SOOW for outlet outside?

Status
Not open for further replies.
packersparky said:
Made up words. LOL. Yep somebody did make them up and put them right there in the NEC.
One manufacturer does us the term on their site.
http://www.southwire.com/products/ViperRubberTypeSOOWBlack.htm
Click to expand...

yeah, i can see where some might say the cord laying flat behind a barrier is "extra hard usage".
or perhaps being ran over by a CAT dozer 100x a day is "extra hard usage".

wait, did i miss "extra hard usage" in Article 100?

But it gets better, there is "hard usage" too. "hard" and "extra hard". could there be such a thing?:happysad::happyyes:, she knows but doesnt tell.

Southwire Type SOOW Flexible Cords are permitted for use as specified by Article 400 and related articles of the 2011 National Electrical Code. Southwire Type SOOW Flexible Cords are designed for extra hard usage on industrial equipment, heavy tools, battery chargers, portable lights welding leads, marine dockside power, power extensions and mining applications.
Click to expand...
portable lights for "extra hard use"? so that as my gauge would a fixed light be "hard use"?

So to note: the vendor sites that do have "extra hard usage" do so in context of "thats what it says in NEC, our cable is suitable for that". in other words, it's NEC verbiage and the vendors are just stealing it to say their cord stuff is compliant for that use, etc.
 
Last edited:
FionaZuppa said:
yeah, i can see where some might say the cord laying flat behind a barrier is "extra hard usage".
or perhaps being ran over by a CAT dozer 100x a day is "extra hard usage".

wait, did i miss "extra hard usage" in Article 100?

But it gets better, there is "hard usage" too. "hard" and "extra hard". could there be such a thing?:happysad::happyyes:, she knows but doesnt tell.


portable lights for "extra hard use"? so that as my gauge would a fixed light be "hard use"?

So to note: the vendor sites that do have "extra hard usage" do so in context of "thats what it says in NEC, our cable is suitable for that". in other words, it's NEC verbiage and the vendors are just stealing it to say their cord stuff is compliant for that use, etc.
Click to expand...

I guess I don't get what you are saying. It seems you have a problem with SO cord being acceptable for "extra hard usage".
The vendors that have there SO cords identified as "extra hard usage" on the websites don't really need to do so because the NEC already recognizes them as such. Designation of "extra hard usage" can be required when using flexible cords and cables. For instance see 525.20(A), and 555.13(A)(2). There may be other locations in the NEC that require extra hard usage cords or cables.
 
FionaZuppa said:
??

SJ is 300v rated, S w/o J is 600v rated
an E has thermoplastic jacket
not sure i see where any SO or SJ cord type is "extra hard use". they have heavy/med/light designations based on jackets.

https:/www.awcwire.com/producttoc.aspx?id=type-sj-sjoow-portable-cord
Click to expand...

Huh....

Please read the designations in the link I provided in my previous post (the one you quoted, above).

Type "S" is "extra hard service" there, and I'm sorry if I put "use" where "service" was used by that vendor. In my experience both "usage" and "service" are used interchangeably in regard to type S cables. NEC prefers "usage", but vendors use that and "service".

Regarding your later claim that cable vendors don't use such terminology on their sites, please see these:

https://www.tpcwire.com/products/wire-and-cable/portable-cords/super-trex-ultra-gard-portable-cords

https://www.southwire.com/products/ViperRubberTypeSOOWYellow.htm

https://www.stayonline.com/reference-cord-jackets.aspx

https://cdn.generalcable.com/getmed..._CableSelectionGuideforHazardousLocations_WEB

http://www.prioritywire.com/soow.php

http://www.dsmt.com/resources/cable-jacket-types/

In addition to Table 400, see NEC Articles 520.61, 520.61(B), 520.68, 520.69(C) for just a few of many examples where "extra-hard usage" cable is absolutely used as a term for required cabling.
 
FionaZuppa said:
yeah, i can see where some might say the cord laying flat behind a barrier is "extra hard usage".
or perhaps being ran over by a CAT dozer 100x a day is "extra hard usage".

wait, did i miss "extra hard usage" in Article 100?

But it gets better, there is "hard usage" too. "hard" and "extra hard". could there be such a thing?:happysad::happyyes:, she knows but doesnt tell.


portable lights for "extra hard use"? so that as my gauge would a fixed light be "hard use"?

