ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down

Author Topic: Smiley-face receptacles  (Read 15272 times)

Joseph D. Macry

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 425
  • Austin TX
Re: Smiley-face receptacles
« Reply #10 on: May 30, 2014, 02:48:44 PM »

Most current electrical codes now call for the ground plug to be up...at least in commercial operations.

After having seen so many commercial construction sites with the ground installed up, I asked the builder of our new home why they weren't so in the house. He said, "You're thinking of commercial code. If you want, you can have an electrician flip them over after we're gone."
Logged
Joseph Macry,
Austin, TX

Kevin Graf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 344
Re: Smiley-face receptacles
« Reply #11 on: May 30, 2014, 06:12:40 PM »

Orientation of wall receptacles is not in the NEC code book, so it must be a local rule.

As a matter of fact over at the NEC code forum, receptacle orientation is a forbidden subject.
Logged
Speedskater

Jeff Bankston

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2568
Re: Smiley-face receptacles
« Reply #12 on: May 30, 2014, 10:53:10 PM »

Orientation of wall receptacles is not in the NEC code book, so it must be a local rule.

As a matter of fact over at the NEC code forum, receptacle orientation is a forbidden subject.
it was a california state code that was recinded several years ago. check out my reply on page 1 as to why the california building and departments enacted it. a city , state , etc and enact codes that go above and beyond the nec but they cannot do less the the nec. the nec is the minimun , not the maximum. example > conduit is required to be strapped/supported every 10 feet BUT a city/state can enact a code the requires conduit to be strapped/supported every 5 feet but they cannot enact a code that allows conduit to be supported every 11 feet.
Logged

Jonathan Johnson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3209
  • Southwest Washington (state, not DC)
Re: Smiley-face receptacles
« Reply #13 on: May 31, 2014, 12:49:54 AM »

it was a california state code that was recinded several years ago. check out my reply on page 1 as to why the california building and departments enacted it. a city , state , etc and enact codes that go above and beyond the nec but they cannot do less the the nec. the nec is the minimun , not the maximum. example > conduit is required to be strapped/supported every 10 feet BUT a city/state can enact a code the requires conduit to be strapped/supported every 5 feet but they cannot enact a code that allows conduit to be supported every 11 feet.

Well, I must disagree. The NEC is a standard established by a non-governmental agency and, to my knowledge, it has not been adopted or mandated in federal legislation or regulation (except possibly for military installations). If a state or local regulatory agency chooses to adopt most of the NEC with modifications, they are free to do so. Those modification can include overriding portions of the Code, allowing greater minimums than the NFPA version of the Code allows. However, the state may require that any subordinate authorities consider the Code with the state's mods to be a minimum.

The purpose of my original post wasn't to drag a debate over the "best" orientation here, but to point out that the "best" orientation is often determined by the actual use rather than someone's idea of "safety."
« Last Edit: May 31, 2014, 12:52:04 AM by Jonathan Johnson »
Logged
Stop confusing the issue with facts and logic!

Jeff Bankston

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2568
Re: Smiley-face receptacles
« Reply #14 on: May 31, 2014, 03:12:08 AM »

Well, I must disagree. The NEC is a standard established by a non-governmental agency and, to my knowledge, it has not been adopted or mandated in federal legislation or regulation (except possibly for military installations). If a state or local regulatory agency chooses to adopt most of the NEC with modifications, they are free to do so. Those modification can include overriding portions of the Code, allowing greater minimums than the NFPA version of the Code allows. However, the state may require that any subordinate authorities consider the Code with the state's mods to be a minimum.

The purpose of my original post wasn't to drag a debate over the "best" orientation here, but to point out that the "best" orientation is often determined by the actual use rather than someone's idea of "safety."
i really dont have a clue as to what you just said or why you quoted my post. i will tell that i have ben a commercial electrical for over 20 years, 15 as a "working forman" and over 8 as a certified journeyman. as for the state requiring more than the minimum we must do what they say or the electrical inspector will not do a final sign off the business will not be allowed to be occupied.
Logged

Mike Sokol

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3361
  • Lead instructor for the No~Shock~Zone
    • No~Shock~Zone Electrical Safety
Re: Smiley-face receptacles
« Reply #15 on: May 31, 2014, 06:53:32 AM »

i really dont have a clue as to what you just said or why you quoted my post. i will tell that i have ben a commercial electrical for over 20 years, 15 as a "working forman" and over 8 as a certified journeyman. as for the state requiring more than the minimum we must do what they say or the electrical inspector will not do a final sign off the business will not be allowed to be occupied.

