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 Search this Thread Display Modes
  #81   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18,538
Default Breakers compatible with Federal Pacific Stab-Lok Load Center

On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 19:49:02 +0000, Let's get it right!
wrote:

replying to , Let's get it right! wrote:
trader4 wrote:

What 15 ampere label? I just looked at a cordless phone base
station, a hair dryer, a Breville electric kettle, and a Brother
multi-function copier/printer. All say UL listed, 120 V, 60 Hz
and the amps/watts, the printer being 9.6A. No where does it
say that it can't be plugged into an outlet that is on a 20 amp
circuit. So, what label exactly are you referring to? If this
is such a danger, then is should be easy to find a user manual
for any of this common appliances that says not to plug it into
a circuit that is greater than 15 amps. I've yet to see one.
Surely you're not
What "it" is that? There is nothing on my appliances labels or
instructions that I'm ignoring. It shows they are UL listed,
120V 50/60 hz, 5 amps, 600 watts, that's all.
You must be a troll. Do you not realize that 20 amp circuits with
15 amp outlets are permitted in the NEC and that they are being
installed by licensed electricians in millions of houses? And
passed by the electrical inspectors?
And you have yet to explain the alleged fire/shock hazard that this
presents compared to a simple floor lamp that uses an 18 gauge cord
on a 15 amp circuit.

Nonsense. There are standard ratings for circuit breakers of
100 amp too, so what? You really are confused.

I just did. I'm waiting for you to show us an appliance manual for
any commonly used household appliances that say that it can only
be used on a 15 amp circuit. I've read many of them over decades and
I don't ever recall seeing any such thing. Cite please.



You missed the point. Even if the label say 0.1 amperes, it's appropriate
to apply the device to a branch circuit of not more than 15-amperes, the
smallest standard size breaker ... which provides the maximum protection..


Goggle McMaster Carr, Three conductor indoor/outdoor extension cords.
Nearly all are rated at a maximum of 10 to 15 amperes at 125 VAC. A
20-ampere circuit breaker will not protect such devices. A 15-ampere
circuit breaker will.

A 15 amp breaker will no more protect a 10 amp cord than a 20 will
protect a 15 amp cord

Just because this is the way it's been done in millions of houses doesn't
make it right. In fact, it supports my argument (Get it Right).

You cannot legislate intelligence
  #82   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18,538
Default Breakers compatible with Federal Pacific Stab-Lok Load Center

On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 19:46:02 +0000, Let's get it right!
wrote:

replying to clare , Let's get it right! wrote:
clare wrote:

On Fri, 20 Dec 2013 18:44:01 +0000, Let's get it right!
You can easily overload a listed 10 amp extension cord with a NEMA
5-15 plug even on a 15 amp breaker - You seem to be a very strong
advocate for "nanny state" interference at all levels of life - the
government has to protect everybody because they are too stupid to
protect themselves. It's bad enough that way in Canada already. You
can't legislate intelligence, and you can't outlaw stupid. And getting
the government involved in "protecting the people" against everything
just guarantees that "stupid" wins.
Are you a lawyer, or do you just play one on TV?????




This is called an "Appeal to Authority" argument (Goggle it!).

No, I'm not a lawyer. However, I am a Licensed Professional Engineer.
I've engineered "Listed" equipment, and designed branch circuit protection
for DOD facilities. I'm not aware of any fires/shock hazards attributed
to my works over the past 45-years.. However, I've determined the cause
of fires of several facilities .... all due to improper branch circuit
protection, and yet the "As-Built" drawing, reviewed and certified by the
local regulatory agency as complying with NEC, didn't comply!

If there we're accountability for improper branch circuit protection, and
the resulting fires and shock hazards, this problem would be cleaned up.
The forum has really exposed the ignorance and arrogance of the user's of
NEC ... and at all levels.

I'm prepared to support my argument in court, as I've done in the past!
Would you?

A good friend of mine is working on an "intelligent " power plug
system that would read the power rating of the load and program the
protection level of the outlet to match - but it cannot support an
extention cord.
  #83   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18,538
Default Breakers compatible with Federal Pacific Stab-Lok Load Center

On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 19:46:02 +0000, Let's get it right!
wrote:

replying to clare , Let's get it right! wrote:
clare wrote:

On Fri, 20 Dec 2013 18:44:01 +0000, Let's get it right!
You can easily overload a listed 10 amp extension cord with a NEMA
5-15 plug even on a 15 amp breaker - You seem to be a very strong
advocate for "nanny state" interference at all levels of life - the
government has to protect everybody because they are too stupid to
protect themselves. It's bad enough that way in Canada already. You
can't legislate intelligence, and you can't outlaw stupid. And getting
the government involved in "protecting the people" against everything
just guarantees that "stupid" wins.
Are you a lawyer, or do you just play one on TV?????




This is called an "Appeal to Authority" argument (Goggle it!).

