And so what is wrong with the installation? And you know article 90 is just informative, it does not prohibit or allow anything.
Roger
Power Bridge
- Thread starter tom baker
- Start date
- Status
And so what is wrong with the installation? And you know article 90 is just informative, it does not prohibit or allow anything.
Roger
- Location
- Massachusetts
And that is exactly my view point, a lot of straw grabbing to find a way it is code compliant.
Especially when people start bringing in reasons why this product is needed, as if the usefulness of the product has anything at all to do with it's code compliance.
- Location
- Massachusetts
IMPO it is using cord as a substitute for chapter 3 methods.
I agree 90 is informs us, and IMPO it informs us that the code applies to this equipment and in turn Article 400 prohibits this equipment.
Lets move out of a dwelling unit and into an large commercial building where there are no requirements for receptacles.
Most of the arguments to support the use of this product would also allow the wiring of this imaginary commercial building with cords. I guess I could put a whole bunch of receptacles in the electrical room and simply run cords out to all the utilization equipment.
Why would two boxes, NM cable, and two devices, need any straws?And that is exactly my view point, a lot of straw grabbing to find a way it is code compliant.
That is a common everday installation., the problem seems to be that the inlet device is out of the ordinary, but it is a device.
Roger
- Location
- Massachusetts
My issues is with the cord, at no time have I said I have an issue with the two boxes, NM cable, and two devices.
Of course if an AV contractor was to charge a homeowner to install those items they would be breaking the MA law if they where not at least a Journeyman and had a permit.
PowerBridgeTech
Member
iwire,
I respect your posts and thinking this through with us.
May I better understand what specific issue you see with a UL/CSA Listed and rated power supply cord? We are not making these in a back-room with non-compliant copper wire and plastic jackets, trust me.
Supply cords are what are used on all appliances.
With reference to NEC 406.6 (D): An INLET can only be energized from a power supply cord. If you accept the INLET as an NEC and UL recognized device, then the logic of a power supply cord would need to be accepted too.
I sense from previous posts, your real issue is the PowerBridge being used to energize an entire premise circuit or a room circuit with multiple outlets with a simple power supply extension cord. Its just not possible.
This is not the intended use or the capability of a PowerBridge. The power supply cord-set has a maximum wattage rating of 1850.
No one has contacted PowerBridge with the question to use it as a house premise wiring method. We have never suggested or heard of anyone using a PowerBridge in this manor.
The marketing is specific to extending power from point A to B not more than that, with the benefit of connection to an external power surge conditioning UPS device. Which if you think about it, they are energized by a power supply cord plugged into the front of the circuit.
Installing a PowerBridge accomplishes the same, EXCEPT using Code compliant building wire/cable (NM/MC) inside the wall to extend power up to the appliance (TV) NOT to power a dwelling, it's simply not rated to accomplish that concept and would not be approved by any AHJ understandably due to the rated capacity of the cord set, so you are correct not be acceptable with that possibility.
Is this being over-thought in the basic concept? This is not a branch circuit, infact it can be argued it's not a circuit at all. Its DEAD until energized from a plugged in power supply cord. This is an extension not a circuit, using NM/MC wire in the wall to extend the EXISTING circuit power from the front-end as intended, not branch wired from the backside as part of the permanent premise wiring circuit.
PowerBridge is a simple solution to a recently new problem. High-level power protection to an expensive display device from external protection. There is no other way to accomplish this that we are aware of.
Regards,
Justin
PowerBridge
al hildenbrand
Senior Member
- Location
- Minnesota
- Occupation
- Electrical Contractor, Electrical Consultant, Electrical Engineer
Justin,
Thanks for the last two posts. They are thoughtful, and, in my opinion, contributing greatly to this discussion.
You point about the appliance permission in 400.7(3) & (8) and the opening sentence of 400.8 is very interesting given that ETL gives your kit the "product information" of "in wall electrical appliance assembly".
I spent some time at the Intertek searching for more information about that "product information", but I had no luck.
