What say you? 210.52D

What say you? 210.52D

  • Yes

    Votes: 3 9.7%

  • No

    Votes: 28 90.3%
  • Total voters
    31
Status
Not open for further replies.
e57 said:
Funny because the above wording is very like what he was using to justify "C" to "D" because the vanity is a counter.... And yes I had both the '99 that the job permit is under, and the '05 CEC open next to each other in the side door of my van - me saying separate - he saying together.
But like I said, he arrived to the job pre-tweeked by a silly Architect trying to go over my head attempting to get something approved that is clearly outside the code. Placing the outlet in cabinets and drawers.... So he wasn't having any of what I was telling him.
Click to expand...

So what was the final call ? We know your thinking is not flawed (this time :D ) but I know how the SFO inspectors can be ( I'll say no more, so as to keep from being deleted again :smile: ) But if you try and go over his head you may as well retire from working in that jurisdiction. Wrong but not the battle to try and win at all cost. It may actually be a good lesson for the architech to learn ( don't be trying to throw your weight around when you have none.)
 
Last edited:
acrwc10 said:
on an island I like it.
Click to expand...
What about a bath vanity?

As for SF inspectors I agree. As for the district I'm in - he may move by trim out next year - one of the nice things about switching them up to different areas of the city. If one becomes subborn the next might not be, but on the other hand you can get the next worse - or next better - depending on rotation. Anyway - he wasn't having any of it - I'll re-visit another day...
 
e57 said:
Back on topic, what does everyone think of a wire-mold strip under the counter edge?
Click to expand...


The required receptacle shall be at least one WALL receptacle with 3' of the basin. The receptacle shall be located on a wall or partition that is adjacent to the basin or basin counter top.
 
wbalsam1 said:
I'm only trying (very hard at this point) to maintain the idea that if a branch circuit is assigned a maximum ocpd of 20 amperes, a point on this circuit where current is taken is not protected at 15, but rather 20 amps. Do you agree?
Click to expand...
Sorry, but I do not agree. That is simply because the function of the OCPD has nothing to do with protecting the outlet/receptacle/receptacle outlet/point on the system/whatever you want to call it. The breaker has only one function, and that is to protect the conductor.
 
charlie b said:

The breaker has only one function, and that is to protect the conductor.
Click to expand...

I can not agree, IMO the listing agencies and the NEC consider the OCPD to be a part of utilization equipment protection.
 
stickboy1375 said:
The required receptacle shall be at least one WALL receptacle with 3' of the basin. The receptacle shall be located on a wall or partition that is adjacent to the basin or basin counter top.
Click to expand...
What is a "wall" receptacle? IMO wiremold mounted on a wall are "wall" mounted receptacles. And since the code elaborates to expand to "partition" that could easily be the face of cabinetry below and adjacent to the basin. Depending on if mounted facing out or down it would also add the safety of a drip loop, if mounted facing down.... :grin: :grin: :grin:
 
e57 said:
What is a "wall" receptacle? IMO wiremold mounted on a wall are "wall" mounted receptacles. And since the code elaborates to expand to "partition" that could easily be the face of cabinetry below and adjacent to the basin. Depending on if mounted facing out or down it would also add the safety of a drip loop, if mounted facing down.... :grin: :grin: :grin:
Click to expand...

Dont make this harder than it has to be. :D
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by wbalsam1
I'm only trying (very hard at this point) to maintain the idea that if a branch circuit is assigned a maximum ocpd of 20 amperes, a point on this circuit where current is taken is not protected at 15, but rather 20 amps. Do you agree?

charlie b said:
Sorry, but I do not agree. That is simply because the function of the OCPD has nothing to do with protecting the outlet/receptacle/receptacle outlet/point on the system/whatever you want to call it. The breaker has only one function, and that is to protect the conductor.
Click to expand...

If I'm reading your interpretation correctly, you're stating that the OCPD is functioning only to protect the conductor, not the point on the circuit where current is taken. There is a conductor at this point you speak of.
My understanding of an OCPD- take for example a circuit breaker- is to open a circuit automatically at a predetermined overcurrent.

If you will, imagine the BC conductor extending to the 'point at which current is taken' as being a conductor, albeit the conductor within the receptacle outlet, and then the conductors of a lamp cord to the lamp itself, and this whole series of conductors in different configurations from OCPD to receptacle outlet to bulb. Now, say it's protected at 20 amperes.

No where along this circuit is there an outlet being protected at 15 amperes. Therefore it is said that a 20 ampere outlet is not protected at 15 amperes.

Thanks in advance for your patience. :smile:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top