No, I'm not a lawyer. However, I am a Licensed Professional Engineer.
I've engineered "Listed" equipment, and designed branch circuit protection
for DOD facilities. I'm not aware of any fires/shock hazards attributed
to my works over the past 45-years.. However, I've determined the cause
of fires of several facilities .... all due to improper branch circuit
protection, and yet the "As-Built" drawing, reviewed and certified by the
local regulatory agency as complying with NEC, didn't comply!

If there we're accountability for improper branch circuit protection, and
the resulting fires and shock hazards, this problem would be cleaned up.
The forum has really exposed the ignorance and arrogance of the user's of
NEC ... and at all levels.

I'm prepared to support my argument in court, as I've done in the past!
Would you?


I still think you'd make a better lawyer - - -

  #84   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18,538
Default Breakers compatible with Federal Pacific Stab-Lok Load Center

On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 19:45:02 +0000, Let's get it right!
wrote:

replying to bud-- , Let's get it right! wrote:
null wrote:

Write a code change proposal. I am confident you will receive the
appropriate consideration.
Petition UL to change its standards. I am confident you will receive the
appropriate consideration.
A 15A circuit breaker does not protect #16 or #18 wires. Include in your
petition to UL and the NEC prohibiting anything smaller than #14 wire.
My desk lamp deserves a #14 cord.
And include in your code change proposal correction for the blatant
over-sizing of protection for fixture wires in 240.5-B-2.
Also include in your code change proposal correction for the blatant
over-sizing of circuit breakers for motors, and even worse, welders. And
I don't even want to think about what they do with fire pumps - it could
cause a fire.
Everyone understands your argument.
As I have explained several times, including quoted above, 110.3
(inspection) is not used for "listed" equipment. The AHJ does not second
guess the listing standard. The AHJ determines the device is used
according to the manufacturers instructions and conditions of listing.
I am a licensed master electrician. I have explained how the NEC and UL
work.
Are you Pete C. in drag?



U.L. isn't the problem. They are doing it right!
The problem is interpretation of NEC. You can't protect a listed device
that utilizes a NEMA 5-15 power cord set from a 20 ampere circuit breaker.
Goggle McMaster Carr, extension cords. None are rated at more than
15-amperes @ 125 VAC. See the problem?

Funny, I have both 20 and 30 amp extention cords.
  #85   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,105
Default Breakers compatible with Federal Pacific Stab-Lok Load Center

On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 23:23:28 -0500, wrote:

On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 19:46:02 +0000, Let's get it right!
m wrote:

replying to clare , Let's get it right! wrote:
clare wrote:

On Fri, 20 Dec 2013 18:44:01 +0000, Let's get it right!
You can easily overload a listed 10 amp extension cord with a NEMA
5-15 plug even on a 15 amp breaker - You seem to be a very strong
advocate for "nanny state" interference at all levels of life - the
government has to protect everybody because they are too stupid to
protect themselves. It's bad enough that way in Canada already. You
can't legislate intelligence, and you can't outlaw stupid. And getting
the government involved in "protecting the people" against everything
just guarantees that "stupid" wins.
Are you a lawyer, or do you just play one on TV?????




This is called an "Appeal to Authority" argument (Goggle it!).

No, I'm not a lawyer. However, I am a Licensed Professional Engineer.
I've engineered "Listed" equipment, and designed branch circuit protection
for DOD facilities. I'm not aware of any fires/shock hazards attributed
to my works over the past 45-years.. However, I've determined the cause
of fires of several facilities .... all due to improper branch circuit
protection, and yet the "As-Built" drawing, reviewed and certified by the
local regulatory agency as complying with NEC, didn't comply!

If there we're accountability for improper branch circuit protection, and
the resulting fires and shock hazards, this problem would be cleaned up.
The forum has really exposed the ignorance and arrogance of the user's of
NEC ... and at all levels.

I'm prepared to support my argument in court, as I've done in the past!
Would you?

A good friend of mine is working on an "intelligent " power plug
system that would read the power rating of the load and program the
protection level of the outlet to match - but it cannot support an
extention cord.


How does that work? Why not just fuse the plugs, as the Brits do?
Simple beats complicated all to hell.


  #86   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,463
Default Breakers compatible with Federal Pacific Stab-Lok Load Center

On 12/23/2013 11:20 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 23:23:28 -0500,
wrote:

On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 19:46:02 +0000, Let's get it right!
wrote:

replying to clare , Let's get it right! wrote:
clare wrote:

On Fri, 20 Dec 2013 18:44:01 +0000, Let's get it right! You can
easily overload a listed 10 amp extension cord with a NEMA 5-15
plug even on a 15 amp breaker - You seem to be a very strong
advocate for "nanny state" interference at all levels of life -
the government has to protect everybody because they are too
stupid to protect themselves. It's bad enough that way in
Canada already. You can't legislate intelligence, and you
can't outlaw stupid. And getting the government involved in
"protecting the people" against everything just guarantees that
"stupid" wins. Are you a lawyer, or do you just play one on
TV?????



This is called an "Appeal to Authority" argument (Goggle it!).

