Thread: A few questions

1. If insulation is non combustible material than why can't it be against the furnace, wh, or fireplace flues?
2. Can someone explain how to recognize a updraft or a downdraft evaporator coil?
3. Do all condensate drain lines require a trap? I need a code reference.
4. Should condensate drain lines be insulated.
5. Can you place black tape on white wires to 220 volt breakers to identify them. Or mark them with a ink marker?
6. Is everyone ready for the weekend?

I appreciate youse guys for the help.

Mama

Similar Threads:

• Toilet questions - - no kidding!
• Gas line questions
• Roofing questions
• Chimney questions
• Ask the right questions - Columbus Ledger-Enquirer

Originally Posted by MaMa Mount

1. If insulation is non combustible material than why can't it be against the furnace, wh, or fireplace flues?
2. Can someone explain how to recognize a updraft or a downdraft evaporator coil?
3. Do all condensate drain lines require a trap? I need a code reference.
4. Should condensate drain lines be insulated.
5. Can you place black tape on white wires to 220 volt breakers to identify them. Or mark them with a ink marker?
6. Is everyone ready for the weekend?

I appreciate youse guys for the help.

Mama

I will help on #3 & #4:

Most A/C manufacturers require a P-Trap (on primary condensate line) within a short distance from the EVAP coil as well as insulation on the primary condensate line for the first few feet. Manufacturer's installation guidelines trumps code.

Originally Posted by MaMa Mount

1) If insulation is non combustible material than why can't it be against the furnace, wh, or fireplace flues?

Because it creates a cold spot (or is it a hot spot, I can never remember) on the vent itself, restricting the required and intended air flow around the vent, which creates problems with the vent, its longevity, and its operation.

2) Can someone explain how to recognize a updraft or a downdraft evaporator coil?

The easiest way is to see where the filter is and that is the return air returning to the coil, with the supply going out. If the filter/return is on the bottom, the setup if for updraft/upflow.

3) Do all condensate drain lines require a trap? I need a code reference.

Yes, per manufacturers' installation instructions, and not just the primary condensate line, but the secondary condensate line as well.

From the 2006 IRC. (bold and underlining are mine)
- M1307.1 General.Installation of appliances shall conform to the conditions of their listing and label and the manufacturer’s installation instructions. The manufacturer’s operating and installation instructions shall remain attached to the appliance.

4) Should condensate drain lines be insulated.

All primary condensate lines should be insulated, and all secondary condensate lines should be insulated, drain lines from auxiliary drain pans need not be insulated.

5) Can you place black tape on white wires to 220 volt breakers to identify them. Or mark them with a ink marker?

Yes, you *can* use black tape, *NO* you *SHOULD NOT* use black tape.

The code states "permanently re-identified by painting" then adds "or other effective means", even "permanent" marker fade and are therefore not "other effective means".

Piggybacking on the comments of others,

Regarding the first question, Insulation "rings" or pockets in contact with the vent/chimney and the housing around the appliance create drafting problems also - the "thermal break" is very important for a number of reasons regarding exhaust venting, chimneys, "flues", "chambers", "heat exhangers", etc., reasons include drafting, air, heat transfer/separation, stack effect, and others. Cold spots create opportunity for collection of condensation, creosote, etc. Hot spots or rings prevent proper exhaust in addition to the other issues already discussed.

About condensate drains, depending on the appliance/equipment and circumstances there are different "rules". Some examples, some appliances cannot or should not be draining into the sanitary system, most should not be directly plumbed and require a gap or break with indirect waste piping methods (trapped and vented), to prevent among other things contamination of the appliance/system being "drained".

For example, for an AC coil, not only if a trap is required but the sizing of the trap can be dependant on the FAN as well. Here is a link to an informative article which approaches the subject on AC condensate and discusses some of the differences relative to IPC/IMC and/or UPC based code adoption/ammendments: http://www.psdmagazine.com/ASPE_memb...CodeUpdate.pdf

I hope you find it helpful. Unclear if you are referring to draining for an AC coil pan on a rooftop in a dry climate, located elsewhere, or a condensing boiler, furnace, condensing (not vented) electric clothes dryer, etc. Or the total developed length or the horizontal length: an example of a short length "drain" entirely vertical or with less than 2 feet horizontal may NOT require a trap (see example in the article linked above).

