Results 1 to 32 of 32

Thread: 1982 Panel

  1. #1
    mathew stouffer's Avatar
    mathew stouffer Guest

    Default 1982 Panel

    Just curious what you say about aging panels. Condo built in 1985, some components original some newer.

    Similar Threads:
    ***IMPORTANT*** You Need To Register To View Images ***IMPORTANT*** You Need To Register To View Images
    Inspection Referral SOC

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ormond Beach, Florida
    Posts
    26,248

    Default Re: 1982 Panel

    Quote Originally Posted by mathew stouffer View Post
    some components original some newer.

    What components are newer? Other than breakers.

    That panel needs to be sealed around to the drywall. That is a fire waiting to spread for sure.

    Two 3 wire NM cables in a knock out with no clamp (those are only allowed one per clamp any way).

    Do you have other photos with the cover off?

    Basically, unless it is a know problematic panel, I always just advised them that, like everything else, things have a life expectancy and need replacing at times.

    If a known problematic panel (FPE, Zinsco) then I recommended replacement.

    Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
    Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  3. #3
    mathew stouffer's Avatar
    mathew stouffer Guest

    Default Re: 1982 Panel

    The rest of the panel looked pretty good. Got the clamp and poor seal. Just curious about the life expectancy of breakers, that was about it. It was a GE panel.


  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Southern Vancouver Island
    Posts
    4,546

    Default Re: 1982 Panel

    "Older system with modifications."


  5. #5
    John Steinke's Avatar
    John Steinke Guest

    Default Re: 1982 Panel

    1985, even 1982, hardly constitutes 'aging.' Heck, the paint is hardly dry!

    Otherwise, there is no 'standard' as to the life expectancy of any electrical components. I was recently in a 1957 house that was in pristine shape - even the attic lacked the usual dust accumulation.

    If you're going to let age influence your thinking, let it point you in more productive directions. For example, look for signs of alteration or abuse.


  6. #6
    Nick J. Alati's Avatar
    Nick J. Alati Guest

    Default Re: 1982 Panel

    Confused with your question?
    Is it the age of the panel, if so, at what point would you consider a panel old. Would you go with 2005 NEC and say that any panel with out ARC Fault is old, where would you draw the line? I look for defects and if the Electrical Panel has a Main Breaker or less than than 6 troughs, has Copper Branch wire and is not one of the panels that has had a recall then I say "The Electrical Panel Located ____ has ___ Amp service and is in Acceptable condition. If not then I explain what was of concern to me and recomend evualation by a Electrical Contractor. I'm a Generalest not a specialiest!


  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ormond Beach, Florida
    Posts
    26,248

    Default Re: 1982 Panel

    Quote Originally Posted by John Steinke View Post
    I was recently in a 1957 house that was in pristine shape - even the attic lacked the usual dust accumulation.

    So you are saying that they had not done any updating, not even adding insulation?

    Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
    Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ormond Beach, Florida
    Posts
    26,248

    Default Re: 1982 Panel

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick J. Altai View Post
    I'm a Generalest not a specialiest!

    But a "Generalist" can only be a good generalist by knowing "specialist" knowledge and information to the point that makes the specialists knowledge into a generalist.

    Without specialists knowledge, one is *not even* a generalist.

    Take your family doctor, the General Practitioner. They also went through medical school and residency and they too also have a lot of the specialists knowledge to that point ... as ALL home inspectors should have.

    As a "generalist" you are, should be, specialist knowledge trained to recognize problem and understand how to write them up so the "specialist" can come in after you and make repairs.

    Without that specialists knowledge and training as needed, one is simply a bumbling DIY who is DIFO (Doing It For Others).

    Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
    Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Manchester, Vermont
    Posts
    298

    Thumbs up Re: 1982 Panel

    June 4, 2009

    expect where I see two 3-wire cable enter the panel, each should be con-
    nected to the panel by their own romex connector.

