modified extension cord

[Jerome W. Young]

I think I know the answer to this already, but i want to hear it from everyone else as well. What is a technical way to describe the problem with cutting an extension cord and using it as a service wire for a dishwasher? Wire sizing etc...

THANKS!

Jerome

This was a renovation on an $850 ,000 condo. GO FIGURE

[James Duffin]

NEC 422.16 (b) (2) says this.....



(2) Built-in Dishwashers and Trash Compactors. Built-in
dishwashers and trash compactors shall be permitted to be
cord-and-plug connected with a flexible cord identified as
suitable for the purpose in the installation instructions of
the appliance manufacturer where all of the following conditions
are met.
(1) The flexible cord shall be terminated with a groundingtype
attachment plug.

Exception: A listed dishwasher or trash compactor distinctly
marked to identify it as protected by a system of double insulation,
or its equivalent, shall not be required to be terminated
with a grounding-type attachment plug.

(2) The length of the cord shall be 0.9 m to 1.2 m (3 ft to
4 ft) measured from the face of the attachment plug to
the plane of the rear of the appliance.
(3) Receptacles shall be located to avoid physical damage
to the flexible cord.
(4) The receptacle shall be located in the space occupied
by the appliance or adjacent thereto.
(5) The receptacle shall be accessible

[Jerome W. Young]

"flexible cord identified as
suitable for the purpose in the installation instructions of
the appliance manufacturer"

Herein lies my question. Is an extension cord suitable? It was grounded and on a dedicated circuit.

[Joseph P. Hagarty]

[B][LEFT]

NEC 422.16 (b) (2) says this.....



Does the Installation meet the Conditions noted above?

[John Steinke]

There is nothing, in either code, nor any standard or trade practice that I've encountered, that would in any way infer that it was, in any way, wrong to use a round orange cord, rather than the flat grey one you usually see attached to a dryer.
Nor is there any requirement that the plug be a molded-on angle plug, rather than a big fat round one.
Finally, it is nowhere written that the 'manufacturer' of anything must be someone other than the final user.

Let's look at the cord in question. One might be able to infer a code requirement that it be 'hard use' (SJ) or 'extra hard use' (S) type. It has to be rated for at least 250 volts, and be of sufficient size for the current drawn by the appliance. The plug SHOULD be appropriate to the receptacle, and it's nice if they conform to NEMA patterns. Yet, there are perfectly acceptable plugs out there that do not match NEMA patterns.

The code may limit the length of the cord .... this is one area where I often disagree with the NEC, and might rely upon the NEC's general provision that virtually anything may be waived by the AHJ. For example, placing the receptacle where it can be easily reached, or having a cord long enough to allow for easy access to the receptacle when you pull the appliance out, can often mean using a cord longer than the code allows. I see some 'wiggle room' there. I'd rather see a seven foot cord on an appliance, than a 3 ft cord combined with a 25 ft extension cord!

Then there is the more important, nay, most important part: how is the cord attached to the appliance. If you pull on the cord, is that tug felt where the conductors are connected to their terminals? I'd look for a proper strain relieving fitting, one that relieved such forces, as well as protected the cord from sharp edges as it leaves the appliance.

Finally, there is the 'obvious' to consider: Is the appliance part of the deal? It simply would not do to raise a fuss over the dryer ... when the dryer has a future in the movers' van :D

[John Steinke]

Oh ... since you did mention 'dishwasher' .... I'd specifically let that one pass. UL statements on the issue are quite convoluted, with far too many factors that you are in no position to evaluate. It's very possible that UL did specifically consider, and allow, the use of flexible cord and plug connections for that dishwasher. Yet, to get a definitive answer on that question would be a real challenge, even for the very people who obtained the approval in the first place.

[James Duffin]

One thing to keep in mind in that you can't run flexible cords through a wall or partition. This is probably why the cord has to be short.

[Jerry Peck]

What is a technical way to describe the problem with cutting an extension cord and using it ...




NEC 422.16 (b) (2) says this.....




(2) Built-in Dishwashers and Trash Compactors. Built-in
dishwashers and trash compactors shall be permitted to be
cord-and-plug connected with a flexible cord identified as

suitable for the purpose ...