No, I'm not a lawyer. However, I am a Licensed Professional
Engineer. I've engineered "Listed" equipment, and designed branch
circuit protection for DOD facilities. I'm not aware of any
fires/shock hazards attributed to my works over the past
45-years.. However, I've determined the cause of fires of
several facilities .... all due to improper branch circuit
protection, and yet the "As-Built" drawing, reviewed and
certified by the local regulatory agency as complying with NEC,
didn't comply!

If there we're accountability for improper branch circuit
protection, and the resulting fires and shock hazards, this
problem would be cleaned up. The forum has really exposed the
ignorance and arrogance of the user's of NEC ... and at all
levels.

I'm prepared to support my argument in court, as I've done in the
past! Would you?

A good friend of mine is working on an "intelligent " power plug
system that would read the power rating of the load and program
the protection level of the outlet to match - but it cannot support
an extention cord.


How does that work? Why not just fuse the plugs, as the Brits do?
Simple beats complicated all to hell.

I'm sure you know that a lot of gear has a fused IEC14 inlet on the back
of the case. If the equipment short circuits, the fuse blows and
I would guess prevent an over current on an undamaged power cord. ^_^

TDD
  #87   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,399
Default Breakers compatible with Federal Pacific Stab-Lok Load Center

On Monday, December 23, 2013 11:21:08 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 19:49:02 +0000, Let's get it right!

wrote:



replying to , Let's get it right! wrote:


trader4 wrote:




What 15 ampere label? I just looked at a cordless phone base


station, a hair dryer, a Breville electric kettle, and a Brother


multi-function copier/printer. All say UL listed, 120 V, 60 Hz


and the amps/watts, the printer being 9.6A. No where does it


say that it can't be plugged into an outlet that is on a 20 amp


circuit. So, what label exactly are you referring to? If this


is such a danger, then is should be easy to find a user manual


for any of this common appliances that says not to plug it into


a circuit that is greater than 15 amps. I've yet to see one.


Surely you're not


What "it" is that? There is nothing on my appliances labels or


instructions that I'm ignoring. It shows they are UL listed,


120V 50/60 hz, 5 amps, 600 watts, that's all.


You must be a troll. Do you not realize that 20 amp circuits with


15 amp outlets are permitted in the NEC and that they are being


installed by licensed electricians in millions of houses? And


passed by the electrical inspectors?


And you have yet to explain the alleged fire/shock hazard that this


presents compared to a simple floor lamp that uses an 18 gauge cord


on a 15 amp circuit.




Nonsense. There are standard ratings for circuit breakers of


100 amp too, so what? You really are confused.




I just did. I'm waiting for you to show us an appliance manual for


any commonly used household appliances that say that it can only


be used on a 15 amp circuit. I've read many of them over decades and


I don't ever recall seeing any such thing. Cite please.






You missed the point. Even if the label say 0.1 amperes, it's appropriate


to apply the device to a branch circuit of not more than 15-amperes, the


smallest standard size breaker ... which provides the maximum protection..





Nothing was missed either by me or the others here, like CL, none
of whom agree with you. Like most people, I plug most appliances, lamps,
etc into whatever receptable is closest and convenient. Exceptions
would be if it were a large load and then I would consider what else
is on the circuit. The folks who write the NEC obviously understand
that and they are OK with putting 15 amps receptacles on 20 amp
circuits. If you disagree, as Bud suggested, feel free to take it
up with them.

And my point is that if this is in fact a safety issue, that you
should not plug a 1 amp device into an outlet on a 20 amp circuit,
why exactly doesn't any device manual say that? Curious thing.
They have all kinds of safety warnings, but I don't ever recall one
for an appliance, light, etc saying "Warning! Not to be used on a
circuit with a breaker larger than 15 amps" Can he show us some
examples?






Goggle McMaster Carr, Three conductor indoor/outdoor extension cords.


Nearly all are rated at a maximum of 10 to 15 amperes at 125 VAC. A


20-ampere circuit breaker will not protect such devices. A 15-ampere


circuit breaker will.


A 15 amp breaker will no more protect a 10 amp cord than a 20 will

protect a 15 amp cord



Right. You could overload a 10 amp cord on a 15 amp breaker by 33%.
If you put a 15 amp cord on to a circuit with a 20 amp breaker, you
only overload it by 25%.





Just because this is the way it's been done in millions of houses doesn't


make it right. In fact, it supports my argument (Get it Right).


You cannot legislate intelligence


As Bud suggested, he should take that up with the NEC and UL who are
obviously OK with it.
  #88   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,105
Default Breakers compatible with Federal Pacific Stab-Lok Load Center

On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 01:56:32 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 12/23/2013 11:20 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 23:23:28 -0500,
wrote:

On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 19:46:02 +0000, Let's get it right!
wrote:

replying to clare , Let's get it right! wrote:
clare wrote:

On Fri, 20 Dec 2013 18:44:01 +0000, Let's get it right! You can
easily overload a listed 10 amp extension cord with a NEMA 5-15
plug even on a 15 amp breaker - You seem to be a very strong
advocate for "nanny state" interference at all levels of life -
the government has to protect everybody because they are too
stupid to protect themselves. It's bad enough that way in
Canada already. You can't legislate intelligence, and you
can't outlaw stupid. And getting the government involved in
"protecting the people" against everything just guarantees that
"stupid" wins. Are you a lawyer, or do you just play one on
TV?????