    1982 isn't not old for circuit breakers.

    1982 is old old is one breaker is been mis-used,

    I would want to make should that the right size wire is connected the
    correct ampere rated circuit breaker. Also check for loose wires.

    One thing for sure, some none qualified person ran wires into it.

    Give all wire connections a good look over. Robert


  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fuquay Varina, NC
    Posts
    1,072

    Default Re: 1982 Panel

    I'm going to play Jerry's role on this
    romex connector
    Correct terminology is Strain relief connectors or cable connector. Romex is a name brand of a cable. Romex connector may be used by the masses but we must educate them on correct terminology for the benefit of our profession.

    How did I do! For give me Jerry for I have sinned.......

    Mike Schulz License 393
    Affordable Home Inspections
    www.houseinspections.com

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ormond Beach, Florida
    Posts
    26,248

    Default Re: 1982 Panel

    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Schulz View Post
    I'm going to play Jerry's role on this

    Correct terminology is Strain relief connectors or cable connector. Romex is a name brand of a cable. Romex connector may be used by the masses but we must educate them on correct terminology for the benefit of our profession.

    How did I do! For give me Jerry for I have sinned.......
    Mike,

    Cool!

    You have noticed (or should have noticed ) that I do not get on people for saying things like that as there is no mistaking what it is or does.

    Your reference, though, I am sure, is to my continued correction of the use of "subpanel" and "sub panel" which not only do not exist (Romex does exist ) but because those who use those terms instead "service equipment" and "panels" basically also always try to bond the neutral at a "main" panel and though it is some how different from the "sub" panel they would never bond the neutral to ground at. That is because "ALL" "panels" are wired the same - the neutral is not bonded to ground at them. The neutral is only bonded to ground at "service equipment".




    Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
    Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Manchester, Vermont
    Posts
    298

    Smile Re: 1982 Panel

    Hi Mike,

    I new to this form, but I fiind humor in your need to offer a different name,
    to the slang term; "romex connector". perhaps two screw non-metallic
    sheated cable connector could also be used.

    Maybe Jerry can help here, but in my many yours in the business, I have
    never read, or heard spoken that the connector in question was a "strain re-relief connector". Is it because NM-B CABLE is require to be staple,
    attach, fasten, within 12" of a 4"Sq, box with 1/2" K.O's.

    Here some humer, in my location, it sometimes called a; "3/8 romex con-
    nector". But if you ask 1/2" you get one big enough for SE-U 6-2.

    I leave you now, Robert


  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Southern Vancouver Island
    Posts
    4,546

    Default Re: 1982 Panel

    Cable clamp.


  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ormond Beach, Florida
    Posts
    26,248

    Default Re: 1982 Panel

    Quote Originally Posted by Robert S. Mattison View Post
    Maybe Jerry can help here, but in my many yours in the business, I have
    never read, or heard spoken that the connector in question was a "strain re-relief connector". Is it because NM-B CABLE is require to be staple,
    attach, fasten, within 12" of a 4"Sq, box with 1/2" K.O's.
    Robert,

    It's intent, the reason for using it, is that it is a "clamp" which is attached to the box and holds the NM cable in place against being pulled on, for whatever reasons it might be pulled on.

    Thus, while it is called a "cable clamp" it is a "strain relief".

    Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
    Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  15. #15
    Joseph C. Miller's Avatar
    Joseph C. Miller Guest

    Default Re: 1982 Panel

    I'm surprised no one has questioned those splices. Do those conductors terminate within the enclosure?


  16. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Manchester, Vermont
    Posts
    298

    Cool Re: 1982 Panel

    June 5, 2009

    Thanks Jerry for your recent post.

    Now I like to share something with you.

    I wonder if you think that connector in question is poorly design, if its
    designers intent on it being used as a, "Stain Relief Connector".

    I have found then over thighen, causing shorting between conductors,
    Or so loose that the NM-B cable would easly slide out from beneath its
    clamp.

