I can't recall whether it was here in CHA or in alt.home.repair (hence the
crosspost) but I am certain I read messages from people who short outlets or
wiring with a screwdriver (instead of using a meter or a fox and hound toner
set) to find the controlling circuit breaker for that branch. The article
below points out the possible downside of that approach:

Missouri: Inquiry Ties Wiring to Fatal Group Home Fire

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/20/us/20brfs-Fire.html

By LIBBY SANDER
Published: December 20, 2006
Hours before a fire killed 10 people in a group home for the mentally ill
and disabled on Nov. 27 in Anderson, a maintenance worker trying to repair a
furnace short-circuited wiring in the attic, where fire investigators said
they believed that the fire started. The worker told investigators that he
did not know which circuit breaker operated the furnace and that he
deliberately tripped the system, according to a report from the Missouri
Fire Safety Division. The wiring may have become overloaded, the report
staid. The fire marshal said the home did not have sprinklers. The report
was obtained by The Associated Press under an open-records law.


--
Bobby G.

tragedy suggests safer constrction codes.

"Gov. Matt Blunt on Friday proposed a sprinkler system mandate for
Missouri's long-term care facilities in response to a fire that killed
11 people at a group home for the mentally ill.
The Anderson Guest House was not equipped with sprinklers when a Nov.
27 fire started in the attic and swept through the one-story building.
After the fire, Blunt ordered a review of Missouri's fire safety
regulations for such facilities. . . .
The report also recommends that smoking be banned in bedrooms and
restricted only to designated smoking areas at long-term-care
facilities."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/n...,5333633.story



Robert Green wrote:
I can't recall whether it was here in CHA or in alt.home.repair (hence the
crosspost) but I am certain I read messages from people who short outlets or
wiring with a screwdriver (instead of using a meter or a fox and hound toner
set) to find the controlling circuit breaker for that branch. The article
below points out the possible downside of that approach:

Missouri: Inquiry Ties Wiring to Fatal Group Home Fire

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/20/us/20brfs-Fire.html

By LIBBY SANDER
Published: December 20, 2006
Hours before a fire killed 10 people in a group home for the mentally ill
and disabled on Nov. 27 in Anderson, a maintenance worker trying to repair a
furnace short-circuited wiring in the attic, where fire investigators said
they believed that the fire started. The worker told investigators that he
did not know which circuit breaker operated the furnace and that he
deliberately tripped the system, according to a report from the Missouri
Fire Safety Division. The wiring may have become overloaded, the report
staid. The fire marshal said the home did not have sprinklers. The report
was obtained by The Associated Press under an open-records law.


--
Bobby G.

Robert Green wrote:
I can't recall whether it was here in CHA or in alt.home.repair (hence the
crosspost) but I am certain I read messages from people who short outlets or
wiring with a screwdriver (instead of using a meter or a fox and hound toner
set) to find the controlling circuit breaker for that branch. The article
below points out the possible downside of that approach:

Missouri: Inquiry Ties Wiring to Fatal Group Home Fire

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/20/us/20brfs-Fire.html

By LIBBY SANDER
Published: December 20, 2006
Hours before a fire killed 10 people in a group home for the mentally ill
and disabled on Nov. 27 in Anderson, a maintenance worker trying to repair a
furnace short-circuited wiring in the attic, where fire investigators said
they believed that the fire started. The worker told investigators that he
did not know which circuit breaker operated the furnace and that he
deliberately tripped the system, according to a report from the Missouri
Fire Safety Division. The wiring may have become overloaded, the report
staid. The fire marshal said the home did not have sprinklers. The report
was obtained by The Associated Press under an open-records law.


--
Bobby G.

If everything is "to code", aside from the personal hazard to the one
doing the shorting, this practice should be completely safe.

But the consequences of something being amiss (not to code, poorly done
wiring, etc) and causing a fire, with damage or worse, is too high a
consequence to pay for a little convenience.

Its a classic "low risk of occurrence, high cost of occurrence"
scenario.