This is called an "Appeal to Authority" argument (Goggle it!).

No, I'm not a lawyer. However, I am a Licensed Professional
Engineer. I've engineered "Listed" equipment, and designed branch
circuit protection for DOD facilities. I'm not aware of any
fires/shock hazards attributed to my works over the past
45-years.. However, I've determined the cause of fires of
several facilities .... all due to improper branch circuit
protection, and yet the "As-Built" drawing, reviewed and
certified by the local regulatory agency as complying with NEC,
didn't comply!

If there we're accountability for improper branch circuit
protection, and the resulting fires and shock hazards, this
problem would be cleaned up. The forum has really exposed the
ignorance and arrogance of the user's of NEC ... and at all
levels.

I'm prepared to support my argument in court, as I've done in the
past! Would you?
A good friend of mine is working on an "intelligent " power plug
system that would read the power rating of the load and program
the protection level of the outlet to match - but it cannot support
an extention cord.


How does that work? Why not just fuse the plugs, as the Brits do?
Simple beats complicated all to hell.

I'm sure you know that a lot of gear has a fused IEC14 inlet on the back
of the case. If the equipment short circuits, the fuse blows and
I would guess prevent an over current on an undamaged power cord. ^_^


Sure, but that doesn't protect the cord. It's obviously not a
sufficient problem to get the NFPA's interest.
  #89   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,463
Default Breakers compatible with Federal Pacific Stab-Lok Load Center

On 12/24/2013 10:54 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 01:56:32 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 12/23/2013 11:20 PM,
wrote:
On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 23:23:28 -0500,
wrote:

On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 19:46:02 +0000, Let's get it right!
wrote:

replying to clare , Let's get it right! wrote:
clare wrote:

On Fri, 20 Dec 2013 18:44:01 +0000, Let's get it right!
You can easily overload a listed 10 amp extension cord with
a NEMA 5-15 plug even on a 15 amp breaker - You seem to be
a very strong advocate for "nanny state" interference at
all levels of life - the government has to protect
everybody because they are too stupid to protect
themselves. It's bad enough that way in Canada already.
You can't legislate intelligence, and you can't outlaw
stupid. And getting the government involved in "protecting
the people" against everything just guarantees that
"stupid" wins. Are you a lawyer, or do you just play one on
TV?????



This is called an "Appeal to Authority" argument (Goggle
it!).

No, I'm not a lawyer. However, I am a Licensed Professional
Engineer. I've engineered "Listed" equipment, and designed
branch circuit protection for DOD facilities. I'm not aware
of any fires/shock hazards attributed to my works over the
past 45-years.. However, I've determined the cause of fires
of several facilities .... all due to improper branch circuit
protection, and yet the "As-Built" drawing, reviewed and
certified by the local regulatory agency as complying with
NEC, didn't comply!

If there we're accountability for improper branch circuit
protection, and the resulting fires and shock hazards, this
problem would be cleaned up. The forum has really exposed the
ignorance and arrogance of the user's of NEC ... and at all
levels.

I'm prepared to support my argument in court, as I've done
in the past! Would you?
A good friend of mine is working on an "intelligent " power
plug system that would read the power rating of the load and
program the protection level of the outlet to match - but it
cannot support an extention cord.

How does that work? Why not just fuse the plugs, as the Brits
do? Simple beats complicated all to hell.

I'm sure you know that a lot of gear has a fused IEC14 inlet on
the back of the case. If the equipment short circuits, the fuse
blows and I would guess prevent an over current on an undamaged
power cord. ^_^


Sure, but that doesn't protect the cord. It's obviously not a
sufficient problem to get the NFPA's interest.

I seem to recall reading something about New York City not allowing any
power strips whatsoever. Those ubiquitous surge arrester strips were not
to be used by anyone and I found it quite puzzling. If it's true and I'm
not just remembering things that aren't there, perhaps one of my Damn
Yankee cousins could set me straight. ^_^

TDD
  #90   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,105
Default Breakers compatible with Federal Pacific Stab-Lok Load Center

On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 14:34:59 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 12/24/2013 10:54 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 01:56:32 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 12/23/2013 11:20 PM,
wrote:
On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 23:23:28 -0500,
wrote:

On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 19:46:02 +0000, Let's get it right!
wrote:

replying to clare , Let's get it right! wrote:
clare wrote:

On Fri, 20 Dec 2013 18:44:01 +0000, Let's get it right!
You can easily overload a listed 10 amp extension cord with
a NEMA 5-15 plug even on a 15 amp breaker - You seem to be
a very strong advocate for "nanny state" interference at
all levels of life - the government has to protect
everybody because they are too stupid to protect
themselves. It's bad enough that way in Canada already.
You can't legislate intelligence, and you can't outlaw
stupid. And getting the government involved in "protecting
the people" against everything just guarantees that
"stupid" wins. Are you a lawyer, or do you just play one on
TV?????