    I believe something with a rubber gland that when tightened against the
    plastic sheated cable it unlikely to rupture/damage the insulation.

    I have always thought of it as a metal bushing with a clamp.

    But after a lot thinking outside the box, your right what else could it be.
    I leave you now. Robert


  17. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ormond Beach, Florida
    Posts
    26,248

    Default Re: 1982 Panel

    Quote Originally Posted by Joseph C. Miller View Post
    I'm surprised no one has questioned those splices. Do those conductors terminate within the enclosure?
    I made a presumption that they terminated in the enclosure, however, from that photo showing only 1/4 of the panel we do not know for sure.

    The connect to the back white NM cable left of center. They then go down on the left and disappear behind the breakers.

    However, I do like the wording of your question as it makes me think you understand what that section of the code says.

    Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
    Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ormond Beach, Florida
    Posts
    26,248

    Default Re: 1982 Panel

    Quote Originally Posted by Robert S. Mattison View Post
    I wonder if you think that connector in question is poorly design, if its
    designers intent on it being used as a, "Stain Relief Connector".

    I have found then over thighen, causing shorting between conductors,
    Or so loose that the NM-B cable would easly slide out from beneath its
    clamp.
    Robert,

    That comes down to the installers experience and qualifications ... or lack thereof ... ANYTHING can be screwed up and installed wrong. One could even over tighten a cable clamp with a rubber bushing and crush through the rubber bushing and the cable sheath, leading to the same thing. They are supposed to be tightened enough to restrain the cable, not to play Tarzan swinging on the grape vines from the clamp.

    Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
    Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  19. #19
    John Steinke's Avatar
    John Steinke Guest

    Default Re: 1982 Panel

    Yes, Jerry, that's exactly what I am saying. Apart from replacing cabinet coors and kitchen appliances (with similar ones), I did not find any changes / improvements in the house.

    Even the 'added' laundry equipment in the garage was done in such a way as to suggest the addition was done at the time of the original construction.


  20. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Colorado Front Range
    Posts
    601

    Default Re: 1982 Panel

    The fitting is called a CABLE CONNECTOR by its' MANUFACTURERS. Its' sole purposes in life are to provide a bushing for knockout hole and to keep the cable from being pushed out of the box. A cable clamp is an integral part of a box that is used to keep the cable from being pushed out of the box. They are listed for how ever many the manufacturer has them tested for. Some have been listed for 2 - 3 wire cables or for 3 or 4 - 2 wire cables in the past. I don't know if they still make them or not as I don't use them. However, you don't know by looking at the box side what the fitting is listed for because the difference is on the outside of the box.

    A strain relief is a fitting that is designed to support the weight of a cable that hangs from a box, either by itself or with something attached. Cables that use a strain relief are listed to support weight. The fitting will also have the weight it is designed to support as part of its' listing

    The NEC has requirements for supporting cables within 12" inches of a box in most instances and that is hardly a distance requiring strain relief. That single gang plastic boxes don't require a clamp ought to be a clue about "strain relief" issues.

    No wonder some of you guys have trouble getting lists of items fixed. Nobody knows what the heck you're talking about. Most of the stuff in the trades has been called a particular name for years and it's not going to change because Jerry or one of you other guys doesn't like it. Sub panel is an example. An electrician knows what it means-doesn't matter if the term isn't used in the NEC or not. You aren't educating anybody with this stuff, you're pissing them off.

    Last edited by Bill Kriegh; 06-05-2009 at 08:06 AM.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ormond Beach, Florida
    Posts
    26,248

    Default Re: 1982 Panel

    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Kriegh View Post
    The fitting is called a CABLE CONNECTOR by its' MANUFACTURERS. Its' sole purposes in life are to provide a bushing for knockout hole and to keep the cable from being pushed out of the box.
    Let's see what you just said "Its' sole purposes" ... huh??? It either has one "sole purpose" or it has "more than one purpose", but it does not have two "sole purposes".