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

All primary condensate lines should be insulated, and all secondary condensate lines should be insulated, drain lines from auxiliary drain pans need not be insulated.

I'd like to know what the basis for that statement is besides your stubborn opinion of how a particular installation in your own geographical location can be done only one way (and I'm not even sure what the author intended it to mean regarding the subject question, and location). I would appreciate it if you would clarify upon what basis you have made such a statement.

(point being, it ain't always an indoor a/c only airhandler in an unconditioned S. Florida attic, and there is more than one way to do even that, despite assumptions to the contrary - IT DEPENDS).

Originally Posted by H.G. Watson, Sr.

I'd like to know what ...

... is going on.

I am sure you would.

Sorry old chap, but you have no idea and I am not going to explain it all to you.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Yes, you *can* use black tape, *NO* you *SHOULD NOT* use black tape.

The code states "permanently re-identified by painting" then adds "or other effective means", even "permanent" marker fade and are therefore not "other effective means".

You MAY utilize ANY EFFECTIVE MEANS. Despite differing OPINION as to WHAT an EFFECTIVE MEANS actually IS, AHJs, UL Field evaulations, Listed use of insulation tape it IS permitted to use phase tape or insulating tape of the intended indentifying color.

Lets look at the otherside of these Peck edicts. Field modifying with a solvent, paint, marker on the otherhand could compromise the Listing of the product you are re-identifying, then there is the "issue" of having the "paint" flaking off, adversely effecting the rating, deteriorating the insulation, temperatures effecting the "paint", being Listed for such a use in the installed cabinet, box, panel, etc. If not Listed you'd have to have it "investigated" or field evaluated.

Lets just consider for a moment, that this is not just a single family free-standing residential electrical code and get a clue about WHAT that code language actually MEANS and a "clue" about what went into the development of that code language (the history, which CMP authored it, based upon what proposals were considered, rejected, accepted in part, in theory, and why it says what it says now, doesn't say what it doesn't, and what the REST of the code does and does not say.

Selectively grabbing only a PART of the NEC without fully appreciating and encorporating what the entirety of the standard and its incorporated standards say and creating a skewed "my way or the highway" edict is only the perogative of an AHJ who is accountable to NO ONE regarding the safety, unlisted, correctness of what they declare, accept, or refuse to accept.

Liability on "them" is zero no matter how wrong they are -- not the case for the "everybody/anybody else" including doing or not doing what "they" say. Sitting in court Q: Why did you do that? A: Because the inspector said to..... That's a defense? Nope. Does that subrogate your liability or reduce your negligence, enjoin "them" to a contributory factor? Not one bit.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

... is going on.

I am sure you would.

Sorry old chap, but you have no idea and I am not going to explain it all to you.

I know exactly what's going on, you've yet again excreted a load of crap with your edicts, can't back them up, are completely wrong in making these "my way" baseless ALL INCLUSIVE statements, limited by your assumptions and your own tiny limited experience in your little part of the world and spout off yet again.

Back it up with the code citations, and since you always demand direct quotes, do it. Back it up man, but you won't, you always demand and demean others - PROVE IT BOY!!! (you won't you'll just carry on with your tantrums to deflect that you can't justify your words, you'll ramble on with scores of posts here and elsewhere and continue on with your defections and slams everywhere else to BURY and HIDE your junk in heaps of off-topic manure.

Expect the heaps and piles to be high, you have nothing else to do with your time, never have.

I hope this is not getting into another discussion like with the attic disappear stairs in the garage in regards to rating.

Wow.....I've been away a long time. It is so refreshing to see 'The Pontiff' get his well deserved comeuppance. Good work Mr. Watson.

The insistence of Painting being the "only" permanent effective means is strictly one persons OPINION. There is no documentation to back this up.With out the proper documentation it is just an opinion.
This opinion goes in the same category as there is no such thing as a Subpanel.
another OPINION
YES you can use tape. Yes you can use a magic marker You can use paint, you could use nail polish if you wanted too.

If you want to get real technical you can use red,black,blue brown,yellow,purple,fusia,tape.
There are only a few colors that are discussed to be used for certain things,
(green,white gray , orange)
As opposed to popular belief there is no set color code in the NEC. It is just a trade practice to use black, red , blue, white for 120/208/240 volt
and brown orange yellow gray for 277/480 volt

Originally Posted by ken horak

The insistence of Painting being the "only" permanent effective means

With a little more in depth reading and thought about what has been read, one would understand that what has been posted is what THE CODE SAYS, not "opinion".