This is called an "Appeal to Authority" argument (Goggle
it!).

No, I'm not a lawyer. However, I am a Licensed Professional
Engineer. I've engineered "Listed" equipment, and designed
branch circuit protection for DOD facilities. I'm not aware
of any fires/shock hazards attributed to my works over the
past 45-years.. However, I've determined the cause of fires
of several facilities .... all due to improper branch circuit
protection, and yet the "As-Built" drawing, reviewed and
certified by the local regulatory agency as complying with
NEC, didn't comply!

If there we're accountability for improper branch circuit
protection, and the resulting fires and shock hazards, this
problem would be cleaned up. The forum has really exposed the
ignorance and arrogance of the user's of NEC ... and at all
levels.

I'm prepared to support my argument in court, as I've done
in the past! Would you?
A good friend of mine is working on an "intelligent " power
plug system that would read the power rating of the load and
program the protection level of the outlet to match - but it
cannot support an extention cord.

How does that work? Why not just fuse the plugs, as the Brits
do? Simple beats complicated all to hell.

I'm sure you know that a lot of gear has a fused IEC14 inlet on
the back of the case. If the equipment short circuits, the fuse
blows and I would guess prevent an over current on an undamaged
power cord. ^_^


Sure, but that doesn't protect the cord. It's obviously not a
sufficient problem to get the NFPA's interest.

I seem to recall reading something about New York City not allowing any
power strips whatsoever. Those ubiquitous surge arrester strips were not
to be used by anyone and I found it quite puzzling. If it's true and I'm
not just remembering things that aren't there, perhaps one of my Damn
Yankee cousins could set me straight. ^_^


When I was working for IBM, the normal commercial power strips were
forbidden. They had some "listed" ones that were used sparingly. The
strips mounted on benches were allowed, but pretty well controlled.
Extension cords were strictly forbidden for anything other than a
*temporary* installation. At my CPoE, I am allotted *one* duplex
outlet. That has to do for not only my four computers (laptops),
three monitors, and all of my lab equipment (scope, power supplies,
meters, etc.). I have power strips plugged into power strips, three
deep. Everyone is in the same situation and some have even more
equipment in their cubes.



  #91   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,463
Default Breakers compatible with Federal Pacific Stab-Lok Load Center

On 12/24/2013 4:16 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 14:34:59 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 12/24/2013 10:54 AM,
wrote:
On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 01:56:32 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 12/23/2013 11:20 PM,
wrote:
On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 23:23:28 -0500,

wrote:

On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 19:46:02 +0000, Let's get it right!
wrote:

replying to clare , Let's get it right! wrote:
clare wrote:

On Fri, 20 Dec 2013 18:44:01 +0000, Let's get it
right! You can easily overload a listed 10 amp
extension cord with a NEMA 5-15 plug even on a 15 amp
breaker - You seem to be a very strong advocate for
"nanny state" interference at all levels of life - the
government has to protect everybody because they are
too stupid to protect themselves. It's bad enough that
way in Canada already. You can't legislate
intelligence, and you can't outlaw stupid. And getting
the government involved in "protecting the people"
against everything just guarantees that "stupid" wins.
Are you a lawyer, or do you just play one on TV?????



This is called an "Appeal to Authority" argument (Goggle
it!).

No, I'm not a lawyer. However, I am a Licensed
Professional Engineer. I've engineered "Listed"
equipment, and designed branch circuit protection for DOD
facilities. I'm not aware of any fires/shock hazards
attributed to my works over the past 45-years.. However,
I've determined the cause of fires of several facilities
.... all due to improper branch circuit protection, and
yet the "As-Built" drawing, reviewed and certified by the
local regulatory agency as complying with NEC, didn't
comply!

If there we're accountability for improper branch
circuit protection, and the resulting fires and shock
hazards, this problem would be cleaned up. The forum has
really exposed the ignorance and arrogance of the user's
of NEC ... and at all levels.

I'm prepared to support my argument in court, as I've
done in the past! Would you?
A good friend of mine is working on an "intelligent "
power plug system that would read the power rating of the
load and program the protection level of the outlet to
match - but it cannot support an extention cord.

How does that work? Why not just fuse the plugs, as the
Brits do? Simple beats complicated all to hell.

I'm sure you know that a lot of gear has a fused IEC14 inlet
on the back of the case. If the equipment short circuits, the
fuse blows and I would guess prevent an over current on an
undamaged power cord. ^_^

Sure, but that doesn't protect the cord. It's obviously not a
sufficient problem to get the NFPA's interest.