So to note: the vendor sites that do have "extra hard usage" do so in context of "thats what it says in NEC, our cable is suitable for that". in other words, it's NEC verbiage and the vendors are just stealing it to say their cord stuff is compliant for that use, etc.
Click to expand...

The designations are listing agency designations. See this UL page:

https://www.ul.com/global/documents.../newsletters/electricalconnections/july08.pdf
 
FionaZuppa said:
thats an interesting doc.
it states that "for SJTOW cord: SJ = hard usage flexible cord"

whaaaaa, that's not what SJ means, not even close.
the J is for "junior" which is rated 300v
w/o the J its rated 600v

so although SO has thicker outer jacket than SJO, the J does not mean "hard usage".
Click to expand...

So you want to argue with Underwriter's Laboratories too? They pretty much literally wrote the book on this.

I provided the links, if you chose to ignore them then post links where something other than:
S = extra-hard usage.
SJ = hard usage.

Yes, S is rated 600v, and SJ is rated 300v....I stated that in the beginning....but they also are the designators for differentiating between hard and extra-hard usage.

Assuming you work with portable cable, when you see some random cable lying about and want to know whether it's acceptable for its use, let's say extra-hard usage....how do you determine this? The only markings will be these letter designators, the mfg name, a listing agency, and the conductor count and size. It won't be marked "light/medium/heavy" as you originally stated, which means nothing in regard to code compliance or listing. It might, but not consistently, state hard usage or extra-hard usage. But it will be marked S or SJ. That will tell you it's listing approval.
 
Last edited:
I've seen both SO = Extra Hard Usage SJO = Hard Usage and the 'J' meaning 'Junior'; I never looked too deeply but I just assumed that 'Junior' was meant to mean 'the weaker version', in other words you had a definition for SO and then defined a weaker version of SO calling it SJO.

-Jon
 
winnie said:
I've seen both SO = Extra Hard Usage SJO = Hard Usage and the 'J' meaning 'Junior'; I never looked too deeply but I just assumed that 'Junior' was meant to mean 'the weaker version', in other words you had a definition for SO and then defined a weaker version of SO calling it SJO.

-Jon
Click to expand...

In reality the SO cord is thicker and more durable perhaps, but not by way of a "J" designation. missing 'J' makes it 600v rated, thus the conductor and jacket insulation is just thicker.

Can it be possible that the cord makers wanted a "extra hard usage" cord so all they did to go from SJO to SO was beef up the insulation and jacket, and the outcome was a 600v rated cord? Perhaps so, but that does not seem logical to me.

Craigv said:
So you want to argue with Underwriter's Laboratories too? They pretty much literally wrote the book on this.

I provided the links, if you chose to ignore them then post links where something other than:
S = extra-hard usage.
SJ = hard usage.

Yes, S is rated 600v, and SJ is rated 300v....I stated that in the beginning....but they also are the designators for differentiating between hard and extra-hard usage.

Assuming you work with portable cable, when you see some random cable lying about and want to know whether it's acceptable for its use, let's say extra-hard usage....how do you determine this? The only markings will be these letter designators, the mfg name, a listing agency, and the conductor count and size. It won't be marked "light/medium/heavy" as you originally stated, which means nothing in regard to code compliance or listing. It might, but not consistently, state hard usage or extra-hard usage. But it will be marked S or SJ. That will tell you it's listing approval.
Click to expand...
The 'S' has nothing to do with it, its all 'S' cord. It either has 'J' or it doesnt have 'J'.

I need 300v extra hard usage cord. or i need 600v hard usage cord. stuck with SO for both?

I have a 600v hard usage application, i see SJOOW on the floor, so that means "hard usage", i am good to go ??? your logic does not hold up.

and i did question it, how does anyone determined what "hard" or "extra hard" usage is? seems more logical to just use the voltage rating of the cord? does a stationary piece of gear running 415v need "extra hard usage" cord? no, it needs cord that is rated at or above 415v.
 
Last edited:
FionaZuppa said:
In reality the SO cord is thicker and more durable perhaps, but not by way of a "J" designation. missing 'J' makes it 600v rated, thus the conductor and jacket insulation is just thicker.
.