If there is additional explanation, from ETL, that expands on "in wall electrical appliance assembly", that would be helpful in this thread, IMO.
Is the kit actually being called (labeled) by ETL an appliance?
Thanks for the last two posts. They are thoughtful, and, in my opinion, contributing greatly to this discussion.
You point about the appliance permission in 400.7(3) & (8) and the opening sentence of 400.8 is very interesting given that ETL gives your kit the "product information" of "in wall electrical appliance assembly".
I spent some time at the Intertek searching for more information about that "product information", but I had no luck.
If there is additional explanation, from ETL, that expands on "in wall electrical appliance assembly", that would be helpful in this thread, IMO.
Is the kit actually being called (labeled) by ETL an appliance?
Last edited:
hurk27
Senior Member
- Location
- Portage, Indiana NEC: 2008
I just thought of something that was discussed here a while back.
Someone had a question about if you can plug in a power strip into another power strip as an extension, and I think the response from UL was no, power strips could only supply the intended appliance, and the use of extensions from them was not evaluated, and if I remember right this was a no go for receptacles on the back of UPS systems also?
If this also would apply to this system, then it could only be plugged into a receptacle, and not a surge strip or UPS?
Someone had a question about if you can plug in a power strip into another power strip as an extension, and I think the response from UL was no, power strips could only supply the intended appliance, and the use of extensions from them was not evaluated, and if I remember right this was a no go for receptacles on the back of UPS systems also?
If this also would apply to this system, then it could only be plugged into a receptacle, and not a surge strip or UPS?
PowerBridgeTech
Member
I see where you are going with the question, perhaps its turned around though in where the supply cord is used.
I don't have specific record to this, however, power strip / surge protector manufactures will not honor warranty claims if the device is plugged into an extension cord or another "strip" from the outlet into the strip/surge device. The reason, is the gauge and rating of the connected cord and it having correct capability to provide proper rated current to the strip/surge. Panamax offers an accessory extension cord to use specifically the same guage and rating of the supply cord of the strip/surge and they state this as the only accepted cord to use to have warranty insured. It makes sense to require a specific allowable cord to assure proper current and grounding.
I've not heard of or know of a specific Code article referencing the insertion/extension after the strip/surge to a supply cord to any appliance or receptacle. This would be interesting if this in fact is the case, although it would not make sense to disallow a supply cord connection from the output of a strip/surge.
Good question!
Last edited:
al hildenbrand
Senior Member
- Location
- Minnesota
- Occupation
- Electrical Contractor, Electrical Consultant, Electrical Engineer
The prohibition of daisy chaining power strips comes from the UL White Book. UL calls power strips "Relocatable Power Taps" and gives them the Category XBYS. A partial quote of the information in XBYS is:
PowerBridgeTech
Member
Thank you Al, I appreciate the compliment. Happy to have provided you the information you requested earlier.
The ETL report information is all we have for descriptive titles. PowerBridge had no input to how the report was written, titled or labled.
The process of agency testing and reports are very intensive and very expensive. The wording and labeling is specific to conformance to standards, set from UL, TUV, CSA. We have nothing more than what the report states. Is there more that should be on the report? If they missed descriptive information in the report necessary for AHJs to have for determinations please let us know.
A little about ETL. They perform factory inspections quarterly to verify called out specifications. They are very intensive. They check every detail in the production process including updates to the Hi-Pot test equipment used to current test every INLET and OUTLET component together along with the power supply cord. They go as far as to verification of the raw plastic material manufactured for us by Samsung used to mold our wall plates. The attached labels conform to UL969 labels and the printing machine are inspected to verify conformance to the UL standard, even the ink used is verified from the supplier to meet UL conformance.
It's funny when we are asked why is this expensive for just an outlet. This is far more than just an outlet. A lot goes into the complete kit, it isn't just parts into a box.
Regards,
Justin
PowerBridge
mivey
Senior Member
That is interesting but this device is not relocatable since it is definitely permanently secured to the building structure. I thing Justin said this device was classified as an appliance?
