Garage Electrical Install Questions

Page 2 of 2  
Where in the NEC, does it specify only 7 items per circuit, in a dwelling?

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It's on that page they left out... :-)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Where's that in the NEC?

You missed something important in the original post -- this part:

If the OP is going to have a garage evolving into a workshop, it's gonna be the one that's already inside the house, not the new one he's asking about wiring.
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
jJim McLaughlin wrote:

My reasons for using 2x2s rather than 2x4s was to minimize the end width of the wall between the basement and the garage. Since the doorway is currently mounted in the 8" foundation wall, adding 2x4s in a conventional manner would result in a roughly 12" width. Starts getting excessive in my opinion. If someone was to finish the inside wall as well (I plan on leaving this part of the basement unfinished), using 2x4s there as well would make the wall width 16". Starts to feel like a small hallway!
In the end, cost is not even factoring in the equation (well, may a little, but definitely not the driver).
By biggest problem with the 2x2s was protecting the romex. But, as I mentioned in the initial posting, I could run the romed flush against the masonry wall, and just notch the back side of the 2x2s. This would put the romex far enough back to meet the edge distance requirement. But, would that be legal?
Cheers, Kevin
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Kevin Dressel wrote:

IMHO, by the time you notch the 2 x 2 to clear the Romex you might as well not have any wood.
If you ever want to sheet rock out that wall, the 2" x 2" isn't practical.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
jJim McLaughlin wrote:

I was thinking about this today some more. If I go with the subpanel idea (and the more I think about it, the more I like it...if for no other reason than convenience), I may have to go the 2x4 approach anyway. I'll just have to come up with a way to make the doorway look less hallway-ish... :->
Thanks, Kevin
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yeah, so when your garage door opener blows the circuit, you'll have no lights.
That's really planning ahead!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
kjpro @ usenet.com wrote:

Really?
How often do garage door openers blow a circuit?
But if one does blow, you use a drop light from the wall outlets and to do a repar or a disconnect from the ighting circui, and you actualy have power from the wall outets to run tools that might be necessay to do a repair.
You put the openers on the lighing circuit because they are low current draws with only intermuittant use, unlike the freezer, the bench tools, the full size tools, etc., which eventually end up in the garage.
It is planning ahead.
But you are such an antagonistic, obnoxious jerk, that never ocurred to you, did it.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

All it takes is once, Asshole!

Disconnect it, you still have no lighting... without using extension cords, Asshole!

Low current doesn't account for the possibility of a tripped circuit!
What a complete, idiot!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

There's a good chance that the inspector will allow you to run bare romex along the underside of the trusses. _Especially_ if you intend to drywall the ceiling. In my case, I had 1x3 lath installed for the ceiling. The inspector said I could run ordinary romex perpendicular to the trusses stapled to the truss bottoms. I only needed to put a chunk of lath on top of the existing lath whenever the wire crossed a line of lath (when going parallel to the trusses) so that the lath face-to-wire distance was > 1 1/4"). The existing lath was deemed to be adequate mechanical protection from being hit from below even before the drywall is installed (if ever ;-).

I think you'd be better off using at _least_ 2x3. Especially if you want to insulate.

That's probably best.

Drilling trusses is a no-no. Best to find an alternate.

One is enough, make sure it's more than big enough.
[It can get stickier if it was for more than a foot or so.]
Note that all wall penetrations have to be well sealed. Including cable holes.

Electrical code says 12" minimum separation when run parallel, and cross only at 90% angles for low voltage wiring. You're not likely to see an interference problem even if you do violate that _except_ possibly with the sensors. You might be able to minimize that if each pair of wires is twisted. Better to avoid it.
--
Chris Lewis,

Age and Treachery will Triumph over Youth and Skill
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.