    Yes, you are correct in that its PURPOSES ARE: 1) to provide a bushing for the knock out; AND, 2) to keep the cable from being pushed out or pulled out of the box, thus it is for "strain relief". I do believe that has already been said, so I'm not sure why you got your shorts in a wedgie about it.

    A strain relief is a fitting that is designed to support the weight of a cable that hangs from a box
    There are many designs, styles, and uses for "strain reliefs". Their purpose is not only do support the weight of a cable which hangs from a box.

    If that is what you think, I think you need to call UL and put on an education seminar for them so they know what you think you know.

    The strain relief clamp,yes, that is what they are, on cord caps are "strain reliefs" and cord caps are not intended to have a "cable that hangs from" it.

    No wonder some of you guys have trouble getting lists of items fixed. Nobody knows what the heck you're talking about.
    You usually make sense in your information, but here you are really way off base.

    Most of the stuff in the trades has been called a particular name for years and it's not going to change because Jerry or one of you other guys doesn't like it. Sub panel is an example. An electrician knows what it means-doesn't matter if the term isn't used in the NEC or not. You aren't educating anybody with this stuff, you're pissing them off.
    We are educating inspectors here, and by using the term "panel" for all panels is dead on correct.

    If that pisses off some electricians or they do not know what a "panel" is, simply put, then they should not be in the business. If "you" are one of "they" then so be it.

    The reason for using the correct terminology, especially in the "subpanel" "sub panel" aspect, is to help teach home inspectors (and those electrician who apparently do not know what a "panel" is) on the proper understanding of what is going on, what is wired where, and how.

    Seems to me that YOU have a problem in understanding something as basic as what a 'strain relief" is, do YOU also have a problem understanding what a "panel" is? If YOU do, I am sure that there are many here who would be willing to help you understand it.

    Cheers.

    Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
    Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Manchester, Vermont
    Posts
    298

    Smile Re: 1982 Panel

    June 5, 2009

    Hi Jerry,

    just got in and read your 6:36 A.M. post that as answer my post.

    A big THANKS, and as always your answers are helping become a better
    inspector.

    Got to leave now - Robert


  23. #23
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fuquay Varina, NC
    Posts
    1,072

    Default Re: 1982 Panel

    No wonder some of you guys have trouble getting lists of items fixed. Nobody knows what the heck you're talking about.
    Somebody had to much caffeine this morning and needs a big Hug.

    Bill think about the wire in the panel. If it had no strain relief clamps wires accidentally tugged on can stress the connection at the breakers. Opps sorry I meant Over current device.
    No matter what term you use just knowing the proper terminology will let us discuss things with the trades on thier level. Not the layman words we normally would use.

    Mike Schulz License 393
    Affordable Home Inspections
    www.houseinspections.com

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    On The Mason-Dixon Line
    Posts
    577

    Default Re: 1982 Panel

    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Schulz View Post
    Somebody had to much caffeine this morning and needs a big Hug.

    Bill think about the wire in the panel. If it had no strain relief clamps wires accidentally tugged on can stress the connection at the breakers. Opps sorry I meant Over current device.
    No matter what term you use just knowing the proper terminology will let us discuss things with the trades on thier level. Not the layman words we normally would use.
    The correct and proper name is: Cable Connectors. Even the UL white book lists them as
    Nonmetallic Cable Connectors ( PXJV) They are not strain reliefs ,they may help in strain relief but they are not strain reliefs.
    Cable Connectors are for just that, Connecting Cables to a box, Just like a conduit connector is for connecting conduit to a box
    As far as providing "strain relief" to provide the cable from being pulled away from the circuit breaker - what about the Arlington Industries " black button" cable connectors?
    Clamps are inside the boxes like what was stated earlier.