YES you can use tape.

Yes, for making black to white which does NOT need to be "permanent" ... no to making white to black which does need to be "permanent".

Yes you can use a magic marker You can use paint, you could use nail polish if you wanted too.

Yep, which is why the statement always includes "or other effective means".

However, before using nail polish I would check with the wire manufacturer to see what it would do to the insulation as it has different chemicals in it than paint and magic marker.

As opposed to popular belief there is no set color code in the NEC. It is just a trade practice to use black, red , blue, white for 120/208/240 volt and brown orange yellow gray for 277/480 volt

Actually only a partially correct statement.

There are set colors for grounded conductors - white (or gray or with three continuous white strips).

There are set things which white (and those other limited options) can be used for - grounded conductors.

Unless, of course, "shall be permanently reidentified to indicate its use by painting or other effective means at its terminations and at each location where the conductor is visible and accessible" - not "opinion" - CODE.

Originally Posted by Dan Cullen

Wow.....I've been away a long time. It is so refreshing to see 'The Pontiff' get his well deserved comeuppance. Good work Mr. Watson.

Glad to notice that you were gone.

It sure was pleasant here during that time.

[quote=Jerry Peck;89165]With a little more in depth reading and thought about what has been read, one would understand that what has been posted is what THE CODE SAYS, not "opinion".

Yes - a little more thought. Paint / marker is NOT the only method allowed !
One could use shrink tube made by 3M and rated for electrical insulation.
It comes in black,red,blue,yellow - can be purchased at any electrical supply or the big blue or orange box stores or online.
So yes the idea of paint being the only method is OPINION

yep, which is why the statement always includes "or other effective means".

However, before using nail polish I would check with the wire manufacturer to see what it would do to the insulation as it has different chemicals in it than paint and magic marker.

I would bet it's no worse then paint, but no going to dispute it



Actually only a partially correct statement. (SEE my reply below as I already stated this)

There are set colors for grounded conductors - white (or gray or with three continuous white strips).

There are set things which white (and those other limited options) can be used for - grounded conductors.

Unless, of course, "shall be permanently reidentified to indicate its use by painting or other effective means at its terminations and at each location where the conductor is visible and accessible" - not "opinion" - CODE
Like you said a little more IN DEPTH READING....

.[/quote]If you want to get real technical you can use red,black,blue brown,yellow,purple,fusia,tape.
There are only a few colors that are discussed to be used for certain things,
(green,white gray , orange)

This is a direct quote from my prior post I already posted this fact for you, why are you disputing it with the same fact?

As happens in the real world with a number of issues, and certain opinions on this forum, the authority having jurisdiction is the entity that decides what meets code, like what constitutes "equally effective means".

The NEC requires things because of an INTENT. The INTENT in this case is that the white wire be marked so it is obvious it is being used for other than a grounded conductor and that unless there is purposeful human action, the method won't "go away" by itself.

In some old prior code cycles it was permissible to use a paper tag with a string attached to wire for identification purposes. Can't tell you how well this holds up after 50 years or so. Now we have language that says "permanent" and "shall encircle" among other things.

There is paint that won't stick to a number of materials very well, including wire that gets flexed in the installation process. No paint I'm aware of is listed for use in marking electrical wire, and in fact many kinds may be detrimental to the insulation. Additionally, I've never seen paint applied to wire that couldn't be removed with a fingernail. (it may exist, I just haven't seen it on wire yet). Keep in mind that the instant the paint gets scraped along its' length it is no longer compliant as it has to completely encircle the wire - something a marker, tape, or shrink sleeving is likely to keep doing even after being scraped .

The fact of the matter is that a majority of AHJs accept tape as a method that meets the intent in this case. It seems pretty unlikely that a method of marking wire used to identify the grounded conductor on a service wire outside in the elements wouldn't be allowed to remark a re-purposed white wire in a box. But, I guess you have to call them like YOU see them.

[quote=ken horak;89171]

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

With a little more in depth reading and thought about what has been read, one would understand that what has been posted is what THE CODE SAYS, not "opinion".