Dave

All it takes is some idiot doing this and the next NEC will require
GFC, and arc faults for everything.

wrote:
Robert Green wrote:
....
...I read messages from people who short outlets or
wiring with a screwdriver (instead of using a meter or a fox and hound toner
set) to find the controlling circuit breaker for that branch. The article
below points out the possible downside of that approach:

Missouri: Inquiry Ties Wiring to Fatal Group Home Fire

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/20/us/20brfs-Fire.html

By LIBBY SANDER
Published: December 20, 2006
Hours before a fire killed 10 people in a group home for the mentally ill
and disabled on Nov. 27 in Anderson, a maintenance worker trying to repair a
furnace short-circuited wiring in the attic, where fire investigators said
they believed that the fire started. The worker told investigators that he
did not know which circuit breaker operated the furnace and that he
deliberately tripped the system, according to a report from the Missouri
Fire Safety Division. The wiring may have become overloaded, ...

If everything is "to code", aside from the personal hazard to the one
doing the shorting, this practice should be completely safe.

But the consequences of something being amiss (not to code, poorly done
wiring, etc) and causing a fire, with damage or worse, is too high a
consequence to pay for a little convenience.

Its a classic "low risk of occurrence, high cost of occurrence"
scenario.

Something seems left out here. As you say, unless there's another
fault, there really is no reason this should cause any problem
whatsoever -- how does the breaker or rest of the circuit "know" it was
a deliberate act as opposed to accidental or a faulty piece of
equipment plugged into an outlet or a ground fault developed in the
furnace blower motor? All the breaker was supposed to do was trip to
remove the fault condition. Did it not do so? If it did, how was
there an "overload" in a dead circuit? Was the breaker over-sized for
the branch wiring?

The fundamental fault appears more deeply embedded and the consequence
could just as easily have occurred had there been another causative
action so I think faulting the maintenance worker unless he left an
undersized jumper in place or some other action other than simply
causing the short seems short-sighted -- finding the underlying fault
that then caused the result should be the focus of investigation, not
simply a person to point blame at. Then again, if he was smoking at
the same time, too, and dropped the end of his cigarette in the attice
w/ onto something flammable beside the location he got access to the
wiring to make the short...

In all, I think there's more to the story still untold...

The local news made mention that there was a poor (inproper) splice on
the circuit (in the attic) and theory is that shorting the circuit,
while it tripped the breaker, was likely the cause of the fire.

This was early on in the investigation, and I only heard it mentioned
once. I live about 50 miles from the home and we had a lot of TV
coverage of this fire - a real tragedy. I was an electrician for 30+
years and never felt this method of finding which breaker controlled a
circuit was wise, but then I still believe fuses are more reliable than
circuit breakers, so what do I know ;-)

John, SW Missouri wrote:
The local news made mention that there was a poor (inproper) splice on
the circuit (in the attic) and theory is that shorting the circuit,
while it tripped the breaker, was likely the cause of the fire.

This was early on in the investigation, and I only heard it mentioned
once. I live about 50 miles from the home and we had a lot of TV
coverage of this fire - a real tragedy. I was an electrician for 30+
years and never felt this method of finding which breaker controlled a
circuit was wise, but then I still believe fuses are more reliable than
circuit breakers, so what do I know ;-)

That at least makes some sense -- see my previous comment. More than
likely in this case there was a high resistance at that point and may
have well been operating at nearly the combustion point for quite some
time. The actual action only shortened the time until it would have
happened "spontaneously" in high likelihood if that were the case.

I really still don't see the difference between the accidental and
deliberate short as a fundamental problem. I don't much like the
practice as it just doesn't seem "right" somehow, but fundamentally it
requires the second fault for a problem to occur. It may, as in this
case, uncover a hidden fault with bad consequences, but that still is a
fault separate and the event being overt instead of covert is only
circumstantial.

Interestingly enough, I had a hot tub -- 220 volt, GFI in the basement.
If there was a fault - motor overload, etc., it seemed to deliberately
shut itself down by causing a "short."