I seem to recall reading something about New York City not allowing
any power strips whatsoever. Those ubiquitous surge arrester strips
were not to be used by anyone and I found it quite puzzling. If
it's true and I'm not just remembering things that aren't there,
perhaps one of my Damn Yankee cousins could set me straight. ^_^


When I was working for IBM, the normal commercial power strips were
forbidden. They had some "listed" ones that were used sparingly.
The strips mounted on benches were allowed, but pretty well
controlled. Extension cords were strictly forbidden for anything
other than a *temporary* installation. At my CPoE, I am allotted
*one* duplex outlet. That has to do for not only my four computers
(laptops), three monitors, and all of my lab equipment (scope, power
supplies, meters, etc.). I have power strips plugged into power
strips, three deep. Everyone is in the same situation and some have
even more equipment in their cubes.

When I worked as a bench tech at a repair depot, guys were bad about
pranking each other. Our benches had a master switch which controlled
the power outlets on the bench. One hapless victim came in, sat down,
flipped the master switch and it was as though the sun suddenly appeared
for one second because some prankster had wired a bunch of 12 volt dial
lights across the 120 volt supply. I was always switching the contents
of freeze spray and tuner wash in the cans. I'd get an empty can for
each then using my handheld vacuum pump, pull as much of a vacuum as I
could on the empty can after which I simply plugged the small extension
tube between the spay nozzles and depressed them. Freeze spray into the
tuner wash can and tuner wash into the freeze spray can. When the victim
tried to spot cool a component, he got tuner wash all over his work. Of
course it evaporated in a few minutes. I wasn't so mean as to put water
in a can unless I was making a super squirt gun. ^_^

TDD
  #92   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 390
Default Breakers compatible with Federal Pacific Stab-Lok Load Center

On 12/23/2013 1:45 PM, Let's get it right! wrote:
replying to bud-- , Let's get it right! wrote:
null wrote:

Write a code change proposal. I am confident you will receive the
appropriate consideration. Petition UL to change its standards. I am
confident you will receive the appropriate consideration. A 15A
circuit breaker does not protect #16 or #18 wires. Include in your
petition to UL and the NEC prohibiting anything smaller than #14 wire.
My desk lamp deserves a #14 cord. And include in your code change
proposal correction for the blatant over-sizing of protection for
fixture wires in 240.5-B-2. Also include in your code change proposal
correction for the blatant over-sizing of circuit breakers for motors,
and even worse, welders. And I don't even want to think about what
they do with fire pumps - it could cause a fire. Everyone understands
your argument. As I have explained several times, including quoted
above, 110.3 (inspection) is not used for "listed" equipment. The AHJ
does not second guess the listing standard. The AHJ determines the
device is used according to the manufacturers instructions and
conditions of listing. I am a licensed master electrician. I have
explained how the NEC and UL work. Are you Pete C. in drag?



U.L. isn't the problem. They are doing it right!


UL lists #18 extension cords. UL knows they know those cords will be
used on 20A circuits. #18 wire in a cord is rated 10A, too low for a 15A
circuit.

The problem is interpretation of NEC. You can't protect a listed device
that utilizes a NEMA 5-15 power cord set from a 20 ampere circuit breaker.
Goggle McMaster Carr, extension cords. None are rated at more than
15-amperes @ 125 VAC. See the problem?


The NEC explicitly allows home-made cord sets with #16 wire (13A) on 20A
circuits.

The NEC allows UL listed extension cords with 15A plugs on 15 and 20A
circuits.

The system is working as intended by UL and the NEC.

You are "an arrogant SOB" wanting New Orleans to enforce the NEC other
than how it is clearly written.


If you don't like how it works write a code change proposal and petition
UL to make changes in its standards.
  #93   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,105
Default Breakers compatible with Federal Pacific Stab-Lok Load Center

On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 17:44:05 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 12/24/2013 4:16 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 14:34:59 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 12/24/2013 10:54 AM,
wrote:
On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 01:56:32 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 12/23/2013 11:20 PM,
wrote:
On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 23:23:28 -0500,

wrote:

On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 19:46:02 +0000, Let's get it right!
wrote:

replying to clare , Let's get it right! wrote:
clare wrote:

On Fri, 20 Dec 2013 18:44:01 +0000, Let's get it
right! You can easily overload a listed 10 amp
extension cord with a NEMA 5-15 plug even on a 15 amp
breaker - You seem to be a very strong advocate for
"nanny state" interference at all levels of life - the
government has to protect everybody because they are
too stupid to protect themselves. It's bad enough that
way in Canada already. You can't legislate
intelligence, and you can't outlaw stupid. And getting
the government involved in "protecting the people"
against everything just guarantees that "stupid" wins.
Are you a lawyer, or do you just play one on TV?????



This is called an "Appeal to Authority" argument (Goggle
it!).

No, I'm not a lawyer. However, I am a Licensed
Professional Engineer. I've engineered "Listed"
equipment, and designed branch circuit protection for DOD
facilities. I'm not aware of any fires/shock hazards
attributed to my works over the past 45-years.. However,
I've determined the cause of fires of several facilities
.... all due to improper branch circuit protection, and
yet the "As-Built" drawing, reviewed and certified by the
local regulatory agency as complying with NEC, didn't
comply!