Also, UL says you can't plug a power tap into an extension cord but does that mean you can't plug an extension cord into a power tap?
- Location
- Lockport, IL
- Occupation
- Semi-Retired Electrical Engineer
I won?t speak for Bob, but I think I do see his point. The fact that the cord is listed means nothing. The issue relates to how it is being used. If a homeowner didn?t want to use a system like yours, and didn?t want ugly wires to be visible, then what choices remain? Well, have a receptacle outlet installed at the TV?s height, and power it from an existing or new branch circuit. So the power cord that is part of your system does, in fact, act as a substitution for permanent wiring.
But yours does not supply an appliance. It supplies something that, in turn, supplies an appliance. Your cord is a middle man, not a final connector. So the reasoning that your cord is no different than an appliance cord does not work for me.
I can?t speak to this one myself. I have never seen an ?inlet,? and I don?t know how one would be used. I concede that it would have to be powered via a cord. But what is on the other side of the inlet? Is the inlet (i.e., as mentioned in the NEC) intended to describe a component that is physically attached to an item of utilization equipment? Or is the inlet merely an element in the power supply to some remote equipment? Someone would have to help me understand this issue.
I don?t sense that at all. Bob knows perfectly well that you do not intend your system to provide power to other areas of the house, nor to connect it to any other branch circuit. I think his issue is that your system involves a flexible cord that is located outside the wall, and that is used so that the homeowner does not have to install a permanent wire inside the wall.
al hildenbrand
Senior Member
- Location
- Minnesota
- Occupation
- Electrical Contractor, Electrical Consultant, Electrical Engineer
Really, Charlie?
Have you ever plugged a power supply cord into the back of a desktop personal computer? That "receptacle" built into the back of the power supply of the desktop PC is an "inlet". Many CRT video monitors had / have detachable power supply cords that connect at the CRT at an inlet.
If you take the time to look at the small gas powered generators at the local Home Center you will find associated hardware that is designed to interface the output of the generator to an occupancy's Premises Wiring (System). The common connection between the portable generator, used as a standby, is a cord with an attachment plug and a cord connector. The attachment plug is inserted into a receptacle mounted on the portable generator and the cord connector is inserted into the "inlet" that is installed as part of the Premises Wiring (System) in some form of a transfer panel. The inlet, with the operating generator attached, supplies power to remote utilization equipment on the Premises Wiring (System). It bears stating, that your lack of familiarity does not diminish the commonness of this simple device, i.e., the inlet.
al hildenbrand
Senior Member
- Location
- Minnesota
- Occupation
- Electrical Contractor, Electrical Consultant, Electrical Engineer
PowerBridgeTech
Member
Charlie,
Thank you for your views and questions.
As for the cord used in the PowerBridge kit.
I posted eariler.
No one has brought up the USES PERMITTED of the flexible cord; it supersedes uses not permitted if use is met.
Section 400.8 USES NOT PERMITTED starts with the wording: Unless specifically permitted in 400.7
We find this interesting as 400.7 USES PERMITTED (A) USES
(3) Connection of portable luminaries, portable and mobile signs, or appliances.
KEY WORD> Appliances (TV)
(8) Appliances where the fastening means and mechanical connections are specifically designed to permit ready removal for maintenance and repair, and the appliance is intended or identified for flexible cord connection.
The PowerBridge ETL listing specifically indentifies our IN WALL ELECTRICAL APPLIANCE to be used with a cord-set to energize.
The INLET is specifically called out in 406.6 (D) Flanged Surface Inlet. A flanged surface inlet shall be installed such that the prongs, blades, or pins are not energized unless an energized cord and connector is inserted into it.
The cord is recognized in our kit listing and meets 400.7, 400.8 and 406.6 (D).