Hey it worked in the dorm (mumble mumble years ago) to silence the
neighbors' stereo on the same circuit. LOL

dpb wrote:
wrote:
Robert Green wrote:
...
...I read messages from people who short outlets or
wiring with a screwdriver (instead of using a meter or a fox and hound toner
set) to find the controlling circuit breaker for that branch. The article
below points out the possible downside of that approach:

Missouri: Inquiry Ties Wiring to Fatal Group Home Fire

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/20/us/20brfs-Fire.html

By LIBBY SANDER
Published: December 20, 2006
Hours before a fire killed 10 people in a group home for the mentally ill
and disabled on Nov. 27 in Anderson, a maintenance worker trying to repair a
furnace short-circuited wiring in the attic, where fire investigators said
they believed that the fire started. The worker told investigators that he
did not know which circuit breaker operated the furnace and that he
deliberately tripped the system, according to a report from the Missouri
Fire Safety Division. The wiring may have become overloaded, ...

If everything is "to code", aside from the personal hazard to the one
doing the shorting, this practice should be completely safe.

But the consequences of something being amiss (not to code, poorly done
wiring, etc) and causing a fire, with damage or worse, is too high a
consequence to pay for a little convenience.

Its a classic "low risk of occurrence, high cost of occurrence"
scenario.

Something seems left out here. As you say, unless there's another
fault, there really is no reason this should cause any problem
whatsoever -- how does the breaker or rest of the circuit "know" it was
a deliberate act as opposed to accidental or a faulty piece of
equipment plugged into an outlet or a ground fault developed in the
furnace blower motor? All the breaker was supposed to do was trip to
remove the fault condition. Did it not do so? If it did, how was
there an "overload" in a dead circuit? Was the breaker over-sized for
the branch wiring?

The fundamental fault appears more deeply embedded and the consequence
could just as easily have occurred had there been another causative
action so I think faulting the maintenance worker unless he left an
undersized jumper in place or some other action other than simply
causing the short seems short-sighted -- finding the underlying fault
that then caused the result should be the focus of investigation, not
simply a person to point blame at. Then again, if he was smoking at
the same time, too, and dropped the end of his cigarette in the attice
w/ onto something flammable beside the location he got access to the
wiring to make the short...

In all, I think there's more to the story still untold...

Just wanted to note I wasn't trying to support this practice in any
way- it's never responsible to commit an act that might endanger others
unless every last thing is perfect.

Dave

Hey it worked in the dorm (mumble mumble
years ago) to silence the neighbors' stereo
on the same circuit. LOL

It also works well on a coax silencing an annoying character's CB radio with illegal linear amplifier. "Blown finals" does not
necessarily refer to exams. :^)

Robert Green wrote:
I can't recall whether it was here in CHA or in alt.home.repair (hence the
crosspost) but I am certain I read messages from people who short outlets or
wiring with a screwdriver (instead of using a meter or a fox and hound toner
set) to find the controlling circuit breaker for that branch. The article
below points out the possible downside of that approach:

Missouri: Inquiry Ties Wiring to Fatal Group Home Fire

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/20/us/20brfs-Fire.html

By LIBBY SANDER
Published: December 20, 2006
Hours before a fire killed 10 people in a group home for the mentally ill
and disabled on Nov. 27 in Anderson, a maintenance worker trying to repair a
furnace short-circuited wiring in the attic, where fire investigators said
they believed that the fire started. The worker told investigators that he
did not know which circuit breaker operated the furnace and that he
deliberately tripped the system, according to a report from the Missouri
Fire Safety Division. The wiring may have become overloaded, the report
staid. The fire marshal said the home did not have sprinklers. The report
was obtained by The Associated Press under an open-records law.


--
Bobby G.

Then what the Hell good are the circuit breakers?

z wrote:
Robert Green wrote:
I can't recall whether it was here in CHA or in alt.home.repair (hence the
crosspost) but I am certain I read messages from people who short outlets or
wiring with a screwdriver (instead of using a meter or a fox and hound toner
set) to find the controlling circuit breaker for that branch. The article
below points out the possible downside of that approach:

Missouri: Inquiry Ties Wiring to Fatal Group Home Fire

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/20/us/20brfs-Fire.html

By LIBBY SANDER
Published: December 20, 2006
Hours before a fire killed 10 people in a group home for the mentally ill
and disabled on Nov. 27 in Anderson, a maintenance worker trying to repair a
furnace short-circuited wiring in the attic, where fire investigators said
they believed that the fire started. The worker told investigators that he
did not know which circuit breaker operated the furnace and that he
deliberately tripped the system, according to a report from the Missouri
Fire Safety Division. The wiring may have become overloaded, the report
staid. The fire marshal said the home did not have sprinklers. The report
was obtained by The Associated Press under an open-records law.