If there we're accountability for improper branch
circuit protection, and the resulting fires and shock
hazards, this problem would be cleaned up. The forum has
really exposed the ignorance and arrogance of the user's
of NEC ... and at all levels.

I'm prepared to support my argument in court, as I've
done in the past! Would you?
A good friend of mine is working on an "intelligent "
power plug system that would read the power rating of the
load and program the protection level of the outlet to
match - but it cannot support an extention cord.

How does that work? Why not just fuse the plugs, as the
Brits do? Simple beats complicated all to hell.

I'm sure you know that a lot of gear has a fused IEC14 inlet
on the back of the case. If the equipment short circuits, the
fuse blows and I would guess prevent an over current on an
undamaged power cord. ^_^

Sure, but that doesn't protect the cord. It's obviously not a
sufficient problem to get the NFPA's interest.

I seem to recall reading something about New York City not allowing
any power strips whatsoever. Those ubiquitous surge arrester strips
were not to be used by anyone and I found it quite puzzling. If
it's true and I'm not just remembering things that aren't there,
perhaps one of my Damn Yankee cousins could set me straight. ^_^


When I was working for IBM, the normal commercial power strips were
forbidden. They had some "listed" ones that were used sparingly.
The strips mounted on benches were allowed, but pretty well
controlled. Extension cords were strictly forbidden for anything
other than a *temporary* installation. At my CPoE, I am allotted
*one* duplex outlet. That has to do for not only my four computers
(laptops), three monitors, and all of my lab equipment (scope, power
supplies, meters, etc.). I have power strips plugged into power
strips, three deep. Everyone is in the same situation and some have
even more equipment in their cubes.

When I worked as a bench tech at a repair depot, guys were bad about
pranking each other. Our benches had a master switch which controlled
the power outlets on the bench. One hapless victim came in, sat down,
flipped the master switch and it was as though the sun suddenly appeared
for one second because some prankster had wired a bunch of 12 volt dial
lights across the 120 volt supply. I was always switching the contents
of freeze spray and tuner wash in the cans. I'd get an empty can for
each then using my handheld vacuum pump, pull as much of a vacuum as I
could on the empty can after which I simply plugged the small extension
tube between the spay nozzles and depressed them. Freeze spray into the
tuner wash can and tuner wash into the freeze spray can. When the victim
tried to spot cool a component, he got tuner wash all over his work. Of
course it evaporated in a few minutes. I wasn't so mean as to put water
in a can unless I was making a super squirt gun. ^_^


Forty years ago, we used to prank on each other at work, all the time.
One of my coworkers was a particular target. One time I took the
insulation off some coax (matching all the coax between instruments)
and ran it across the bench in back of his, under the setup he was
testing. When he put a cover on it to do temperature sensing, I blew
smoke through the tube.

One of the other guys filled the tech's pipe tobacco pouch with pencil
shavings and chopped up rubber bands. What was really funny is that
he didn't notice, though everyone else was running for the doors.
  #94   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,463
Default Breakers compatible with Federal Pacific Stab-Lok Load Center

On 12/26/2013 10:02 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 17:44:05 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 12/24/2013 4:16 PM,
wrote:
On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 14:34:59 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 12/24/2013 10:54 AM,
wrote:
On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 01:56:32 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 12/23/2013 11:20 PM,
wrote:
On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 23:23:28 -0500,

wrote:

On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 19:46:02 +0000, Let's get it
right!

wrote:

replying to clare , Let's get it right! wrote:
clare wrote:

On Fri, 20 Dec 2013 18:44:01 +0000, Let's get it
right! You can easily overload a listed 10 amp
extension cord with a NEMA 5-15 plug even on a 15
amp breaker - You seem to be a very strong advocate
for "nanny state" interference at all levels of
life - the government has to protect everybody
because they are too stupid to protect themselves.
It's bad enough that way in Canada already. You
can't legislate intelligence, and you can't outlaw
stupid. And getting the government involved in
"protecting the people" against everything just
guarantees that "stupid" wins. Are you a lawyer, or
do you just play one on TV?????



This is called an "Appeal to Authority" argument
(Goggle it!).

No, I'm not a lawyer. However, I am a Licensed
Professional Engineer. I've engineered "Listed"
equipment, and designed branch circuit protection for
DOD facilities. I'm not aware of any fires/shock
hazards attributed to my works over the past
45-years.. However, I've determined the cause of
fires of several facilities .... all due to improper
branch circuit protection, and yet the "As-Built"
drawing, reviewed and certified by the local
regulatory agency as complying with NEC, didn't
comply!

If there we're accountability for improper branch
circuit protection, and the resulting fires and
shock hazards, this problem would be cleaned up. The
forum has really exposed the ignorance and arrogance
of the user's of NEC ... and at all levels.

