"subject to physical damage"

[Zapdaddy85]

Why are we allowing the term "subject to physical damage" to be openly interpreted? The picture included is a service entrance wire run bare, externally. It should have been protected by 230.50 section B subsections 1 OR 2. But this was allowed to pass inspection run at what looks to be about 4 get high. How is this not "subject to physical damage"? My 3 year old kid could touch that bare wire with her hands, without a step stool. Which surely means that it is"subject to physical damage". And the sun alone is going to beat the hell out the sheath around that wire causing the wire to be only more exposed at some point. That doesn't include the rest of the weather that will take it's tole on the sheath of that wire. And the worst part is that someone thought it was okay to pass an inspection the first time. And this is in the states, where we have some of the most stringent rules in electrical for all the safety reasons in the world... But this apparently wasn't considered "subject to damage" upon inspection. Please, allow the plumber to prove you wrong.

 

[petersonra]

suppose it had been run in PVC pipe. that would not have prevented the plumber from drilling into it.

 

[roger]

I hate that the plumber or anyone gets hurt but, he should have investigated where he was drilling to see what he might have run into. As Bob said, if it was PVC or a PVC jbox he would have penetrated it too.

Roger

 

[Sierrasparky]

If it was a metal box or EMT what would have stopped it.

Nothing.

The plumber would have thought it was a nail.

 

[K8MHZ]

"My 3 year old kid could touch that bare wire with her hands, without a step stool."

What bare wire?

 

[readydave8]

if had been inside wall would have been protected from physical damage but results could have been similiar

 

[jaggedben]

Go become a inspector, then you can call that 'subject to physical damage' and people will have to listen to you. I have no problem with that. But if you're seriously proposing that the code not leave it up to interpretation then I challenge you to provide a concise definition that applies fairly and evenly across all real world situations.

 

[sameguy]

Installation looks good to me, must be x away from windows etc.. plumber drilling without looking rhymes with dumber.

 

[tom baker]

And the sun alone is going to beat the hell out the sheath around that wire causing the wire to be only more exposed at some point. That doesn't include the rest of the weather that will take it's tole on the sheath of that wire. . View attachment 20860

There are millions of services installed with SE cable, that have been in service for many years.
Also have been many attempts to change the definition of physical damage. I would suggest you go for a code change in the 2023 NEC

 

[infinity]

Why are we allowing the term "subject to physical damage" to be openly interpreted? The picture included is a service entrance wire run bare, externally. It should have been protected by 230.50 section B subsections 1 OR 2. But this was allowed to pass inspection run at what looks to be about 4 get high. How is this not "subject to physical damage"? My 3 year old kid could touch that bare wire with her hands, without a step stool. Which surely means that it is"subject to physical damage". And the sun alone is going to beat the hell out the sheath around that wire causing the wire to be only more exposed at some point. That doesn't include the rest of the weather that will take it's tole on the sheath of that wire. And the worst part is that someone thought it was okay to pass an inspection the first time. And this is in the states, where we have some of the most stringent rules in electrical for all the safety reasons in the world... But this apparently wasn't considered "subject to damage" upon inspection. Please, allow the plumber to prove you wrong.

You could install 100 services around here just like in the photo and not one would be considered subject to physical damage. My observations, the wire is not bare, it is not subject to physical damage, it's rated to be outdoors in the sunlight and weather and will last for decades.

 

[K8MHZ]

You could install 100 services around here just like in the photo and not one would be considered subject to physical damage. My observations, the wire is not bare, it is not subject to physical damage, it's rated to be outdoors in the sunlight and weather and will last for decades.

A couple years ago I replaced the SE cable feeding my meter with pipe and wire. It had been up for over 50 years. I took it down because the insulation on the conductors, old RHW stuff, was falling off where it was exposed and connected to the POCO drop. The outside sheath was still intact and tough as a 'gator's back.

 

[rcarroll]

"Subject to Physical Damage" IMO if you take that extremely literally, nothing would get built.

 

[infinity]

A couple years ago I replaced the SE cable feeding my meter with pipe and wire. It had been up for over 50 years. I took it down because the insulation on the conductors, old RHW stuff, was falling off where it was exposed and connected to the POCO drop. The outside sheath was still intact and tough as a 'gator's back.

And the materials used in that 50 year old cable were probably inferior to the materials used in modern SE cable which might last even longer. I've seen rusted EMT on the outside of buildings that probably won't last 50 years.

 

[mopowr steve]

And the materials used in that 50 year old cable were probably inferior to the materials used in modern SE cable which might last even longer. I've seen rusted EMT on the outside of buildings that probably won't last 50 years.

Actually the 50 year old SE cable with a rubberized jacket was some great stuff (can’t remember what brand it was) (almost hate to remove it) but it’s jacket far outlasts anything I’ve seen the last 30 years.

 

[tom baker]

SE cable is a chapter 3 wiring method...
Again make a code propsal. Otherwise your complaints are not heard.

And a comment. In WA we are not allowed to use SE cable, its in our state code rules (don't know why). So for us its pipe and wire. Standard is a 200 amp service as our power rates are fairly low, a 200 amp panel is $80.
Now when I go back east I see SE cable everywhere, looks odd. Eastners come out here and see pipe and wire - wow, whats with you sparkies?

 

[hbiss]

Here in NY you see a lot of both SE and pipe. SE is the least cost alternative but pipe-usually PVC- is a better job at a slightly higher cost, depending on the installation. Sometimes the only way to replace an old service is with SE.

But then you see epic fails like this every once and a while- this is a brand new house.





-Hal

 

[shortcircuit2]

If those SE conductors were in Rigid Steel conduit, the wood bit would not have penetrated.

Glad the plumber is OK. He should have looked outside before drilling. He will next time.

 

[infinity]

Here in NY you see a lot of both SE and pipe. SE is the least cost alternative but pipe-usually PVC- is a better job at a slightly higher cost, depending on the installation. Sometimes the only way to replace an old service is with SE.

But then you see epic fails like this every once and a while- this is a brand new house.

View attachment 20870



-Hal

Why is this an epic fail? In many places this is code compliant.

 

[romex jockey]

Most of us do our installs with potential damage in mind , most inspectors view it all that way too

Every now and then someone or something comes along we could not have figured on

I'm off to a genny install in sch 40 & liquidtight today

I THINK i've got this , butcha never know when a meteor shower could occur ~RJ~

 

[qcroanoke]

Why is this an epic fail? In many places this is code compliant.

I agree. unless he is citing 230-9(A) and I don't think the applies to the service entrance conductors IMO.