weather PROOF recptical

Status
Not open for further replies.
roger3829 said:
Without the twistlock style end, these are quite common with people that have RV's
Click to expand...

Boat owners use them also. Mostly to keep a battery charger going. Problem is they then turn on the XYZ and ABC and and and. Then the 15-amp male plug warms up or the receptacle it's plugged into. Very easy to overload a circuit using this device, and an attorney could have a field day with it.
 
480sparky said:
Why? The 15-a receptacle should not have a 30a OCPD on it.
Click to expand...

Customer: "Breaker was bad (kept tripping) so I put a larger one in". (or larger fuse, or penny behind the fuse, etc.).

To keep some lights on or a battery charger going it serves the purpose. It's just, well............ some people just don't understand what's going on around them and it's up to the "professional" to keep them from damaging their equipment. At least that's what the attorney says.

Just ask McDonalds, $4,000,000 for a hot cup of coffee!
 
I use one but is not twistlock style for my travel trailer. Turn off all breakers inside except for the battery charger. You know I never did look to see if it was ul listed. Got it at Wallyworld, oh dear.
 
mgentile said:
Actually, our (Hubbell) Pin & Sleeve devices are classified as "Watertight" per IEC 60309-1 and have IP67 Suitability.
Click to expand...

Yes, and are those the type of devices the OP was asking about or the kind the NEC requires?:)

You know what, forget it. I was trying to get folks to learn to use the correct terminology but the heck with it. Obviously I am just an idiot for trying. :roll:
 
iwire said:
You know what, forget it. I was trying to get folks to learn to use the correct terminology but the heck with it. Obviously I am just an idiot for trying. :roll:
Click to expand...

My wife calls me a jerk, a$$hole, etc. etc. when I try to get people to use correct terminology. I wonder if I could just get her to call me an idiot instead, :grin:
 
iwire said:
Yes, and are those the type of devices the OP was asking about or the kind the NEC requires?:)

You know what, forget it. I was trying to get folks to learn to use the correct terminology but the heck with it. Obviously I am just an idiot for trying. :roll:
Click to expand...
They are resistant to proof.
 
iwire said:
Yes, and are those the type of devices the OP was asking about or the kind the NEC requires?:)

You know what, forget it. I was trying to get folks to learn to use the correct terminology but the heck with it. Obviously I am just an idiot for trying. :roll:
Click to expand...

I don't understand the issue here:

according to the NEC definition in article 100, the receptacles you are talking about are weatherproof, right ? so why wouldn't you use the correct NEC term "weatherproof" ?
 
nakulak said:
I don't understand the issue here:

according to the NEC definition in article 100, the receptacles you are talking about are weatherproof, right ? so why wouldn't you use the correct NEC term "weatherproof" ?
Click to expand...
see previous :
iwire said:
Yes, and if you go to any of those manufactures sites you will find them called and listed as 'resistant' not proof. :)
Click to expand...
 
TOOL_5150 said:
Not my point.... :roll:

~Matt
Click to expand...

Sorry Matt, working around marinas I see a lot of power crap. People trying to take 2 30-amp receptacles (being fed from different phases) going through a combining pig tail (something like you showed) to produce a "50-amp" receptacle.

I hear "it's 2 30-amps feeding 1 50-amp (a 125/250-volt receptacle), what's the problem?".

I just get worked up about that stuff.
 
mivey said:
see previous :
Click to expand...

so in every other case, you guys want to use NEC definitions and NEC terminology, but in this case, just because manufacturers are calling them weather resistant, you have decided that the manufacturer terminology is correct ? I don't see the logic.
 
nakulak said:
so in every other case, you guys want to use NEC definitions and NEC terminology, but in this case, just because manufacturers are calling them weather resistant, you have decided that the manufacturer terminology is correct ? I don't see the logic.
Click to expand...
It just seemed to be the reason iwire took issue with "proof". It doesn't matter to me one way or the other.
 
nakulak said:
so in every other case, you guys want to use NEC definitions and NEC terminology, but in this case, just because manufacturers are calling them weather resistant, you have decided that the manufacturer terminology is correct ? I don't see the logic.
Click to expand...

No I am using NEC terminology, just because a definition for weather proof exists in Article 100 does not mean it is the correct one to use for all NEC sections.

What terminology does the NEC use in 406.8(A) and 406.8(B)(1)?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top