--
Bobby G.

Then what the Hell good are the circuit breakers?

The problem occurrs when there is some part of the system between the
shorting-point and the breaker that is not up to code.

Dave

In article om,
says...

If everything is "to code", aside from the personal hazard to the one
doing the shorting, this practice should be completely safe.

Unless, while specified to code, the breaker panel is one that tolerates
currents grossly in excess of the nominal capacity of the breakers.

(Our house had an untrippable Zinsco panel when we bought it.)

--
is Joshua Putnam
http://www.phred.org/~josh/
Braze your own bicycle frames. See
http://www.phred.org/~josh/build/build.html

wrote:
z wrote:
Robert Green wrote:
I can't recall whether it was here in CHA or in alt.home.repair (hence the
crosspost) but I am certain I read messages from people who short outlets or
wiring with a screwdriver (instead of using a meter or a fox and hound toner
set) to find the controlling circuit breaker for that branch. The article
below points out the possible downside of that approach:

Missouri: Inquiry Ties Wiring to Fatal Group Home Fire

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/20/us/20brfs-Fire.html

By LIBBY SANDER
Published: December 20, 2006
Hours before a fire killed 10 people in a group home for the mentally ill
and disabled on Nov. 27 in Anderson, a maintenance worker trying to repair a
furnace short-circuited wiring in the attic, where fire investigators said
they believed that the fire started. ...

....
Then what the Hell good are the circuit breakers?

The problem occurrs when there is some part of the system between the
shorting-point and the breaker that is not up to code.

But if that is the case (as at least one poster has said was reported
in the subject event), it's also the case whether the short is induced
intentionally or not and so it isn't the shorting that's the
fundamental problem but the other fault. If the intentional short
causes a catastrophic problem, it's highly likely an unintentional one
will, too.

On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 01:03:28 -0500, "Robert Green"
wrote:

I can't recall whether it was here in CHA or in alt.home.repair (hence the
crosspost) but I am certain I read messages from people who short outlets or
wiring with a screwdriver (instead of using a meter or a fox and hound toner
set) to find the controlling circuit breaker for that branch. The article
below points out the possible downside of that approach:

Missouri: Inquiry Ties Wiring to Fatal Group Home Fire

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/20/us/20brfs-Fire.html

By LIBBY SANDER
Published: December 20, 2006
Hours before a fire killed 10 people in a group home for the mentally ill
and disabled on Nov. 27 in Anderson, a maintenance worker trying to repair a
furnace short-circuited wiring in the attic, where fire investigators said
they believed that the fire started. The worker told investigators that he
did not know which circuit breaker operated the furnace and that he
deliberately tripped the system, according to a report from the Missouri
Fire Safety Division. The wiring may have become overloaded, the report
staid. The fire marshal said the home did not have sprinklers. The report
was obtained by The Associated Press under an open-records law.


Good info. I was always told, never intentially create a makeshift
fault to test a protective device, because it might only be designed
to work once, or it might fail badly, and never work right ever again.
Creating a dangerious situation.

Always use 'approved' techniques, test buttons, etc. Oh and only use
qualified electricians.

tom @ www.BlankHelp.com

dpb wrote:
wrote:
z wrote:
Robert Green wrote:
I can't recall whether it was here in CHA or in alt.home.repair (hence the
crosspost) but I am certain I read messages from people who short outlets or
wiring with a screwdriver (instead of using a meter or a fox and hound toner
set) to find the controlling circuit breaker for that branch. The article
below points out the possible downside of that approach:

Missouri: Inquiry Ties Wiring to Fatal Group Home Fire

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/20/us/20brfs-Fire.html

By LIBBY SANDER
Published: December 20, 2006
Hours before a fire killed 10 people in a group home for the mentally ill
and disabled on Nov. 27 in Anderson, a maintenance worker trying to repair a
furnace short-circuited wiring in the attic, where fire investigators said
they believed that the fire started. ...

