Is There An Electrician in the House?

Page 7 of 8  

Doug Miller wrote:

Your assuming again. Were did I say that the method I was suggesting was to cord and plug connect the heating plant or the well pump? All that is needed is a deep four square box, a switch by single receptacle raised cover, a flanged inlet; and a single or double poled, double throw switch.
--
Tom Horne

Well we aren\'t no thin blue heroes and yet we aren\'t no blackguards to.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jim Redelfs wrote:

Amen.
--
The e-mail address in our reply-to line is reversed in an attempt to
minimize spam. Our true address is of the form snipped-for-privacy@prodigy.net.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
CJT wrote:

Another thought since it's been mentioned is furnaces and well pumps. I'm not aware of any code requirement that they be hardwired. You can easily and inexpensively make them cord connected devices with dedicated outlets, allowing you to readily connect them via extension cords to your generator.
Pete C.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

My furnace (burns gas so it doesn't need a lot of electricity) is cord connected. The outlet in there is the only thing on that circuit, although it's used for the doorbell transformer also.
--
3 days until the winter solstice celebration

Mark Lloyd
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I WAS going to do just that when we replaced our furnace last February. However, since the low temp during the outage was -8F, we were in a bit of a hurry to get it back up-and-running, so I "hard-wired" it as before.
I suspect that, during a protracted outage, I could easily and quickly attach a plug to the input and be warm again.
--
:)
JR

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

Furnaces have always been required to be hardwired per (2002) NEC 422.16(A), and have a disconnect at the furnace if it is not within sight of the distribution panel that supplies the circuit. Also, on old furnaces that have the old combo fuse/switches, the fuse _is_ the overload protection for the motor. Installing a cord cap and flexible cord on that equipment would leave the furnace motor without overload protection when it is plugged into the generator.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
volts500 wrote:

WTF are you talking about? I have the 2002 NEC in front of me, open to article 422.16(a) and it in no way indicates a furnace needs to be hardwired.
Pete C.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Pete C. wrote:

Is a furnace an electrical appliance? (422.1)
Are furnaces FREQUENTLY interchanged?
Are the fastening means and mechanical connections for furnaces specifically designed to permit _ready_ removal for maintinance and repair?
If you can answer the last two questions yes, then a flexible cord is permitted on a furnace, even then it would have to come from the factory with a flexible cord. Same reason for well pumps, water heaters, etc.
Better yet, show me the code cite that says that they _don't_ have to be hardwired.
Quoted from 2002 NEC:
"422.16 Flexible Cords. (A) General. Flexible cord shall be permitted (1) for the connection of appliances to facilitate their FREQUENT interchange or to prevent transmission of noise or vibration or (2) to facilitate the removal or disconnection of appliances that are fastened in place, where the fastening means and mechanical connections are SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED to permit READY removal for maintenance or repair AND the appliance is intended or identified for flexible cord connection."
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
volts500 wrote:

Read: "or to prevent transmission of noise or vibration". That's all the justification I need. And yes, any installation I have anything to do with has plumbing unions and whatnot to facilitate easy removal as well.
Pete C.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Pete C. wrote:

It's not like you're wiring a primary crusher and its' accessory motors in a mine. THAT would be a reason to use flexible cord. This thread is already pervaded with misinformation and gerry rigging, don't add to it.
Why are millions of furnaces hard-wired? Why does Article 424 (Fixed Electric Space-Heating Equipment), specifically, 424.19 Disconnecting Means, make absolutely _no_ mention of using a flexible cord and cord cap as a disconnecting means while other Articles in the NEC do allow a flexible cord with a cord cap to be a disconnect for certain equipment? Could it be because wiring a fixed space heating equipment with flexible cord and a cord cap isn't even a consideration in the eyes of the NEC?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
volts500 wrote:

How do you explain article 424.3(a) which specifically references branch circuits supplying *outlets* for fixed electric space heating equipment?
Pete C.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Pete C. wrote:

Outlets are not necessarily receptacles. The NEC defines an outlet in Article 100 as: "A point on the wiring system at which current is taken to supply utilization equipment."
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Why not pull that breaker and install a tandem breaker? Or move one wire to another breaker? That way the two circuits each have their own breaker.

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

Having 2 wires on a single breaker is a code violation unless the breaker is rated for 2 wires - some SquardD ones are. It is not "highly dangerous" and is very easy to fix by pigtailing as about everyone has said.
I have not heard of lubricating breakers. I very much doubt is possible to lubricate breakers. If it is possible, it is probably a bad idea. The whole thing smells like a scam.
A good site for general information on aluminum wire is: http://www.inspect-ny.com/aluminum / Much of the information is derived from the Consumer Product Safety Commission, which did a lot of work on aluminum wiring. IMHO the best link is: http://www.inspect-ny.com/aluminum/alreduce.htm This is a paper writen by an engineer who did extensive testing of aluminum connections for the CPSC, and includes many options for what to do with aluminum wiring.
-- bud--
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
isnt pigtailing in the panel also a code violation? I thought you had to either put each home run or branch circuit on its on breaker OR have it made up in a J-box intead of taking to the panel and pigtailing
>Having 2 wires on a single breaker is a code violation unless the

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

No.
Lots of people think that -- but nobody's been able to show me where the Code says that...
--
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
Doug Miller wrote:

Right, the panel is a listed enclosure where you can make splices. It's more of a best practices thing since the panel tends to get crowded anyway and having splices and pigtails in the panel just makes it that much messier.
Pete C.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Pete C. wrote:

I believe it is covered by NEC 312.8 - "Enclosures for switches or overcurrent devices". Splices are allowed if the fill at any cross-section is 75% or less.
Wires running through the enclosure are allowed if the fill at any cross-section is 40% or less. An example would be if the panel ran out of breakers, existing breakers could be removed to add a breaker for a subpanel and the wires for the original breakers could be run through the panel to the new subpanel.
-- bud--
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 19:38:59 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@unisys.com (Arthur Shapiro) wrote:

I agree that this is much ado about nothing. I would make a note of the company that your electrician works for and not invite them back.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Arthur Shapiro wrote:

The molded-case circuit breakers used for residential applications are _sealed_, one cannot lubricate them. The only thing that one can do is exercise them every 6 to 12 months or so, by turning them off and on several times. If any are binding, they should be replaced because they may not trip if/when called upon to perform under fault conditions. Large circuit breakers, such as is found in large commercial, industrial switchgear or utility substations are very complex mechanisms and do require periodic maintainance and lubrication by highly skilled factory approved people in a shop environment......_not_ by some electrician out in the field.
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.