The 'S' has nothing to do with it, its all 'S' cord. It either has 'J' or it doesnt have 'J'.

I need 300v extra hard usage cord. or i need 600v hard usage cord. stuck with SO for both?

I have a 600v hard usage application, i see SJOOW on the floor, so that means "hard usage", i am good to go ??? your logic does not hold up.

and i did question it, how does anyone determined what "hard" or "extra hard" usage is? seems more logical to just use the voltage rating of the cord? does a stationary piece of gear running 415v need "extra hard usage" cord? no, it needs cord that is rated at or above 415v.
Click to expand...

A page ago you were claiming extra-hard usage was a "made up term" and implying that "light/med/heavy" were the correct terms to differentiate cords...because you saw it on one vendor website. You went as far as to sarcastically ask whether you "missed the definition in Article 100."

We have established that the terms hard usage and extra-hard are in common use by NEC, listing agencies, and the cable manufacturing industry.

See Table 400.4, where every SJ cable is rated 300v and is no higher than hard usage, and every SO cable is 600v and extra-hard usage. If this seems illogical or bothers you, take it up with NEC and the listing agencies...they created the designations and the code requirements. There's no mystery in how a thicker conductor insulator and jacket would result in both a higher voltage rating and more physical durability. Pretty basic.
 
Last edited:
FionaZuppa said:
Can it be possible that the cord makers wanted a "extra hard usage" cord so all they did to go from SJO to SO was beef up the insulation and jacket, and the outcome was a 600v rated cord? Perhaps so, but that does not seem logical to me.
Click to expand...
Have you ever actually held or worked with SO and SJ cables from the same manufacturer with the same conductor size and count? The thickness is literally all that's different. Same conductor insulation material. Same jacket material. Just more of both. Don't overthink it. Thicker material equals more strength and dielectric properties.
 
Craigv said:
A page ago you were claiming extra-hard usage was a "made up term" and implying that "light/med/heavy" were the correct terms to differentiate cords...because you saw it on one vendor website. You went as far as to sarcastically ask whether you "missed the definition in Article 100."

We have established that the terms hard usage and extra-hard are in common use by NEC, listing agencies, and the cable manufacturing industry.

See Table 400.4, where every SJ cable is rated 300v and is no higher than hard usage, and every SO cable is 600v and extra-hard usage. If this seems illogical or bothers you, take it up with NEC and the listing agencies...they created the designations and the code requirements. There's no mystery in how a thicker conductor insulator and jacket would result in both a higher voltage rating and more physical durability. Pretty basic.
Click to expand...

I noted that the cable vendor used "light/med/heavy" definition, not me.
I also noted that it appears the the others (cable makers) who use "hard" or "extra hard" descriptions do so because those are the words used in NEC, not the other way around.

And yes, I have used 300v and 600v S cord quite a bit.

Is there any measurable criteria that goes into the thickness of a jacket to make it "extra hard", or is my only comparison looking at SO vs SJ cord and seeing that SO is thicker?

Why are S cord jackets not 0.25"(min) in thickness for "extra hard use" ?
If I make SO and SJ do I just choose thickness at random (less dielectric strength for voltage rating on conductors) as long as SO is thicker than SJ so I can label them different but using the terms found in 400.4 ?

Insulation size is up to the vendor?
https://www.iewc.com/-/media/iewcglobal/files/resource-downloads/ul-cord-construction-ratings.pdf

notice nothing in this UL doc on cord specs say "hard use" or "extra hard use". page 17 gives cord specs for the type of labeling being used. it only mentions the words as back refrenced to NEC on page 29 of the doc. Those words are NEC words, not UL words.
see https://www.ul.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/WC_MG.pdf
 
Last edited:
FionaZuppa said:
I noted that the cable vendor used "light/med/heavy" definition, not me.
I also noted that it appears the the others (cable makers) who use "hard" or "extra hard" descriptions do so because those are the words used in NEC, not the other way around.

And yes, I have used 300v and 600v S cord quite a bit.

Is there any measurable criteria that goes into the thickness of a jacket to make it "extra hard", or is my only comparison looking at SO vs SJ cord and seeing that SO is thicker?

Why are S cord jackets not 0.25"(min) in thickness for "extra hard use" ?
If I make SO and SJ do I just choose thickness at random (less dielectric strength for voltage rating on conductors) as long as SO is thicker than SJ so I can label them different but using the terms found in 400.4 ?
Click to expand...

