On Feb 24, 9:25 am, email@example.com (Doug Miller) wrote:
Yeah, funny how he comes up with his version of what code says, but
then wants us to go find it. I'd also like to see where in the code
it says if I simply choose to plug a chest freezer into an existing
outlet in my garage, I have to bring the entire garage up to current
I especially liked this part too:
"> Right, until some part within the refrigerator or new chest
So his approach is to run additional higher current circuits to
support failing appliances that are drawing twice the load they
should, instead of replacing the appliance. That doesn't sound
like a very safe or economical solution to me. If a chest freezer
is failing and somehow using 2X the electricity it should use, a new
one would pay for itself in a few years. I just replaced a 23 year
old refrigerator with a larger unit that uses about $95 a year less in
electricity. You can buy a chest freezer for what, $400? And there
is obvious environmental benefit as well.
Bottom line is the best place to start is to determine what all the
loads are pulling on that circuit. Then a proper determination can
On Feb 24, 9:47 am, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
LOL... Or you could pay attention to your "failing appliances" and
repair the $20 or $30 timer or relay that is causing it to use more
But I guess that is too much fine detail for a guy follows the letter
of the NEC code without applying any common sense...
Do you totally replace a light fixture when the bulb burns out ???
Bottom line ??? Got too much crap drawing more than 1,440 watts
being fed from a circuit that traverses the entire house from the
location of the feed to the point where the load is being drawn...
Sounds like the refrigerator might need repair or some new power
tools are too powerful given the wattage of the constant load from
Don't need a code encyclopedia or a slide rule to figure that one
You *really* should stop talking about the electrical code, since it's clear
that you have at best a sketchy understanding of what it requires.
The "80% rule" applies only to continuous loads. A continuous load is
explicitly defined by the Code as maximum current for 3 hours or more, and
this clearly does not apply to a refrigerator, or a freezer, or a garage door
opener. (If you want to know what a continous load looks like, think
resistance heating, or air conditioners.)
There aren't any code issues with that circuit. The problem is simply that the
OP is plugging too much stuff into it. Sometimes, that stuff draws too much
current, and the breaker trips. That's the way it's *supposed* to work.
The OP needs a second circuit, but that's only because he's trying to plug in
more stuff than the existing circuit is capable of handling -- not because of
any "code issues" that you imagine to exist.
The circuit is fine. The problem is that the OP has too much crap plugged into
Some of this is covered nicely by Doug.
Essentially all the "code requirements" are nonexistent (what a surprise).
Cite - using the NEC.
The probability of 2 devices starting at exactly the same time is nil.
And the delay built into any residential circuit breaker would likely
withstand the momentary overload.
It rather easy to have too much running overload or starting current on
top of running current from another unit.
Sorry - my Ouija board still isn't giving me an answer.
I really don't think much wiring in a house uses the next conductor size.
I'm sure that happens all the time......
Nicely covered by trader. No doubt everyone at this newsgroup would want
adequate circuit capacity so that refrigerator could continue to draw at
least twice the power it should.
I guess you don't have much useful common sense.
Maybe your (alleged) inspector would. Not likely in the real world.
How insightful that trader included a new circuit as one of his possible
Some of the people who ask questions are actually half-way intelligent.
(Some of the people answering aren't.)
If the OP followed your advice to add a circuit in "a full metal
conduit" that is buried, and the metal disappeared from rust, his kid
could electrocuted from the lack of a ground on a grounded outlet.
1 - I answered only you, not others
2 - I *never* cited the NEC
3 - you cited imaginary code requirements I challenged your hallucinations
4 - your posts have been largely based on imaginary NEC requirements.
my post (and trader's) were based on good thoughtful advice
Is there a "NEC envy" kinda like "penis envy" - you seem to have it.
It might help if you responses were not dogmatic
I thought trader's multiple choice answer was entirely reasonable.
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.