There is nothing, in either code, nor any standard or trade practice that I've encountered, that would in any way infer that it was, in any way, wrong to use a round orange cord, rather than the flat grey one you usually see attached to a dryer.
Nor is there any requirement that the plug be a molded-on angle plug, rather than a big fat round one.

James gave the closest answer to being correct.

John's answer was mostly incorrect.

The key to the above is Jerome's statement: " ... cutting an extension cord and using it ... ".

Once you cut the plug off a cord and plug set, that cord and plug set is no longer UL listed or labeled, also, it is now being used outside it's UL listing and labeling (the listing and labeling it had), finally ...

From the 2008 NEC. (bold and underlining are mine)
- 110.3 Examination, Identification, Installation, and Use of Equipment.
- - (B) Installation and Use. Listed or labeled equipment shall be installed and used in accordance with any instructions included in the listing or labeling.

NO cord and plug set, nor even a cord set designed without a plug to be connected to an appliance (like a dishwasher) is allowed to be used in place of a permanent wiring method.

[James Duffin]

I normally get a 6' replacement cord for a drill and use that for a dishwasher if it is to be cord connected. These come with a molded male plug and bare wires on the other end. Have to cut off a couple of feet though o make it legal.

[Jerry Peck]

James,

You can buy listed and labeled "appliance cords" made that same way ... "These come with a molded male plug and bare wires on the other end.", no need to cut anything off.

[James Duffin]

I'll check at Lowe's the next time I am there...

[Rick Hurst]

Extension cords taken literally.

rick

[Jerry Peck]

"litterally" ;)

Well, that is quite a "litter" of them. :D

[John Steinke]

Well, let's see ....

UL lists the cord.

UL lists the plugs for placing on the cords.

Put them together, as intended.... sure, the assembly is not UL listed - but that's a distinction without a difference. UL certainly has no problem with connecting the cord to the cable. That is exactly the circumstance for which the plug was evaluated. There is absolutely no code, or listing, issue with your assembling something, using materials as intended, in a manner that simulates a manufactured product.

To try to twist words and say otherwise would lead us to conclude that the plugs can never be used, for anything, because the specific 'assembly' is not listed. That's an insane extension of "logic."

There might be a problem with a home-made cord .... but to find that, one needs to dig deeper than surface appearances.

As for cords in place of permanent wiring .... cords are accepted where movement is an issue. Either movement for cleaning and servicing .... or due to vibration .... qualify.

Then there is the issue of passing the cord through a 'wall or partition.' I have no worries about a dishwasher cord passing through a suitably bushed hole in the cabinet side, a hole large enough for the plug to pass through.
Why? primarily because the code appears to both require a short cord, as well as require the disconnecting means to be accessible. I defy anyone to comply with both requirements when a dishwasher is mounted in a cabinet, under a counter. Either the cord has to be long enough to allow you to pull the unit out far enough that you can reach into the cavity ... or the cord has to pass through the cabinetry into a section you can access.
I would say that we have competing code principles here ...and, IMO, the overriding principle is that you be able to disconnect the appliance. IMO, any code requirements as to "how" are far less important than the "what" and the "why."

That's why the NEC starts off by stating the AHJ can deviate from the text, as he sees fit.

[Jerry Peck]

Well, let's see ....

UL lists the cord.

UL lists the plugs for placing on the cords.

Put them together, as intended.... sure, the assembly is not UL listed - but that's a distinction without a difference. UL certainly has no problem with connecting the cord to the cable. That is exactly the circumstance for which the plug was evaluated. There is absolutely no code, or listing, issue with your assembling something, using materials as intended, in a manner that simulates a manufactured product.

To try to twist words and say otherwise would lead us to conclude that the plugs can never be used, for anything, because the specific 'assembly' is not listed. That's an insane extension of "logic."

Well, let's see ....

UL lists the cord.

UL lists the plugs for placing on the cords.

UL lists cord and plug sets ... oh, wait, THAT is what we were discussing, isn't it? Yep. UL listed and labeled cord and plug sets.

"To try to twist words" around to fit what you want to post, yeah, I agree "That's an insane extension of "logic." ".

So, why do you do it?