Yes - a little more thought. Paint / marker is NOT the only method allowed !
One could use shrink tube made by 3M and rated for electrical insulation.
It comes in black,red,blue,yellow - can be purchased at any electrical supply or the big blue or orange box stores or online.
So yes the idea of paint being the only method is OPINION

Ken,

You seem to have a problem with me quoting what THE CODE says, and then thinking that I am saying THE ONLY solution is "painting". You have done it before on other threads, you have done it above on this thread, and even after I pointed out that I have not said that, you go and do it again ...

Which only makes one think that YOU are so one track minded that you cannot think about what YOU read and make thoughts based on that, instead you makes thoughts based on YOUR biases.

If you have paid any attention at all to what I have been saying, you would understand that I have been saying, and am still saying ... TAPE "is not permanent".

Ken, repeat after me ... "TAPE is not permanent - Jerry has not said that ONLY PAINTING is permanent."

You brought up some nice examples of "permanent" methods to reidentify white ... but, alas, you still do not read what is written, the I have not stated that painting is the only permanent means of reidentification.

Someday, hopefully soon, you will clear your mind or you misconceptions and actually pay attention to what is written.

yep, which is why the statement always includes "or other effective means".

Well, now you are finally reading that, huh? About time. I have been stating that and posting that EACH AND EVERY TIME, yet you somehow thought that I was stating that painting was the only means.

Maybe you are finally understanding what I have been writing all this time?

Will wonders never cease.

Originally Posted by Bill Kriegh

The NEC requires things because of an INTENT. The INTENT in this case is that the white wire be marked so it is obvious it is being used for other than a grounded conductor and that unless there is purposeful human action, the method won't "go away" by itself.

Correct, that the reidentification be "permanent", which is what I have been stating over and over and over and over.

Tape is NOT "permanent", it will, it DOES, come loose and fall off.

That is why THE CODE ITSELF states " by painting or other effective means ", which you and Ken seem to have a problem with reading, thinking that I am saying that painting only is the only way to go.

I have, on other threads, even brought up the concern for using "paint" as specifically addressed in THE CODE. I.e., WHAT KIND OF PAINT IS LISTED FOR USE ON ELECTRICAL INSULATION? If not listed for use on electrical insulation, is even painting allowed?

Go to Ken's warped post and you will see where, in addition to his warped view of what he thinks I have been saying he posted some excellent suggestions for "permanent" reidentification of conductors.

Maybe Ken can help you understand what I have been stating, and maybe you can help Ken understand what I have been stating: I have been stating what THE CODE says, not an "opinion" - I will even make it red for you so you and Ken can make sure not to miss it " by painting or other effective means ".

Jeez, you guys THINK YOU KNOW SOMETHING and do not even bother to read what is written, only putting what you want that writing to say into that writing. If only you guys would wake up AND READ WHAT IS WRITTEN and then make an effort to understand WHAT IS WRITTEN, then I believe communication would be much easier and much more productive.

Peck
everyone here knows that you feel that paint is the only effective permanent means.
You even write it in such a way as to imply this:
I quote you below:
The code states "permanently re-identified by painting" then adds "or other effective means", even "permanent" marker fade and are therefore not "other effective means".

By writing that phrase the way you do you are implying what I stated, but you leave yourself an out for when you are confronted - (true Peck fashion)

The code says: permanently reidentify by painting or other effective means.
It is all one sentence. They did not "add" anything. Had it been added it would have been in another sentence or an exception.

I remember reading in a post you had, that you even stated that paint is the only permanent method. I'm not sure which so don't ask

When you wish to discuss this like an adult,without being rude and unprofessional, I will respond. Until then ....................

So, if paint falls off how is that permanent? If paint can be rubbed off how is that permanent? If paint can be scraped off how is that permanent?

Exactly what is going to be the definition of permanent? You CAN'T put ANY kind of marking on a wire I can't get off of it. 5 seconds with a brass brush and no paint is left. 5 seconds with a knife and tape or shrink sleeve is gone. A paper towl and some Goof Off and marker is gone.

If you have anything that meets the definition of "permanent" I'm all ears.

Now, if I can remove paint with a bit of effort then tape that requires at least the same effort to remove seems to me to be an equally effective means. Cheap tape will fall off. Good tape won't.