...
Then what the Hell good are the circuit breakers?

The problem occurrs when there is some part of the system between the
shorting-point and the breaker that is not up to code.

But if that is the case (as at least one poster has said was reported
in the subject event), it's also the case whether the short is induced
intentionally or not and so it isn't the shorting that's the
fundamental problem but the other fault. If the intentional short
causes a catastrophic problem, it's highly likely an unintentional one
will, too.

Yes, that's a given.

Would it be morally wrong to short outlets during a home inspection?

Dave

wrote:
In article om,
says...

If everything is "to code", aside from the personal hazard to the one
doing the shorting, this practice should be completely safe.

Unless, while specified to code, the breaker panel is one that tolerates
currents grossly in excess of the nominal capacity of the breakers.

(Our house had an untrippable Zinsco panel when we bought it.)

--
is Joshua Putnam
http://www.phred.org/~josh/
Braze your own bicycle frames. See
http://www.phred.org/~josh/build/build.html

Well, breakers that don't break when they're supposed to is a fault in
itself!

Exactly the kind of occurrence that makes me say 'never do this',
because it requires a chain of wires/splices/devices that ALL have to
be perfect for this to be 'safe'.

Dave

"Robert Green" wrote:

(Quoted)
Hours before a fire killed 10 people in a group home for the mentally ill
and disabled on Nov. 27 in Anderson, a maintenance worker trying to repair
a
furnace short-circuited wiring in the attic, where fire investigators said
they believed that the fire started. The worker told investigators that he
did not know which circuit breaker operated the furnace and that he
deliberately tripped the system, according to a report from the Missouri
Fire Safety Division. The wiring may have become overloaded, the report
staid. The fire marshal said the home did not have sprinklers. The report
was obtained by The Associated Press under an open-records law.

Imagine how many more people might have died if the fire had occurred from
an unintentional fault. Maybe no one would have died if it had never been
shorted, but there was obviously a deeper problem than an electrician with a
screwdriver.

wrote:
wrote:
In article om,
says...

If everything is "to code", aside from the personal hazard to the one
doing the shorting, this practice should be completely safe.

Unless, while specified to code, the breaker panel is one that tolerates
currents grossly in excess of the nominal capacity of the breakers.

(Our house had an untrippable Zinsco panel when we bought it.)

--
is Joshua Putnam
http://www.phred.org/~josh/
Braze your own bicycle frames. See
http://www.phred.org/~josh/build/build.html

Well, breakers that don't break when they're supposed to is a fault in
itself!

Exactly the kind of occurrence that makes me say 'never do this',
because it requires a chain of wires/splices/devices that ALL have to
be perfect for this to be 'safe'.

But unless that condition is true, it isn't "safe" anyway, so it's a
false comfort at best...

Well I am the poster who checks breakers by shorting

First I turn OFF the breaker!

Then I check its dead with a test lamp or meter!

Then I short it intentionally just in case!

Over the years this method has saved me from some possibly nasty
shocks

I have discovered boxes fed with multiple power sources in one box,
never a good idea if you ask me......

I have also discovered some bad breakers that didnt trip under full
short. On these I replaced all the breakers in the panel

Also leared FPE stab lock breakers are a known fire hazard......

I dont believe theres a difference between a intential or accidental
short, the breakers should trip either way. 100% of the time. and
become more sensitive to overloads as they age.....

For good reasons soon ALL receptables will be GFCI and arc fault
protected

Some would argue NO GOOD in a residential environment. Consider a 15
amp circuit in a 30 year old home, that has never been tripped in 30
years. Now someone plugs in a faulty space heater and it overloads the
circuit, but the breaker doesn't trip ! Don't think this can't happen.

This is one of the reason I like fuses. They trip no matter what age
they are.

When they first used circuit breakers they were exclusive to commercial
installations. In fact many were used for lighting and acted as the
switch for the lights. The maintenance man went around each evening
and turned off the breakers to shut down the lights. This amounted to
"exercising" the breakers and likely kept them mechanically sound.

Breakers can also be "welded" - something you would never find in a
fuse.

There are also different grades of circuit breakeres and you can bet
builders aren't using the top-of-the-line in residential construction.