As to the permanance of the "extension", the inside wall NM/MC wire is permanant, HOWEVER it is NOT "PART OF" the premise wired circuits. It is DEAD it is not a circuit or part of the circuit as defined, until energized from the power supply cord.The power supply cord is arguable to maintain, the cord itself is NOT permanant or a substitute. By description in 408.8, it is not attached to dwelling or the permanent building wire in the wall. It has DISCONNECT at both ends of the DEAD FRONT CIRCUIT. It can be removed or replaced by a non-professional end-user and is PORTABLE. That being said, how can the supply cord be considered a substitute for the fixed wiring?
The power supply cord is being used as intended by its UL listing which is relevant to Code as Code requires power supply connection cords to have agency listing and conform to its Listing and to Code. If the cord is being used as intended and defined in 400.7 and is not in violation of 400.8 and used in definition in 406.6 (D)then how does the argument have merit.
The kit is actually considered an IN WALL ELECTRICAL APPLIANCE, as called out in our control report with Intertek/ETL. That itself is not so much the basis, as the end of the EXTENSION which all parts included as a kit supply the TV appliance power. It only serves the appliance and not other receptacles/outlet anywhere else in the dwelling, so it is confused to how this is a fixed structure subsitute for premise wiring. This is only a DEAD EXTENSION it is not "part of" by means of hardwired to any part of the premise wiring.
As to options consumers have for powering the TV appliance, absolutely, a hardwired branched outlet is the obvious solution. However, that will not establish the benefit of the PowerBridge, that the cord allows for connection to external power surge/conditioning/UPS to the expensive display device appliance.
Last edited:
al hildenbrand
Senior Member
- Location
- Minnesota
- Occupation
- Electrical Contractor, Electrical Consultant, Electrical Engineer
Well, I'm not so sure.
The Intertek web site reports the PowerBridge is listed as an "In Wall Electrical Appliance Assembly".
Until I know more about what the ETL listing of "In Wall Electrical Appliance Assembly" is, I can't rule out the Code-worthiness of the PowerBridge.
Any ETL documentation on what comprises the "In Wall Electrical Appliance Assembly" would be really helpful.
- Location
- Chapel Hill, NC
- Occupation
- Retired Electrical Contractor
We can use rubber cord to power a piece of equipment that is directly wired to the power system. So, IMO, the rubber cord is not fixed wiring in the manner that it is used.
Here is a generator inlet.
Here is a generator inlet.
- Location
- Massachusetts
I can't speak for others but I did not bring up uses permitted as I see nothing in that section that specifically allows the use of cord in this manner.
PowerBridgeTech
Member
Good day iwire!
I understand, everyone wants to have a "specific use" section specifically for a PowerBridge. It does not exist all as in one section.
Put this together as a combination of listed componets that the NEC sets code to installation methods, no different then using/installing multiple components together in any electrical circuit/assyembly. Reference is called out in several sections to apply to the PowerBridge componets.
NM/MC must be installed as per Chapter 3
The j- boxes must comply Article 312
Receptacles, Inlets, Article 406
Power Supply/flexible cords Article 400
Since there is not a "ONE" Article/Section to fulfill the "kit", then we need to apply the definitions which are applicable to each listed component and put them together, that's what the Code is for. Or am I completely off base here?
Again, the power supply cord DOES meet 400.7 as it is SPECIFIC in allowable use.
400.7 USES PERMITTED (A) USES
(3) Connection of portable luminaries, portable and mobile signs, or appliances.
KEY WORD> Appliances (TV)
(8) Appliances where the fastening means and mechanical connections are specifically designed to permit ready removal for maintenance and repair, and the appliance is intended or identified for flexible cord connection.
We establish our ETL Listing is SPECIFIC as indentifing flexible cord/supply power connection.
This is our basis to appeal to the state of WA and any other AHJ calling out the use of the supply cord.
They will need to establish how 400.8 is a violation when the accepted NEC article is SPECIFIC to the proper use of the cord with the PowerBridge within it's agency listing meeting 400.7, which by definition at the title of 400.8 states it supercedes unless.
Respectfully,
Justin
PowerBridge
- Status