    So yes You should use the proper terminology - Cable Connector

    (A true "strain relief" is called a "cord grip' also by UL white book)


  25. #25
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ormond Beach, Florida
    Posts
    26,248

    Default Re: 1982 Panel

    Quote Originally Posted by ken horak View Post
    (A true "strain relief" is called a "cord grip' also by UL white book)
    Only kinda sorta but not entirely .

    "strain reliefs" are not shown in the industry term index, however, "cord grip attachments" are ("cord grips" are not).

    "Cord grip attachments" states (see "Outlet Bushings And Fittings" (QCRV))

    "Outlet Bushings And Fittings" states:
    This category covers supports for outlet and flush device boxes; bushings for use in metal studs; fittings for use in or on outlet and flush device boxes, such as knockout reducers, seals and insulating inserts, and cord grip attachments; insulating gaskets used behind cover plates for flush-mounted wiring devices to stop drafts; pulling grips, strain-relief grips and support grips; locknuts for conduit; service entrance heads for rigid conduit or electrical metallic tubing; cable riser supports; and bushings for use on the ends of rigid or flexible conduit, or electrical metallic tubing, where a change to open wiring is made.



    Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
    Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fuquay Varina, NC
    Posts
    1,072

    Default Re: 1982 Panel

    I like the word Cable connector but that would be confusing to the client It sounds like you are trying to connect two cables together. Now cable clamp sounds better and to throw the fear factor into them use strain relief cable clamps.

    Mike Schulz License 393
    Affordable Home Inspections
    www.houseinspections.com

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ormond Beach, Florida
    Posts
    26,248

    Default Re: 1982 Panel

    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Schulz View Post
    I like the word Cable connector but that would be confusing to the client It sounds like you are trying to connect two cables together. Now cable clamp sounds better and to throw the fear factor into them use strain relief cable clamps.
    "Cable clamp" it is then.

    Besides, the UL White Book says that is okay.

    (underlining and bold are mine)
    "The Listing Mark for these products includes the UL symbol (as illustrated in the Introduction of this Directory) together with the word ‘‘LISTED,’’ a control number, and the product name ‘‘Nonmetallic Sheathed Cable Connector’’ (or ‘‘N.M. Cable Connector’’), or other appropriate product name as shown in the individual Listings."

    If the manufacturer uses "cable clamp" in their listing, then "cable clamp" is it.

    Now, are you going to start reading all of the manufacturers listing information for that term, or, are you just going to make the presumption that one of them may use that term?

    Seems some people have such an aversion to using "panel" that they want to distract the issue by throwing in everything else, including the kitchen sink as it were. There is a very good and educational reason for using "panel" and "service equipment" and those people just cannot get that through their heads.

    Their issues with themselves just need to be dealt with by themselves. This is not a "group therapy" session for them. But, if the price were right, I am sure Brian H. would not have a problem with them footing that bill.


    Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
    Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Manchester, Vermont
    Posts
    298

    Smile Re: 1982 Panel

    June 6, 2009

    At last the connector question is answer or is it?

    Moving on, to the question of electrical panel in question.

    I ask or has it be written that this panel in question appears to be a sub-panel?


  29. #29
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ormond Beach, Florida
    Posts
    26,248

    Default Re: 1982 Panel

    Quote Originally Posted by Robert S. Mattison View Post
    Moving on, to the question of electrical panel in question.

    I ask or has it be written that this panel in question appears to be a sub-panel?
    Robert,

    No, it is not a sub-panel.

    It is not located in a submarine, therefore it is not a sub panel.

    It is located in a house, so it is just a "panel", or "distribution panel", or "remote panel" or "electrical panel", or even "load center".

    Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
    Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Manchester, Vermont
    Posts
    298

    Wink Re: 1982 Panel

    June 6, 2009

    Hi Jerry,

    Thanks again for correct my incorrect useag** 'IT NOT A SUB-PANEL"

    But in my world, and working electricians, you get on board with their
    slang, or you don't have clue has to what their talking about. That is
    why I listen to every word you post, on this Site****

    So let me put my foot in mouth** once again.

