DIYbanter - View Single Post - SIMPLE electrical job. Cost via electrician? chg direct-wire to plug & socket

Bud--

On 2/4/2012 3:17 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 10:16:26 -0600,
wrote:

On 2/3/2012 8:25 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 03 Feb 2012 20:37:07 -0500, wrote:

On 2/3/2012 7:13 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 03 Feb 2012 18:48:40 -0500, wrote:

On 2/3/2012 6:30 PM, mike wrote:
On 2/3/2012 1:34 PM, Horace Greeley wrote:
On 2/3/2012 7:22 AM, RBM wrote:
On 2/2/2012 11:05 PM, wrote:

I've seen furnaces connected with a twist-lock plug - it meets the
requirement for a disconnect within reach of the furnace.(takes the
place of a switch) and is also a foolproof way of connecting to a
genset.

That maybe true in Canada, but it doesn't meet 422.16 of the Nec, in the
U.S., at least not for your garden variety central heating system.

Check with your local electrical inspector.

If done properly, ours said it was legal and safe to do the plug and
cord setup.

His only recommendation was to use a 12 gauge appliance cord set, proper
strain relief (not romex clamp) and a high-quality 20 amp receptacle.

I went thru the same process.
Prevailing opinion is that devices permanently attached to the structure
must be permanently wired. Heating system seems to be permanently attached.
Reading the NEC, it appears that's what it says.

The Nec requires that it be designed to be unattached , and removed for
servicing, for a cord and plug to be used. Not too many central heating
systems that meet that criteria.

So, I went down to the permit office and talked with the inspector.
He said, "no problem; putting a socket in the box and plug on the wire
will pass my inspection".

That's only the "B" part.
There IS another allowed reason.

422.16 Flexible Cords.
(A) General. Flexible cord shall be permitted (1) for the
connection of appliances to facilitate their frequent interchange
or to prevent the transmission of noise or vibration

A power failure every year or less can be considered "frequent
interchange". - if you don't wish to make a case for anti-vibration
(and you do not have a "compliant connection" or whatever you call the
fabric connector on the duct hood.

Boy, you are one master of misinterpretation. It's referring to
interchanging the appliance. You don't replace your boiler because of
frequent power failures.
I would love to see you try and run your silly arguments by an
electrical inspector. They'd laugh you right out of the business.

They get inspected and passed all the time. And not just in Ontario,
or Canada.

And you determined that from your Ouija board?

Google it like I did.
It is being done and passed in Pennsylvania for sure.

Anecdotal evidence of "all the time". What a great idea.
Astrology works "all the time".

You and Evan generalize what is (allegedly) true where you are to the
universe.

You are generalizing about something you apparently don't know any
more about than I do.

Like RBM I am commenting on NEC requirements.

I agree with RBM.

To take a slightly different approach, use of cords is covered in
article 410. Uses permitted is in 410.7-A. Possibly relevant sections a
"(6) Connection of utilization equipment to facilitate frequent interchange.
(7) Prevention of the transmission of noise or vibration.
(8) Appliances where the fastening means and mechanical connections are
specifically designed to permit ready removal for maintenance...."

Sections 6 and 8 are not relevant to boilers in the US. You may have to
often replace your boilers (6) or remove them for maintenance in Canada
(7) but it does not happen in the US.

Any competent electrician in the US (don't know about Canada where
electricians "molest" the wiring) can connect a boiler and avoid the
transmission of vibration. There are numerous flexible wiring methods
and our boilers are massive enough not to vibrate.

But if we imported a Canadian boiler that had enough vibration problem
that a flexible cord was need we couldn't connect it with a plug. Plugs
are covered in 410.7-B. Plugs are not permitted for (7) above.

That is consistent with the more limited 422.16 and with what RBM said.

Incidentally, if a receptacle was allowed it wouldn't be a duplex
receptacle which you suggested.

Correct. Code DOES say a "dedicated" outlet - which in it's strictest
interpretation is a single outlet.

Strictest? It is the interpretation that any competent electrician would
use.

Again - I DID later say I
recommended a 20 amp twist-lock - and every one of THOSE I have run
across recently IS a single outlet.

You could also read the comments of gfretwell who basically says it is
(a minor) wrong but he would do it anyway. (Is it any wonder our youth
are in trouble. Where are the role models...)

There is no safety or logical resaon NOT to. I suspect it is a
carry-over from some reason that USED to exist.

Nothing has changed. Cord is tested primarily for flexibility. Tests of,
for instance, romex are much more extensive. Cord is not intended to be
a permanent wiring method and is not allowed "as a substitute for the
fixed wiring of a structure."

RBM provided a connection method that is code compliant. The same method
could be done cheaper if built from parts if you are doing it yourself.
The OP asked about having an electrician do it. An electrician is real
unlikely to wire a cord and plug unless they have cleared their method
with the AHJ. The AHJ is not available.

And in the US a 20A receptacle wired with #12 wire but on a 15A breaker
is a code violation.

--
bud--