Solution in search of a problem

[iggy2]

I've always been intrigued by the fact that the NEC uses phrases like "...#4 AWG or larger." Since conductor diameter and AWG run opposite (larger AWG = smaller diameter conductor) - larger what- AWG or conductor diameter?

Is this covered in general somewhere? Should I submit the proposal to add "diameter" after every such instance???

 

[GoldDigger]

I've always been intrigued by the fact that the NEC uses phrases like "...#4 AWG or larger." Since conductor diameter and AWG run opposite (larger AWG = smaller diameter conductor) - larger what- AWG or conductor diameter?

Is this covered in general somewhere? Should I submit the proposal to add "diameter" after every such instance???

#4 AWG is a wire size. #2 AWG is another wire size. The second wire is larger, and I see no need to specify diameter in deciding which is larger.

Now if the NEC had, for some odd reason, said "... an AWG wire size number of 4 or greater...." I would agree that there was a potential problem. Fortunately, they did not do that, and I would just let it lie. There are much more substantial changes that are in limbo.

 

[iggy2]

I'm always reading and re-reading the specs I write, to see how someone could interpret what I write differently than what I intend, and have been waiting for this to come up. It hasn't so far. But it's only been 33 years.

 

[rbalex]

I'm relocating/closing this thread. This topic section is not for discussing "philosophy". See the introductory "sticky".