Originally Posted by ken horak

Peck
everyone here knows that you feel that paint is the only effective permanent means.
You even write it in such a way as to imply this:
I quote you below:
The code states "permanently re-identified by painting" then adds "or other effective means", even "permanent" marker fade and are therefore not "other effective means".

By writing that phrase the way you do you are implying what I stated, but you leave yourself an out for when you are confronted - (true Peck fashion)

Ken,

Thank you for posting something which supports what I am saying, and have been saying that it needs to be "permanent" and that it is not limited to "painting" and that "tape" is not "permanent".

In your twisted Ken mind, though, you seem to still read into it that I am saying that ONLY PAINTING is permanent, which is quite untrue, and you confirmed that in your post above of what I posted.

Again, thank you.

You are correct in that "permanent markers" are not "permanent", however, in your recent post above (when you were actually using your mind and thinking ) you stated:

Originally Posted by ken horak

Yes - a little more thought. Paint / marker is NOT the only method allowed !
One could use shrink tube made by 3M and rated for electrical insulation.
It comes in black,red,blue,yellow - can be purchased at any electrical supply or the big blue or orange box stores or online.

I followed that with this post a few posts down:

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

I have, on other threads, even brought up the concern for using "paint" as specifically addressed in THE CODE. I.e., WHAT KIND OF PAINT IS LISTED FOR USE ON ELECTRICAL INSULATION? If not listed for use on electrical insulation, is even painting allowed?

As I stated on another thread, you are currently in "argument mode" and even people agreeing with you are unacceptable as you do not WANT anyone to agree with you, you simply want to rant on.

Go for it.

Originally Posted by Bill Kriegh

Exactly what is going to be the definition of permanent? You CAN'T put ANY kind of marking on a wire I can't get off of it. 5 seconds with a brass brush and no paint is left. 5 seconds with a knife and tape or shrink sleeve is gone. A paper towl and some Goof Off and marker is gone.

So you would violate 110.12(B) to try to prove something was "not permanent"?

In which case you would be in violation of 110.12(B), so what have you gained? Nothing, and in fact you have now lost as you would need to replace those damaged conductors.

Read 110.12(B) and you will also see why I make those posts regarding "painting".

I am referring to my posts like this:

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

I have, on other threads, even brought up the concern for using "paint" as specifically addressed in THE CODE. I.e., WHAT KIND OF PAINT IS LISTED FOR USE ON ELECTRICAL INSULATION? If not listed for use on electrical insulation, is even painting allowed?

Yes, the code SPECIFICALLY SPECIFIES "by painting" as a "permanent" means, and then allows for other effective means.

However, as I have stated several times in years past - WHAT KIND OF PAINT is allowed to be painted on electrical insulation? The paint would need to be listed for that use.

Yet here you are, Bill, saying that you would violate 110.12(B) and DAMAGE the insulation in an effort to prove the paint could be removed.

And I thought YOU were someone who was intelligent and smart in the codes?

I'd like some documentation where a listed use of an approved and listed product is not sufficiently permanent as to the definition of permanent as applied in the code.

I'd like to see some documentation whereby the use or presence of field applied PAINT everywhere a "breaker" might installed would/should/could be permitted.

The Opinion of one that Listed phase/friction/ or electrical insulation tape was anything other than "permanent" is contrary to its Listed purpose and cannot be used as a "permanent" reidentifying means is undefendable.

Oh, and by the way if using tape or adhesive labels weren't a permanent means of identification, the CODE wouldn't provide it as one, which it actually does.

For example 210.5(C) specifically mentions marking TAPE as an approved means for identification by separate color coding.

215.12(C) also specifically mentions means of identifiation to be by separate color coding, marking TAPE, TAGGING, or other approved means. Paint and markers are not mentioned there.

250.119(B) "at the time of installation, shall be permitted to be permanently identified...at each end and at every point where the conductors are accessible by one of the following means....
...(3) Marking the exposed insulation with green TAPE or green ADHESIVE LABLES."

Tape is listed for that purpose in electrical installations/equipment. Show me a paint or marker that is.

There is nothing that is less-than permanent regarding the application of aforementioned approved and listed tapes as marking tape or adhesive labels.

YEAH!!!!!
H.G. WELLS SR. (DON'T FORGET THE SR.) IS BACK!
I'VE MISSED THE BANTER BETWEEN YOU AND JERRY/

I'M SURE WE WILL ALL BE TUNED IN.