Everybody please play nice. As is often the case, there is some truth on both sides of the argument. As I understand it, NFPA 70 (the National Electrical Code) does NOT have the power of federal law, much like each state can set its own speed limits and the feds can do little about it. I know for a fact that each state and county will pick when (and if) it will use the latest code book edition. And each state/county/city/inspector can choose if they will comply with everything in a particular edition of the code. For instance, there's a lot of dissension about requiring AFCI breakers in new builds. Now I'm not going to start up that particular debate in this thread (even though it would be interesting), but I know that some southern states have declared "states rights" and don't require their inspectors to require AFCI's. The reason they give is that the $300 additional cost of requiring AFCI breakers on a typical $100,000 build would create a hardship for the developers.

Also, as I've noted in a few other threads, there's a lot of code difference in each state and municipality. That's what makes ground loop chasing so difficult at times. You really don't know what you've got until you start looking at the details. That's one of the things I really like about this forum, you guys can offer examples of code in many states and even countries.

So now I want you all to kiss and make up or buy each other a beer (or whatever floats your boat).     
« Last Edit: May 31, 2014, 11:28:33 AM by Mike Sokol »
Logged

Jeff Bankston

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2568
Re: Smiley-face receptacles
« Reply #16 on: May 31, 2014, 11:00:46 PM »

Everybody please play nice. As is often the case, there is some truth on both sides of the argument. As I understand it, NFPA 70 (the National Electrical Code) does NOT have the power of federal law, much like each state can set its own speed limits and the feds can do little about it. I know for a fact that each state and county will pick when (and if) it will use the latest code book edition. And each state/county/city/inspector can choose if they will comply with everything in a particular edition of the code. For instance, there's a lot of dissension about requiring AFCI breakers in new builds. Now I'm not going to start up that particular debate in this thread (even though it would be interesting), but I know that some southern states have declared "states rights" and don't require their inspectors to require AFCI's. The reason they give is that the $300 additional cost of requiring AFCI breakers on a typical $100,000 build would create a hardship for the developers.

Also, as I've noted in a few other threads, there's a lot of code difference in each state and municipality. That's what makes ground loop chasing so difficult at times. You really don't know what you've got until you start looking at the details. That's one of the things I really like about this forum, you guys can offer examples of code in many states and even countries.

So now I want you all to kiss and make up or buy each other a beer (or whatever floats your boat).   
Exelent reply Mike. I had an inspector once that was making up his own code that went way beyond what was required. when he wanted me to add a 3rd ground wire i just looked at him with a "are you serious" look on my non smiley face at which point he told me i probably had enough service ground rods etc and signed off on the service. your not suppose to run overhead bare wire power either but the power company does it and the bare wires are usually 13,000+ volts depending on where you live.
Logged

Jonathan Johnson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3209
  • Southwest Washington (state, not DC)
Re: Smiley-face receptacles
« Reply #17 on: June 01, 2014, 01:08:01 AM »

So now I want you all to kiss and make up or buy each other a beer (or whatever floats your boat).   

Well, I don't drink and I kiss only my wife, so will a virtual handshake do?
Logged
Stop confusing the issue with facts and logic!

Dennis Wiggins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 857
Re: Smiley-face receptacles
« Reply #18 on: June 02, 2014, 09:43:55 AM »

From a practical view, I have only seen (US) right angle plugs where the cable exits nearest the ground pin.  To have the receptacle mounted with the ground pin on top would be very unstable.

Compare this to Steve's picture of a UK plug, where the cable exits between the L/N.

-Dennis
« Last Edit: June 02, 2014, 09:48:56 AM by Dennis Wiggins »
Logged

Mike Sokol

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3361
  • Lead instructor for the No~Shock~Zone
    • No~Shock~Zone Electrical Safety
Re: Smiley-face receptacles
« Reply #19 on: June 02, 2014, 11:42:49 AM »

From a practical view, I have only seen (US) right angle plugs where the cable exits nearest the ground pin.  To have the receptacle mounted with the ground pin on top would be very unstable.

The US plugs go both ways.

ProSoundWeb Community

Re: Smiley-face receptacles
« Reply #19 on: June 02, 2014, 11:42:49 AM »


Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up
 



Site Hosted By Ashdown Technologies, Inc.

Page created in 0.04 seconds with 24 queries.