with standard QOC cover and optional Mono-Flat cover
? Factory-installed main lugs (200 A), convertible to main circuit breaker
when used with QOC cover only
? Available in 12 to 40 circuits
? Indoor only
? Optional Mono-Flat? cover available for both 125 A and 200 A panels
(sold separately)
QO48M60DSGP
Wide Gutter
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top