    1) do you refer the panel with the service disconnect breaker in it, as the
    Service Panel?

    2) do you refer the any panel after the, "Service Panel" as the "Main Lug
    only panel. Which should be label and if label, what label would you
    used, (MLP 1, OR MLP A) with additional panel label, (MLP 2, OR
    MLP B) or (LC 1 or LC A) with additional panel label, (LC 2, or LC B)

    I find slang terms use all the time. Try this one, go to supply house get me some 1/2" greenfield. When I first heard that, I didn't have a clue as to what the they were talking about.

    At the supply house they always know, 12-2/ground romex is in fact 12-2/
    ground non-metallic sheathed cable. (term reference from "Trade Service"
    publication.)

    As always your use of humor helps get your point across.

    Got to go. Robert

    quote: "I was once blind but now I see".


  31. #31
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ormond Beach, Florida
    Posts
    26,248

    Default Re: 1982 Panel

    Quote Originally Posted by Robert S. Mattison View Post
    1) do you refer the panel with the service disconnect breaker in it, as the Service Panel?
    It is "service equipment", one could call it the "service panel" but why confuse things when it is the "service equipment", and, if it is the only panel in the house, it is also "the electrical panel" ... which just happens to also be "service equipment".

    2) do you refer the any panel after the, "Service Panel" as the "Main Lug only panel. Which should be label and if label, what label would you used, (MLP 1, OR MLP A) with additional panel label, (MLP 2, OR MLP B) or (LC 1 or LC A) with additional panel label, (LC 2, or LC B)
    You have lost me there. It is has main lugs only and no main disconnect, is cannot be the "service panel" as it is not the "service equipment".

    Just further evidence that we should be keeping it simple: "service equipment" and "panels", or "electrical panels" if you feel a need to separate "electrical" panels from some other type of panel.

    If it is "service equipment" call it "service equipment", and if it is not service equipment, then it is a "panel".

    To further complicate matters, but only slightly, many areas install "service equipment" with panels in the same enclosure and which are "part of" the service equipment. One could call that a "service panel", but from the discussion above I see where you might use that term for a panel which is not service equipment, which brings us back to "keep it simple" and it is either "service equipment" (panel or no panel) or it is not service equipment which means it is simply a "panel".

    Then, of course, one could get fancy and call them "load centers", distribution panels", etc.

    I state the location of all panels, i.e., "garage", "hall", "laundry room", upstairs hall", "garage, left panel", "garage center panel", "garage right panel". That way my client, and the electrician, and myself for later, knows that it is a "panel" and knows where that panel is located, and which panel it is if there is more than one panel located there.

    I've had installation where I had a "left", "left center", "center", "right center" and "right" panels, along with "top right" panel. I just describe what I see as its location.

    Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
    Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  32. #32
    John Steinke's Avatar
    John Steinke Guest

    Default Re: 1982 Panel

    There's a bit too much debate about unknowable matters here, regarding strain relief.

    Every means of attaching a cable to a box is required to accomplish two things: protect the cable from abrasion, and provide strain relief.

    The difficulty arises in that there are different strain relief tests for different purposes, and you have no way of telling which test was used on any particular connector.

    The two main tests differ only in the amount of force applied to the cable. IIRC, the amounts of force are 35 pounds and 90 pounds. That is, the connector is installed 'pointing down,' and a weight of that size is attached to the cable. The connector is expected to hold the cable for a certain period of time (15 minutes IIRC).

    It's quite possible for a connection to fail if there isn't enough 'free cable' inside the box.

    It's also quite possible for two entirely different connectors, listed for entirely different uses, to appear nearly identical in the field.

    At some point, you simply have to trust to fate, as you have no way of gathering the necessary information.


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •