Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Home Repair (alt.home.repair) For all homeowners and DIYers with many experienced tradesmen. Solve your toughest home fix-it problems. |
Reply |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
I am redoing some wiring in our house that involves breaking and
remaking some original connections -- ripping out and replacing boxes by larger (e.g., two-gang by three-gang). I find that in some cases all the conductors of the same color have been connected using crimps that have then been taped over -- even the hots. Is this kosher? Surely wirenuts provide better insulation than the tape. There could be 220/240 volts between conductors in some boxes because there are Edison circuits involved. Should I use wirenuts for the reconnections? Crimps and tape take up less room. And, while I think of it, is it OK to have circuits fed from different breakers in the same box (e.g., outlet and light switch)? One could assume that since the one circuit is dead (switched off at the panel), the other is too. Perce |
#2
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
"Percival P. Cassidy" wrote in message
... I am redoing some wiring in our house that involves breaking and remaking some original connections -- ripping out and replacing boxes by larger (e.g., two-gang by three-gang). I find that in some cases all the conductors of the same color have been connected using crimps that have then been taped over -- even the hots. Is this kosher? Surely wirenuts provide better insulation than the tape. There could be 220/240 volts between conductors in some boxes because there are Edison circuits involved. Should I use wirenuts for the reconnections? Crimps and tape take up less room. And, while I think of it, is it OK to have circuits fed from different breakers in the same box (e.g., outlet and light switch)? One could assume that since the one circuit is dead (switched off at the panel), the other is too. Perce Addressing the connection method: When I think of crimps, I think of the type that already have a plastic sleeve over a metal interior. However, I *have* seen a type that's just a metal sleeve. As far as I know, they are intended only for joining bare ground wires. Someone will stumble along here and claim otherwise, but I think electrical tape is for slobs and hacks who don't know how to make a secure connection, so they cover things up with tape to hide their incompetence. It also leaves things gummy. When I want to rewire something, my definition doesn't include wiping gunk off my fingers constantly because some monkey went nuts with tape. I once asked a local inspector and was told it was perfectly legal to use crimps for house wiring, and was told that it WAS. There are two caveats: 1) You must use a crimp tool that actually shapes the crimp properly. You won't find such a tool at Home Depot or Lowe's. It'll take some effort. It requires a channel for the crimp to sit in, and a tooth-like prong on the opposite jaw. The tooth almost creates a hole in one side of the crimp. 2) If wires might need to be disassembled later, and they're already short, cutting off an old crimp will obviously make them even shorter. Use wire nuts in these situations. Have several sizes on hand. |
#3
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
In article , "Percival P. Cassidy" wrote:
I am redoing some wiring in our house that involves breaking and remaking some original connections [...] Should I use wirenuts for the reconnections? Crimps and tape take up less room. Wire nuts are perfectly fine; crimps aren't unless they're made properly, and - no offense intended - asking the question shows that you don't know how to make them properly. And, while I think of it, is it OK to have circuits fed from different breakers in the same box (e.g., outlet and light switch)? One could assume that since the one circuit is dead (switched off at the panel), the other is too. It's "OK" in the sense that it is permitted by the NEC, although in my opinion it should not be -- for exactly the reason you cite. It would be a good idea to write a warning with a Sharpie on the inside of the cover plate. Perce -- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com) It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again. |
#4
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
On 07/20/07 03:24 pm Doug Miller wrote:
I am redoing some wiring in our house that involves breaking and remaking some original connections [...] Should I use wirenuts for the reconnections? Crimps and tape take up less room. Wire nuts are perfectly fine; crimps aren't unless they're made properly, and - no offense intended - asking the question shows that you don't know how to make them properly. I have a Gardner-Bender stripping/crimping/etc. tool that AFAIK is meant for this job, and I believe I know how to use it. Asking whether it's OK to do something has nothing to do, IMO, with knowing how to do it. There are many possibilities: 1. I know it's OK and know how to do it. 2. I know it's OK but don't know how to do it. 3. I don't know whether it's OK and wouldn't know how even if it is OK. 4. I don't know whether it's OK but know how to do it. I believe I fall into the last category. Actually I suppose there are yet other possibilities: 5. I know it's not OK but know how to do it and will do it anyway. 6. I haven't a clue but will do it wrong even if it would be OK if I did it right.... And, while I think of it, is it OK to have circuits fed from different breakers in the same box (e.g., outlet and light switch)? One could assume that since the one circuit is dead (switched off at the panel), the other is too. It's "OK" in the sense that it is permitted by the NEC, although in my opinion it should not be -- for exactly the reason you cite. It would be a good idea to write a warning with a Sharpie on the inside of the cover plate. Good idea. Perce |
#5
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
"Percival P. Cassidy" wrote in message ... I am redoing some wiring in our house that involves breaking and remaking some original connections -- ripping out and replacing boxes by larger (e.g., two-gang by three-gang). I find that in some cases all the conductors of the same color have been connected using crimps that have then been taped over -- even the hots. Is this kosher? Sure its kosher when its done right. BTW, high voltage, high current cables - that is, thousands of volts and thousands of amps - use crimp (compression) connectors. Surely wirenuts provide better insulation than the tape. There could be 220/240 volts between conductors in some boxes because there are Edison circuits involved. Should I use wirenuts for the reconnections? Crimps and tape take up less room. And, while I think of it, is it OK to have circuits fed from different breakers in the same box (e.g., outlet and light switch)? One could assume that since the one circuit is dead (switched off at the panel), the other is too. Perce |
#6
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
On 07/20/07 11:41 pm ** Frank ** wrote:
I am redoing some wiring in our house that involves breaking and remaking some original connections -- ripping out and replacing boxes by larger (e.g., two-gang by three-gang). I find that in some cases all the conductors of the same color have been connected using crimps that have then been taped over -- even the hots. Is this kosher? Sure its kosher when its done right. BTW, high voltage, high current cables - that is, thousands of volts and thousands of amps - use crimp (compression) connectors. It wasn't so much the crimping I was questioning as the two or three layers of insulation tape vs. however many mm of insulation provided by a wirenut. Perce |
#7
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
On Jul 20, 11:48 pm, "Percival P. Cassidy"
wrote: On 07/20/07 11:41 pm ** Frank ** wrote: I am redoing some wiring in our house that involves breaking and remaking some original connections -- ripping out and replacing boxes by larger (e.g., two-gang by three-gang). I find that in some cases all the conductors of the same color have been connected using crimps that have then been taped over -- even the hots. Is this kosher? Sure its kosher when its done right. BTW, high voltage, high current cables - that is, thousands of volts and thousands of amps - use crimp (compression) connectors. It wasn't so much the crimping I was questioning as the two or three layers of insulation tape vs. however many mm of insulation provided by a wirenut. Perce Of course more insulation is better, but r |
#8
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
On Jul 20, 11:48 pm, "Percival P. Cassidy"
wrote: On 07/20/07 11:41 pm ** Frank ** wrote: I am redoing some wiring in our house that involves breaking and remaking some original connections -- ripping out and replacing boxes by larger (e.g., two-gang by three-gang). I find that in some cases all the conductors of the same color have been connected using crimps that have then been taped over -- even the hots. Is this kosher? Sure its kosher when its done right. BTW, high voltage, high current cables - that is, thousands of volts and thousands of amps - use crimp (compression) connectors. It wasn't so much the crimping I was questioning as the two or three layers of insulation tape vs. however many mm of insulation provided by a wirenut. Perce More insulation is better, but remember that the splice is usually tucked safely in the box |
#9
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
Percival P. Cassidy wrote:
On 07/20/07 11:41 pm ** Frank ** wrote: I am redoing some wiring in our house that involves breaking and remaking some original connections -- ripping out and replacing boxes by larger (e.g., two-gang by three-gang). I find that in some cases all the conductors of the same color have been connected using crimps that have then been taped over -- even the hots. Is this kosher? Sure its kosher when its done right. BTW, high voltage, high current cables - that is, thousands of volts and thousands of amps - use crimp (compression) connectors. It wasn't so much the crimping I was questioning as the two or three layers of insulation tape vs. however many mm of insulation provided by a wirenut. Tape is OK. I would use more that 3 layers. Be careful of points and edges that can poke through the tape. It has to be listed electrical tape. The crimps also have to be listed for purpose - including wire size and number of wires, stranded/solid, and voltage for insulated crimps. -- bud-- |
#10
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
"Percival P. Cassidy" wrote in message
... On 07/20/07 11:41 pm ** Frank ** wrote: I am redoing some wiring in our house that involves breaking and remaking some original connections -- ripping out and replacing boxes by larger (e.g., two-gang by three-gang). I find that in some cases all the conductors of the same color have been connected using crimps that have then been taped over -- even the hots. Is this kosher? Sure its kosher when its done right. BTW, high voltage, high current cables - that is, thousands of volts and thousands of amps - use crimp (compression) connectors. It wasn't so much the crimping I was questioning as the two or three layers of insulation tape vs. however many mm of insulation provided by a wirenut. Perce One more time: The tape is sloppy, and if the crimp is done right, there is absolutely no need for it. This company makes the best crimps you can buy: http://www.panduit.com/search/search... u=P_RollupKey On that page, you'll see a link to a pdf file which discusses proper crimping tools and techniques. Although you can order directly from the company, there may also be an industrial supply dealer near you that sells their products. |
#11
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
on 7/20/2007 2:47 PM Percival P. Cassidy said the following:
I am redoing some wiring in our house that involves breaking and remaking some original connections -- ripping out and replacing boxes by larger (e.g., two-gang by three-gang). I find that in some cases all the conductors of the same color have been connected using crimps that have then been taped over -- even the hots. Is this kosher? Surely wirenuts provide better insulation than the tape. There could be 220/240 volts between conductors in some boxes because there are Edison circuits involved. Should I use wirenuts for the reconnections? Crimps and tape take up less room. And, while I think of it, is it OK to have circuits fed from different breakers in the same box (e.g., outlet and light switch)? One could assume that since the one circuit is dead (switched off at the panel), the other is too. Perce I would avoid crimps for just one reason. What if you had to replace an outlet, light fixture, or switch that went bad, or wanted to upgrade to the latest and greatest fixtures or switches? Would you rather just unscrew a wirenut, or try to get the crimp off with a pair of pliers? -- Bill In Hamptonburgh, NY To email, remove the double zeroes after @ |
#12
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
I would avoid crimps for just one reason. What if you had to replace an outlet, light fixture, or switch that went bad, or wanted to upgrade to the latest and greatest fixtures or switches? Would you rather just unscrew a wirenut, or try to get the crimp off with a pair of pliers? With many people, (especially with those who live in countries where they are banned), there seems to be some sort of bias against the use of wire nuts, even though they are a perfectly acceptable and an NEC legally approved method of making splices. When done properly, by twisting the wires together with a pliers and applying the wire nut with a proper tightness, there is little chance the wire nut will come off or that the splice will become a high-resistance hot spot. Wire nuts offer the advantages of simplicity, economy, speed, and the flexibility to make future changes without destroying the connecter. Open up enough outlet boxes where the splices have been taped after 5, 10, or 20 years and you will, more likely than not, find examples where the tape has dried up or even fallen off the splices it was intended to cover. Beachcomber |
#13
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
"willshak" wrote in message
... on 7/20/2007 2:47 PM Percival P. Cassidy said the following: I am redoing some wiring in our house that involves breaking and remaking some original connections -- ripping out and replacing boxes by larger (e.g., two-gang by three-gang). I find that in some cases all the conductors of the same color have been connected using crimps that have then been taped over -- even the hots. Is this kosher? Surely wirenuts provide better insulation than the tape. There could be 220/240 volts between conductors in some boxes because there are Edison circuits involved. Should I use wirenuts for the reconnections? Crimps and tape take up less room. And, while I think of it, is it OK to have circuits fed from different breakers in the same box (e.g., outlet and light switch)? One could assume that since the one circuit is dead (switched off at the panel), the other is too. Perce I would avoid crimps for just one reason. What if you had to replace an outlet, light fixture, or switch that went bad, or wanted to upgrade to the latest and greatest fixtures or switches? Would you rather just unscrew a wirenut, or try to get the crimp off with a pair of pliers? Bill Two things: If you can remove a crimp using pliers, it means the crimp wasn't installed correctly in the first place. If you need to change a connection, you cut on either side of the crimp. If you're running new wiring, you leave extra in case you need to cut out a crimp. If it seems that existing wiring is already too short to allow cutting later, use wire nuts. |
#14
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
On 07/21/07 08:39 am JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
One more time: The tape is sloppy, and if the crimp is done right, there is absolutely no need for it. These are the plain copper cylinders (more or less) that are crimped onto the wires. As supplied, they have no insulation, so obviously if they are used on hots or neutrals they need to be insulated afterwards. What would you use other than tape -- or shrinkwrap, I guess? Perce |
#15
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
On 07/21/07 12:38 pm Beachcomber wrote:
I would avoid crimps for just one reason. What if you had to replace an outlet, light fixture, or switch that went bad, or wanted to upgrade to the latest and greatest fixtures or switches? Would you rather just unscrew a wirenut, or try to get the crimp off with a pair of pliers? With many people, (especially with those who live in countries where they are banned), there seems to be some sort of bias against the use of wire nuts, even though they are a perfectly acceptable and an NEC legally approved method of making splices. I must admit to having been horrified the first time I saw a wirenutted connection. Looked like some real Rube Goldberg affair. What I was used to seeing for electrical connections was a box made of insulating material, with firmly attached brass "busbars" with wires inserted into the holes and held secure by clamping screws. When done properly, by twisting the wires together with a pliers and applying the wire nut with a proper tightness, there is little chance the wire nut will come off or that the splice will become a high-resistance hot spot. I have read that the wires must *not* be twisted together first. In fact I just read a claim that UL approval of wirenuts depends on them making a secure connection without pretwisting the conductors. Wire nuts offer the advantages of simplicity, economy, speed, and the flexibility to make future changes without destroying the connecter. Open up enough outlet boxes where the splices have been taped after 5, 10, or 20 years and you will, more likely than not, find examples where the tape has dried up or even fallen off the splices it was intended to cover. The ones I just encountered were likely original (30 years) and the tape was tight. Perce |
#16
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
"Percival P. Cassidy" wrote in message
... On 07/21/07 08:39 am JoeSpareBedroom wrote: One more time: The tape is sloppy, and if the crimp is done right, there is absolutely no need for it. These are the plain copper cylinders (more or less) that are crimped onto the wires. As supplied, they have no insulation, so obviously if they are used on hots or neutrals they need to be insulated afterwards. What would you use other than tape -- or shrinkwrap, I guess? Perce Since the wrong kind of crimps were used, I would cut them out and change them to insulated crimps. If you have the wrong connectors, you don't use them and try and make them right. You stop the work until you have the right thing. A cob job might be appropriate when making toast, but not when wiring a house (or car, boat, or anything else). |
#17
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 23:21:52 -0400, "Percival P. Cassidy"
wrote: I must admit to having been horrified the first time I saw a wirenutted connection. Looked like some real Rube Goldberg affair. What I was used to seeing for electrical connections was a box made of insulating material, with firmly attached brass "busbars" with wires inserted into the holes and held secure by clamping screws. When done properly, by twisting the wires together with a pliers and applying the wire nut with a proper tightness, there is little chance the wire nut will come off or that the splice will become a high-resistance hot spot. I have read that the wires must *not* be twisted together first. In fact I just read a claim that UL approval of wirenuts depends on them making a secure connection without pretwisting the conductors. Is your first sentence in your paragraph above a conclusion you reached from your second sentence, or was it a separate statement you read? The seoncd sentence means that the wirenuts must be able to make a secure connection if the wires are not pretwisted. It does not in itself doesn't mean that the wires can't also be pretwisted. Or even that it wouldn't work better if they were pretwitsted. I only do this stuff once in a while, and sometimes I don't pretwist, I guess usually when I don't have pliers handy, but I feel more confidant of the electrical connection when it is pretwisted. Based on my knowledge of things and materials and touching, I don't know how it could be otherwise. |
#18
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Percival P. Cassidy" wrote in message ... On 07/21/07 08:39 am JoeSpareBedroom wrote: One more time: The tape is sloppy, and if the crimp is done right, there is absolutely no need for it. These are the plain copper cylinders (more or less) that are crimped onto the wires. As supplied, they have no insulation, so obviously if they are used on hots or neutrals they need to be insulated afterwards. What would you use other than tape -- or shrinkwrap, I guess? Perce Since the wrong kind of crimps were used, On what is that conclusion based? I would cut them out and change them to insulated crimps. If you have the wrong connectors, you don't use them and try and make them right. You stop the work until you have the right thing. A cob job might be appropriate when making toast, but not when wiring a house (or car, boat, or anything else). -- The e-mail address in our reply-to line is reversed in an attempt to minimize spam. Our true address is of the form . |
#19
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
"CJT" wrote in message
... JoeSpareBedroom wrote: "Percival P. Cassidy" wrote in message ... On 07/21/07 08:39 am JoeSpareBedroom wrote: One more time: The tape is sloppy, and if the crimp is done right, there is absolutely no need for it. These are the plain copper cylinders (more or less) that are crimped onto the wires. As supplied, they have no insulation, so obviously if they are used on hots or neutrals they need to be insulated afterwards. What would you use other than tape -- or shrinkwrap, I guess? Perce Since the wrong kind of crimps were used, On what is that conclusion based? Bare copper cylinders need to be insulated after they're installed, right? One method would involve tape, which is sloppy and amateurish, and I don't care whose grandpappy did it and got away with it. The other method involves heat shrink tubing, which is miraculous stuff, but to use it **correctly**, you should apply heat to all sides of the tubing. Not so easy with short wires in a box. |
#20
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"CJT" wrote in message ... JoeSpareBedroom wrote: "Percival P. Cassidy" wrote in message ... On 07/21/07 08:39 am JoeSpareBedroom wrote: One more time: The tape is sloppy, and if the crimp is done right, there is absolutely no need for it. These are the plain copper cylinders (more or less) that are crimped onto the wires. As supplied, they have no insulation, so obviously if they are used on hots or neutrals they need to be insulated afterwards. What would you use other than tape -- or shrinkwrap, I guess? Perce Since the wrong kind of crimps were used, On what is that conclusion based? Bare copper cylinders need to be insulated after they're installed, right? One method would involve tape, which is sloppy and amateurish, and I don't care whose grandpappy did it and got away with it. The other method involves heat shrink tubing, which is miraculous stuff, but to use it **correctly**, you should apply heat to all sides of the tubing. Not so easy with short wires in a box. Your preference against it doesn't make it "wrong." -- The e-mail address in our reply-to line is reversed in an attempt to minimize spam. Our true address is of the form . |
#21
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
"CJT" wrote in message
... JoeSpareBedroom wrote: "CJT" wrote in message ... JoeSpareBedroom wrote: "Percival P. Cassidy" wrote in message ... On 07/21/07 08:39 am JoeSpareBedroom wrote: One more time: The tape is sloppy, and if the crimp is done right, there is absolutely no need for it. These are the plain copper cylinders (more or less) that are crimped onto the wires. As supplied, they have no insulation, so obviously if they are used on hots or neutrals they need to be insulated afterwards. What would you use other than tape -- or shrinkwrap, I guess? Perce Since the wrong kind of crimps were used, On what is that conclusion based? Bare copper cylinders need to be insulated after they're installed, right? One method would involve tape, which is sloppy and amateurish, and I don't care whose grandpappy did it and got away with it. The other method involves heat shrink tubing, which is miraculous stuff, but to use it **correctly**, you should apply heat to all sides of the tubing. Not so easy with short wires in a box. Your preference against it doesn't make it "wrong." It most certainly does. With wiring, only perfection is acceptable. Tape doesn't even come close. |
#22
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"CJT" wrote in message ... JoeSpareBedroom wrote: "CJT" wrote in message ... JoeSpareBedroom wrote: "Percival P. Cassidy" wrote in message ... On 07/21/07 08:39 am JoeSpareBedroom wrote: One more time: The tape is sloppy, and if the crimp is done right, there is absolutely no need for it. These are the plain copper cylinders (more or less) that are crimped onto the wires. As supplied, they have no insulation, so obviously if they are used on hots or neutrals they need to be insulated afterwards. What would you use other than tape -- or shrinkwrap, I guess? Perce Since the wrong kind of crimps were used, On what is that conclusion based? Bare copper cylinders need to be insulated after they're installed, right? One method would involve tape, which is sloppy and amateurish, and I don't care whose grandpappy did it and got away with it. The other method involves heat shrink tubing, which is miraculous stuff, but to use it **correctly**, you should apply heat to all sides of the tubing. Not so easy with short wires in a box. Your preference against it doesn't make it "wrong." It most certainly does. With wiring, only perfection is acceptable. Tape doesn't even come close. And you think wirenuts are "perfection?" Good luck with that. -- The e-mail address in our reply-to line is reversed in an attempt to minimize spam. Our true address is of the form . |
#23
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"CJT" wrote in message .... Your preference against it doesn't make it "wrong." It most certainly does. With wiring, only perfection is acceptable. Tape doesn't even come close. "Perfection" is defined for practical purposes by the NEC. If it accepts a practice, that's perfect enough... -- |
#24
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
In article , "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:
It most certainly does. With wiring, only perfection is acceptable. Tape doesn't even come close. That's going to be news to the NFPA, publishers of the NEC. -- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com) It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again. |
#25
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
Percival P. Cassidy wrote:
On 07/21/07 08:39 am JoeSpareBedroom wrote: One more time: The tape is sloppy, and if the crimp is done right, there is absolutely no need for it. These are the plain copper cylinders (more or less) that are crimped onto the wires. As supplied, they have no insulation, so obviously if they are used on hots or neutrals they need to be insulated afterwards. What would you use other than tape -- or shrinkwrap, I guess? Perce You would use the system as designed by the manufacturer. There is a matching cap designed to be used with those connectors. You can get them at a real electrical supply house. |
#26
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
Beachcomber wrote:
I would avoid crimps for just one reason. What if you had to replace an outlet, light fixture, or switch that went bad, or wanted to upgrade to the latest and greatest fixtures or switches? Would you rather just unscrew a wirenut, or try to get the crimp off with a pair of pliers? With many people, (especially with those who live in countries where they are banned), there seems to be some sort of bias against the use of wire nuts, even though they are a perfectly acceptable and an NEC legally approved method of making splices. When done properly, by twisting the wires together with a pliers and applying the wire nut with a proper tightness, there is little chance the wire nut will come off or that the splice will become a high-resistance hot spot. Wirenuts are properly applied by holding the wires parallel and then twisting the wirenut. Wire nuts offer the advantages of simplicity, economy, speed, and the flexibility to make future changes without destroying the connecter. Open up enough outlet boxes where the splices have been taped after 5, 10, or 20 years and you will, more likely than not, find examples where the tape has dried up or even fallen off the splices it was intended to cover. You won't see that if a quality tape such as Scotch 33 or 88 is used. You will see that if you use that stuff commonly found at the big box stores. Beachcomber |
#27
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
"CJT" wrote in message
... JoeSpareBedroom wrote: "CJT" wrote in message ... JoeSpareBedroom wrote: "CJT" wrote in message ... JoeSpareBedroom wrote: "Percival P. Cassidy" wrote in message ... On 07/21/07 08:39 am JoeSpareBedroom wrote: One more time: The tape is sloppy, and if the crimp is done right, there is absolutely no need for it. These are the plain copper cylinders (more or less) that are crimped onto the wires. As supplied, they have no insulation, so obviously if they are used on hots or neutrals they need to be insulated afterwards. What would you use other than tape -- or shrinkwrap, I guess? Perce Since the wrong kind of crimps were used, On what is that conclusion based? Bare copper cylinders need to be insulated after they're installed, right? One method would involve tape, which is sloppy and amateurish, and I don't care whose grandpappy did it and got away with it. The other method involves heat shrink tubing, which is miraculous stuff, but to use it **correctly**, you should apply heat to all sides of the tubing. Not so easy with short wires in a box. Your preference against it doesn't make it "wrong." It most certainly does. With wiring, only perfection is acceptable. Tape doesn't even come close. And you think wirenuts are "perfection?" Good luck with that. No. I didn't say that. Wire nuts may be the only choice in a cramped box where the wires are already too short for working with a crimper. But, crimps are always the best way, when it's possible to use them. |
#28
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
"dpb" wrote in message ...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote: "CJT" wrote in message ... Your preference against it doesn't make it "wrong." It most certainly does. With wiring, only perfection is acceptable. Tape doesn't even come close. "Perfection" is defined for practical purposes by the NEC. If it accepts a practice, that's perfect enough... I suspect it accepts the practice because wire nuts are faster to apply than crimps, and professionals like it that way. |
#29
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"dpb" wrote in message ... JoeSpareBedroom wrote: "CJT" wrote in message ... Your preference against it doesn't make it "wrong." It most certainly does. With wiring, only perfection is acceptable. Tape doesn't even come close. "Perfection" is defined for practical purposes by the NEC. If it accepts a practice, that's perfect enough... I suspect it accepts the practice because wire nuts are faster to apply than crimps, and professionals like it that way. You can "suspect" it all you want, but the real reason is that while it is indeed, reasonably fast and inexpensive, _LOTS_ of empirical data and lab testing confirm it is quite reliable and safe so more complex methods are totally unnecessary. The point of the code is, of course, to provide a safe and effective set of requirements to the practical application. As someone else already noted, the Code wasn't begun by government but by the insurance in order to provide the benefits accruing to their members by the adherence to such standards. Consequently, when Code is updated to account for new technology, the prime consideration is that it meets these objectives. -- |
#30
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
"dpb" wrote in message ...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote: "dpb" wrote in message ... JoeSpareBedroom wrote: "CJT" wrote in message ... Your preference against it doesn't make it "wrong." It most certainly does. With wiring, only perfection is acceptable. Tape doesn't even come close. "Perfection" is defined for practical purposes by the NEC. If it accepts a practice, that's perfect enough... I suspect it accepts the practice because wire nuts are faster to apply than crimps, and professionals like it that way. You can "suspect" it all you want, but the real reason is that while it is indeed, reasonably fast and inexpensive, _LOTS_ of empirical data and lab testing confirm it is quite reliable and safe so more complex methods are totally unnecessary. The point of the code is, of course, to provide a safe and effective set of requirements to the practical application. As someone else already noted, the Code wasn't begun by government but by the insurance in order to provide the benefits accruing to their members by the adherence to such standards. Consequently, when Code is updated to account for new technology, the prime consideration is that it meets these objectives. Probably all true. But, I'd like to know what types of people install the wire nuts in testing situations. I've opened electrical boxes and found some interesting horror shows. If they're installed by idiots, they are certainly not safe. |
#31
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"dpb" wrote in message ... JoeSpareBedroom wrote: "dpb" wrote in message ... JoeSpareBedroom wrote: "CJT" wrote in message ... Your preference against it doesn't make it "wrong." It most certainly does. With wiring, only perfection is acceptable. Tape doesn't even come close. "Perfection" is defined for practical purposes by the NEC. If it accepts a practice, that's perfect enough... I suspect it accepts the practice because wire nuts are faster to apply than crimps, and professionals like it that way. You can "suspect" it all you want, but the real reason is that while it is indeed, reasonably fast and inexpensive, _LOTS_ of empirical data and lab testing confirm it is quite reliable and safe so more complex methods are totally unnecessary. The point of the code is, of course, to provide a safe and effective set of requirements to the practical application. As someone else already noted, the Code wasn't begun by government but by the insurance in order to provide the benefits accruing to their members by the adherence to such standards. Consequently, when Code is updated to account for new technology, the prime consideration is that it meets these objectives. Probably all true. But, I'd like to know what types of people install the wire nuts in testing situations. I've opened electrical boxes and found some interesting horror shows. If they're installed by idiots, they are certainly not safe. That's so for any connection technology. And it's part of the reason why there are licenses and inspectors. -- The e-mail address in our reply-to line is reversed in an attempt to minimize spam. Our true address is of the form . |
#32
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
Guys,
Brand new to this forum... great stuff here. Searching for info on "wire nuts vs tape" is how I found this forum and thread. My electrical sub-contractor has been splicing wires with electrical tape. He insists that "3M-33 tape is acceptable for splicing #12 and smaller conductors". I showed both him and my inspector NEC 110-14, which includes the phrase: "... All splices, including ground wires, shall be made with an approved splice cap or wire nut...". They still say electric tape is acceptable, but can provide no evidence for this assertion. My question: Is there any code that specifically accepts, or denies, the use of electrical tape for splices in residential electrical installations, specifically for wire sizes #12 and smaller. Thanks very much for your help in this. Bill Doyle The Construction Coach |
#33
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
"billder99" wrote in message
oups.com... Guys, Brand new to this forum... great stuff here. Searching for info on "wire nuts vs tape" is how I found this forum and thread. My electrical sub-contractor has been splicing wires with electrical tape. He insists that "3M-33 tape is acceptable for splicing #12 and smaller conductors". I showed both him and my inspector NEC 110-14, which includes the phrase: "... All splices, including ground wires, shall be made with an approved splice cap or wire nut...". They still say electric tape is acceptable, but can provide no evidence for this assertion. My question: Is there any code that specifically accepts, or denies, the use of electrical tape for splices in residential electrical installations, specifically for wire sizes #12 and smaller. Thanks very much for your help in this. Bill Doyle The Construction Coach This particular discussion has sort of died because people seem to think it's done. You might want to re-post this as a top level new thread. You'll probably get more responses. |
#34
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
In article .com, billder99 wrote:
Guys, Brand new to this forum... great stuff here. Searching for info on "wire nuts vs tape" is how I found this forum and thread. My electrical sub-contractor has been splicing wires with electrical tape. He insists that "3M-33 tape is acceptable for splicing #12 and smaller conductors". I showed both him and my inspector NEC 110-14, which includes the phrase: "... All splices, including ground wires, shall be made with an approved splice cap or wire nut...". No, it doesn't. Not in the latest (2005) Code, anyway. The entire 2005 NEC is available online he http://nfpa-acs-01.gvpi.net:8080/rrs...NFPASTD/7005SB Neither that sentence, nor anything remotely similar to it, appears anywhere in Article 110.14. They still say electric tape is acceptable, but can provide no evidence for this assertion. The evidence is Article 110.14, which states clearly, "All splices and joints and the free ends of conductors shall be covered with an insulation equivalent to that of the conductors or with an insulating device identified for the purpose." [2005 NEC, Article 110.14(B), third sentence] If the tape is listed as providing sufficient insulation, then it's ok. My question: Is there any code that specifically accepts, or denies, the use of electrical tape for splices in residential electrical installations, specifically for wire sizes #12 and smaller. See above. Thanks very much for your help in this. Bill Doyle The Construction Coach -- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com) It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again. |
#35
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
Here's another way to look at the situation: The customer (Bill) is
obviously uncomfortable with electrical tape. It's his money. It doesn't matter what the code says. It's not allowed in his home. I've used four electricians in 20+ years. None of them have used electrical tape, except one guy who used little bits of it to identify certain wires in a crowded box while he wandered around working in other areas of the house. He removed it when he was done. Now, you could reverse this and ask "What if the customer insisted on tape, and the code didn't allow it?" The answer is simple: He might find it impossible to hire an electrician, and he'd have to find another way to get what he wanted. Maybe do the work himself. |
#36
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
Doug Miller wrote:
In article .com, billder99 wrote: Guys, Brand new to this forum... great stuff here. Searching for info on "wire nuts vs tape" is how I found this forum and thread. My electrical sub-contractor has been splicing wires with electrical tape. He insists that "3M-33 tape is acceptable for splicing #12 and smaller conductors". I showed both him and my inspector NEC 110-14, which includes the phrase: "... All splices, including ground wires, shall be made with an approved splice cap or wire nut...". No, it doesn't. Not in the latest (2005) Code, anyway. The entire 2005 NEC is available online he http://nfpa-acs-01.gvpi.net:8080/rrs...NFPASTD/7005SB Neither that sentence, nor anything remotely similar to it, appears anywhere in Article 110.14. They still say electric tape is acceptable, but can provide no evidence for this assertion. The evidence is Article 110.14, which states clearly, "All splices and joints and the free ends of conductors shall be covered with an insulation equivalent to that of the conductors or with an insulating device identified for the purpose." [2005 NEC, Article 110.14(B), third sentence] If the tape is listed as providing sufficient insulation, then it's ok. My question: Is there any code that specifically accepts, or denies, the use of electrical tape for splices in residential electrical installations, specifically for wire sizes #12 and smaller. See above. .... But that addresses the _insulation_ of a splice, not the mechanical splice itself. My reading/understanding of the question is that apparently, they're allowing only a twisted connection covered by tape and I don't think that is allowed if so... Maybe again it goes back to the crimp vis a vis wirenut, but that isn't specifically what this particular poster stated/asked. -- |
#37
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
Doug Miller wrote:
The entire 2005 NEC is available online he http://nfpa-acs-01.gvpi.net:8080/rrs...NFPASTD/7005SB Thanks for the web site. It will come in handy. -- Moe Jones HVAC Service Technician Energy Equalizers Inc. Houston, Texas www.EnergyEqualizers.com |
#39
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
In article , dpb wrote:
Doug Miller wrote: In article .com, billder99 wrote: Guys, Brand new to this forum... great stuff here. Searching for info on "wire nuts vs tape" is how I found this forum and thread. My electrical sub-contractor has been splicing wires with electrical tape. He insists that "3M-33 tape is acceptable for splicing #12 and smaller conductors". I showed both him and my inspector NEC 110-14, which includes the phrase: "... All splices, including ground wires, shall be made with an approved splice cap or wire nut...". No, it doesn't. Not in the latest (2005) Code, anyway. The entire 2005 NEC is available online he http://nfpa-acs-01.gvpi.net:8080/rrs...NFPASTD/7005SB Neither that sentence, nor anything remotely similar to it, appears anywhere in Article 110.14. They still say electric tape is acceptable, but can provide no evidence for this assertion. The evidence is Article 110.14, which states clearly, "All splices and joints and the free ends of conductors shall be covered with an insulation equivalent to that of the conductors or with an insulating device identified for the purpose." [2005 NEC, Article 110.14(B), third sentence] If the tape is listed as providing sufficient insulation, then it's ok. My question: Is there any code that specifically accepts, or denies, the use of electrical tape for splices in residential electrical installations, specifically for wire sizes #12 and smaller. See above. .... But that addresses the _insulation_ of a splice, not the mechanical splice itself. That seemed to be what the question was about... My reading/understanding of the question is that apparently, they're allowing only a twisted connection covered by tape and I don't think that is allowed if so... As far as I can see, it *is* allowed. -- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com) It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again. |
#40
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Crimp-and-tape vs. wirenuts -- for hots?
On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 11:40:56 GMT, (Doug Miller)
wrote: In article , dpb wrote: Doug Miller wrote: In article .com, billder99 wrote: Guys, Brand new to this forum... great stuff here. Searching for info on "wire nuts vs tape" is how I found this forum and thread. My electrical sub-contractor has been splicing wires with electrical tape. He insists that "3M-33 tape is acceptable for splicing #12 and smaller conductors". I showed both him and my inspector NEC 110-14, which includes the phrase: "... All splices, including ground wires, shall be made with an approved splice cap or wire nut...". No, it doesn't. Not in the latest (2005) Code, anyway. The entire 2005 NEC is available online he http://nfpa-acs-01.gvpi.net:8080/rrs...NFPASTD/7005SB Neither that sentence, nor anything remotely similar to it, appears anywhere in Article 110.14. They still say electric tape is acceptable, but can provide no evidence for this assertion. The evidence is Article 110.14, which states clearly, "All splices and joints and the free ends of conductors shall be covered with an insulation equivalent to that of the conductors or with an insulating device identified for the purpose." [2005 NEC, Article 110.14(B), third sentence] If the tape is listed as providing sufficient insulation, then it's ok. My question: Is there any code that specifically accepts, or denies, the use of electrical tape for splices in residential electrical installations, specifically for wire sizes #12 and smaller. See above. .... But that addresses the _insulation_ of a splice, not the mechanical splice itself. That seemed to be what the question was about... My reading/understanding of the question is that apparently, they're allowing only a twisted connection covered by tape and I don't think that is allowed if so... As far as I can see, it *is* allowed. Allowed or not, it's NOT safe. Quality tape is fine to cover bare wires, but it does NOT clamp the ends of twisted connections. Tape is only intended to cover bare wires, NOT to clamp the wires together. If any twist is not perfect, it will likely vibrate loose over time (or immediately), and start arcing. At least, this will cause light to flicker and electronics to fry. At worst, it could cause a fire. The wires have to be soldered, or clamped in another manner to maintain a tight connection. This electrician must be a real cheap son of a b****. Wirenuts cost 10 cents each (or less). How cheap can he be. I'd either insist that he use wirenuts, or find another electrician, and if you keep this one, the hourly wage spent nutting all the wires should be on him, not on you. By the way, I often see electricians wirenutting wires without twisting them. This too is dangerous. Yes, I have done it for a temporary connection, but not permanent. |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Electrical question about splicing into one hot wire for a light from a set of hots for 220 circuit | Home Repair | |||
Wirenuts Part II | Home Repair | |||
Wirenuts | Home Repair | |||
Update Hitachi blowing HOTS | Electronics Repair | |||
Hitachi blowing HOTS | Electronics Repair |