The fire we are talking about was a residential care facility, but if
you saw the before pictures you would realize it was nothing more than
an old wood building. Many parts of rural Missouri lack any type of
building codes.

Again, these are just my personal opinions, YMMV.




Then what the Hell good are the circuit breakers?

Under normal conditions, the breaker trips before any equipment
damage is done. These may have been defective breakers.

--

Christopher A. Young
You can't shout down a troll.
You have to starve them.
..

"z" wrote in message
oups.com...

Then what the Hell good are the circuit breakers?

That, or the now famous FPE, Federal Pacific Electric. Noted for
not tripping.

--

Christopher A. Young
You can't shout down a troll.
You have to starve them.
..

wrote in message
.net...
Unless, while specified to code, the breaker panel is one that
tolerates
currents grossly in excess of the nominal capacity of the
breakers.

(Our house had an untrippable Zinsco panel when we bought it.)

On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 01:03:28 -0500, "Robert Green"
wrote in message
:

I can't recall whether it was here in CHA or in alt.home.repair (hence the
crosspost) but I am certain I read messages from people who short outlets or
wiring with a screwdriver (instead of using a meter or a fox and hound toner
set) to find the controlling circuit breaker for that branch. The article
below points out the possible downside of that approach:

Missouri: Inquiry Ties Wiring to Fatal Group Home Fire

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/20/us/20brfs-Fire.html

By LIBBY SANDER
Published: December 20, 2006
Hours before a fire killed 10 people in a group home for the mentally ill
and disabled on Nov. 27 in Anderson, a maintenance worker trying to repair a
furnace short-circuited wiring in the attic, where fire investigators said
they believed that the fire started. The worker told investigators that he
did not know which circuit breaker operated the furnace and that he
deliberately tripped the system, according to a report from the Missouri
Fire Safety Division. The wiring may have become overloaded, the report
staid. The fire marshal said the home did not have sprinklers. The report
was obtained by The Associated Press under an open-records law.

Sounds like untested hypothesis used to fuel conjecture. (See below ;-)

Quote: "The wiring MAY have become overloaded" hence "blow[ing] breakers
MIGHT be a bad idea (my emphasis).

A literal reading of the NYTimes article does _not_ indicate that the fire
was shown to be caused by tripping a breaker in my opinion. The information
provided is insufficient to know what actually happened. I'd need much better
information before making any inferences from this vague description.

http://www.townhall.com/News/NewsArt...c-6a54a9fe707d
" The Nov. 27 fire at the Anderson Guest House started in the attic
and swept through the one-story building. State fire officials cited an
electrical short or overload as a possible cause. "

"The facility had been cited for failing to conduct an annual fire
inspection in 2000, but had not been cited for fire problems in more recent
years. The three other facilities run by the same company all had received
fire safety citations since 2003."

Based on only the information provided, it is possible that _nothing_ that
the worker did had _anything_ to do with starting the fire -- much less
popping the breakers. The furnace (which is itself a mechanism for creating
fire) was broken _before_ he started and the article is mute on even whether
that was fixed.

Or the worker may have jumped or shorted out a furnace component such as an
SCR, and _also_ popped the breaker with the latter having nothing whatever to
do with causing the fire.

If the worker shorted out or interconnected components or wires in an
electromechanical system, even temporarily, he may have damaged something
creating the hazard in that way. He was, it is written, trying to repair a
furnace, which has motors and relays and sensors and burners that themselves
create fire.

I recently discovered that the single control on my downstairs heating system
that turns the burners off if the boiler gets too hot is a single
thermostatic mercury switch on the hot water pipe leaving the boiler. If the
circulation pump were to fail AND the mercury switch failed, the gas burners
would _never_ turn off because the thermostat would continue to call for heat
and the 80,000 BTUs produced by the boiler would not be removed by
circulating the water so the house wouldn't heat.

Moreover, the circulating water goes only to a heat exchanger in the air
handler. So a similar problem could be created if the multi-stage thermostat
(heat pump, boiler, or heat pump + boiler) was inappropriately programmed
and the lone thermostatic switch failed. I discovered during the programming
of a communicating two-stage heating thermostat that in one possible mode,
the only thing between normal temperatures and an overheated boiler *was*
that single heat-actuated switch! (I've added a second switch to my own
setup as is required -- I've been told -- by commercial at least some
residential codes .)