So the vendor uses "light/med/heavy", but not you.

You wrote:

"not sure i see where any SO or SJ cord type is "extra hard use". they have heavy/med/light designations based on jackets.

If you don't use heavy/med/light, or think it's correct terminology, and you obviously didn't use hard usage or extra-hard usage, because until last night it seems you never heard the term used in electrical work, and you say you have "used 300v and 600v S cord quite a bit", how did you refer to them and know which to spec for a particular use? You seem unfamiliar with Table 400.4, and given that mfgs and vendors all use NEC terminology, how would you order cable without using that terminology or knowing what voltage ratings and usages he letters mean?

And yes, you noted the vendors and manufacturers use the terminology used by NEC and listing agencies, but you certainly weren't acting as if it was legitimate, stating, "in other words, it's NEC verbiage and the vendors are just stealing it to say their cord stuff is compliant for that use, etc."
Re: your two closing questions. What is going on in your head that would make you ask if cable manufacturers "just choose thickness at random"??? Never read a UL testing specification? And why is a quarter inch jacket the magic number?

I really hope you're just trolling, because this has been incredibly disturbing coming from an engineer.
 
The O in SO stands for oil resistant.

SJ has 0.03” rubber insulation on the conductors and jacket. SO has same on conductors but 0.06” neoprene jacket.

This is for 16 gauge cord.
 
Russs57 said:
The O in SO stands for oil resistant.

SJ has 0.03” rubber insulation on the conductors and jacket. SO has same on conductors but 0.06” neoprene jacket.

This is for 16 gauge cord.
Click to expand...

Are you quoting a UL standard? If so what UL is it?
 
Craigv said:
So the vendor uses "light/med/heavy", but not you.

You wrote:

"not sure i see where any SO or SJ cord type is "extra hard use". they have heavy/med/light designations based on jackets.

If you don't use heavy/med/light, or think it's correct terminology, and you obviously didn't use hard usage or extra-hard usage, because until last night it seems you never heard the term used in electrical work, and you say you have "used 300v and 600v S cord quite a bit", how did you refer to them and know which to spec for a particular use? You seem unfamiliar with Table 400.4, and given that mfgs and vendors all use NEC terminology, how would you order cable without using that terminology or knowing what voltage ratings and usages he letters mean?

And yes, you noted the vendors and manufacturers use the terminology used by NEC and listing agencies, but you certainly weren't acting as if it was legitimate, stating, "in other words, it's NEC verbiage and the vendors are just stealing it to say their cord stuff is compliant for that use, etc."
Re: your two closing questions. What is going on in your head that would make you ask if cable manufacturers "just choose thickness at random"??? Never read a UL testing specification? And why is a quarter inch jacket the magic number?

I really hope you're just trolling, because this has been incredibly disturbing coming from an engineer.
Click to expand...

SV/SJ/S , light-duty/med-duty/heavy-duty

I cant find the UL listing that defines hard or extra hard usage. What about the "not hard" usage that some put on SV cord?

All of the cable makers say "approved for extra hard usage per NEC" or "can be used for hard usage per NEC 400"

No marking on a UL cord is a designation of "hard usage" or "extra hard usage". J means 300v, no J means 600v, period.

NEC then took those constructions of spec'd cord and added words to them. 600v is just bulkier because of the higher voltage rating.

Notice it says "per NEC" and not "per UL"
s-cord.jpg


s-cord2.jpg
 
Last edited:
It is NEC who labels SV (vacuum cleaner), SJ, and S as not hard usage, hard usage, and extra hard usage.

Same thing with THHN. NEC terminology, not UL.
 
Russs57 said:
It is NEC who labels SV (vacuum cleaner), SJ, and S as not hard usage, hard usage, and extra hard usage.

Same thing with THHN. NEC terminology, not UL.
Click to expand...

??
i agree, NEC verbiage for S cord use.

but THHN, THWN-2 etc, is marked on the wire and are also spec's of the wire insulation. are you saying that THWN-2 and the like are NEC words and the wire makers make the wire to that spec? where do i find the actual specification for wire in water in NEC?

the S cord words (hard, not hard, extra super-duper hard) are not markings on S cord.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top