So if the existing problem the worker was trying to fix was (eg) a bad pump,
and the added problem he caused (or not) was stuck overtemperature switch,
the combination (as in my case) could itself cause a fire -- especially if
such a system were in an attic (as in the case cited) surrounded by squirrel
nests or leaves or stored items or other flammable items. Or not ;-)


.... Marc
Marc_F_Hult
www.ECOntrol.org

Last I heard they had pretty much decided that it will be impossible to
determine the cause of the fire. There's no doubt that service done
just prior to the fire will always be suspect. About 10 months ago a
Chinese restaurant near me had a small fire just before closing. The
fire department came and put out the small fire and told the owners to
go home. About an hour later another fire was called in and the
building was a total loss. Seems the fire department didn't do a very
good job of checking and a small undetected fire in the duct was the
cause of the more serious fire.

After a recent storm in my area there were numerous dumpsters in my
neighborhood. One was filled half full with damp to wet roll
insulation. Apparently someone threw a cigarette or something hot into
the dumpster and started this insulation burning. I don't believe it
ever really grew into flames, but it smoldered all night and when we
came back in the morning the paint was totally burned off the dumpster
from the heat. The insulation was still smolderng and putting out a
lot of smoke, but no flame. Prior to this I had been under the
assumption that insulation was sort of fire resistant - guess not.

I have been a office machine service tech my entire adult life since
1975, we are trained to test by overloading etc all resettable safety
devices so we know they work when needed

Last I heard they had pretty much
decided that it will be impossible
to determine the cause of the fire.
There's no doubt that service done
just prior to the fire will always be
suspect...

I've read a number of online news reports aqbout the Anderson group home fire. I didn't find anything about an electrician having
shorted anything. Do you know a link to this information? Absent that, I wonder if this isn't part fact (the fire certainly did
occur) and part modern urban legend.

--

Regards,
Robert L Bass

=============================
Bass Home Electronics
941-866-1100
4883 Fallcrest Circle
Sarasota · Florida · 34233
http://www.bassburglaralarms.com
=============================

Robert L Bass wrote:

I've read a number of online news reports aqbout the Anderson group home fire. I didn't find anything about an electrician having
shorted anything. Do you know a link to this information? Absent that, I wonder if this isn't part fact (the fire certainly did
occur) and part modern urban legend.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/20/us/20brfs-Fire.html

"The worker told investigators that he did not know which circuit
breaker operated the furnace and that he deliberately tripped the
system, according to a report from the Missouri Fire Safety Division."

wrote:

Would it be morally wrong to short outlets during a home inspection?

It would be stupid. This thread is a testament to that.

The URL requires a login. Thanks for posting the quote.

--

Regards,
Robert L Bass

=============================
Bass Home Electronics
941-866-1100
4883 Fallcrest Circle
Sarasota · Florida · 34233
http://www.bassburglaralarms.com
=============================



"volts500" wrote in message oups.com...

Robert L Bass wrote:

I've read a number of online news reports aqbout the Anderson group home fire. I didn't find anything about an electrician
having
shorted anything. Do you know a link to this information? Absent that, I wonder if this isn't part fact (the fire certainly did
occur) and part modern urban legend.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/20/us/20brfs-Fire.html

"The worker told investigators that he did not know which circuit
breaker operated the furnace and that he deliberately tripped the
system, according to a report from the Missouri Fire Safety Division."

The URL requires a login. Thanks for posting the quote.

www.bugmenot.com is handy for working around those.

Nurse, where does that vein come from?

I don't know doctor, lets tie it off and see what artery pops.

Cool, it will save us a lot of time.

volts500 wrote:
wrote:

Would it be morally wrong to short outlets during a home inspection?

It would be stupid. This thread is a testament to that.

Not as stupid as buying the house, plugging in a space heater, and
going to bed.

Tom The Great wrote:
Good info. I was always told, never intentially create a makeshift
fault to test a protective device, because it might only be designed
to work once, or it might fail badly, and never work right ever again.

No wonder my fuse-tester isn't working right!