I'm prepared to support my argument in court, as
I've done in the past! Would you?
A good friend of mine is working on an "intelligent "
power plug system that would read the power rating of
the load and program the protection level of the outlet
to match - but it cannot support an extention cord.

How does that work? Why not just fuse the plugs, as the
Brits do? Simple beats complicated all to hell.

I'm sure you know that a lot of gear has a fused IEC14
inlet on the back of the case. If the equipment short
circuits, the fuse blows and I would guess prevent an over
current on an undamaged power cord. ^_^

Sure, but that doesn't protect the cord. It's obviously not
a sufficient problem to get the NFPA's interest.

I seem to recall reading something about New York City not
allowing any power strips whatsoever. Those ubiquitous surge
arrester strips were not to be used by anyone and I found it
quite puzzling. If it's true and I'm not just remembering
things that aren't there, perhaps one of my Damn Yankee cousins
could set me straight. ^_^

When I was working for IBM, the normal commercial power strips
were forbidden. They had some "listed" ones that were used
sparingly. The strips mounted on benches were allowed, but pretty
well controlled. Extension cords were strictly forbidden for
anything other than a *temporary* installation. At my CPoE, I am
allotted *one* duplex outlet. That has to do for not only my
four computers (laptops), three monitors, and all of my lab
equipment (scope, power supplies, meters, etc.). I have power
strips plugged into power strips, three deep. Everyone is in the
same situation and some have even more equipment in their cubes.

When I worked as a bench tech at a repair depot, guys were bad
about pranking each other. Our benches had a master switch which
controlled the power outlets on the bench. One hapless victim came
in, sat down, flipped the master switch and it was as though the
sun suddenly appeared for one second because some prankster had
wired a bunch of 12 volt dial lights across the 120 volt supply. I
was always switching the contents of freeze spray and tuner wash in
the cans. I'd get an empty can for each then using my handheld
vacuum pump, pull as much of a vacuum as I could on the empty can
after which I simply plugged the small extension tube between the
spay nozzles and depressed them. Freeze spray into the tuner wash
can and tuner wash into the freeze spray can. When the victim tried
to spot cool a component, he got tuner wash all over his work. Of
course it evaporated in a few minutes. I wasn't so mean as to put
water in a can unless I was making a super squirt gun. ^_^


Forty years ago, we used to prank on each other at work, all the
time. One of my coworkers was a particular target. One time I took
the insulation off some coax (matching all the coax between
instruments) and ran it across the bench in back of his, under the
setup he was testing. When he put a cover on it to do temperature
sensing, I blew smoke through the tube.

One of the other guys filled the tech's pipe tobacco pouch with
pencil shavings and chopped up rubber bands. What was really funny
is that he didn't notice, though everyone else was running for the
doors.

I only prank those I like and and my pranks are never destructive of
property, unless I supplied the item to be destroyed. I don't prank
those people I don't like because I'm afraid I might become malicious
and I don't like to hurt people, even nasty people. I believe in Karma
and what goes around comes around. I've seen so many ambulatory turds
eventually get their butts nailed to the wall and it's well deserved. ^_^

TDD
  #95   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24
Default Breakers compatible with Federal Pacific Stab-Lok Load Center

replying to clare , Let's get it right! wrote:
clare wrote:

On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 19:49:02 +0000, Let's get it right!
A 15 amp breaker will no more protect a 10 amp cord than a 20 will
protect a 15 amp cord
You cannot legislate intelligence



Intelligence? You realize a 15-ampere circuit breaker provides more
protection than a 20-ampere circuit breaker? You are aware of that ...
aren't you?

As far as the ampacity of the conductors, it has nothing to do with the
problem ... as long as it's been evaluated as part of the "Listing"
effort.

So ... you gonna do it like the NEC requires, or or you gonna ignore the
responsibilities imposed upon you by NEC?

Have a save 2014! I'm done trying to educate the "EXPERTS"(?).

--




  #96   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
SMS SMS is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,365
Default Breakers compatible with Federal Pacific Stab-Lok Load Center

On 12/13/2013 9:44 AM, Let's get it right! wrote:

Which raises an interesting fact. Most homes and office buildings I've
inspected have 20 ampere circuit breakers providing branch circuit
protection to wall outlets, switch, listed cord and direct connected
equipment. If the listed cord connected equipment utilizes a NEMA 5-15
plug, it's not protected, and because it cannot be applied to such branch
circuit protection and still be considered "PROTECTED".


Your theory is that every device plugged into a circuit with a 20A
breaker must have wiring that can handle 20A in case the device
malfunctions and draws the full 20A.

It's an interesting theory though you're wrong of course. The breaker
protects the internal building wiring, not each individual cord or
device plugged into that wiring, each of which draws less than the total
available current.

The cord or device needs its own protection. For example, at my
daughter's dorm the rule is that power strips must have their own
circuit breakers. She complied with this, but most cheap power strips
don't have circuit breakers and the university never checks up on this.

If an unprotected device with wire that was rated for 15A had a short
that caused a high current through the wiring then the 20A circuit
breaker would still trip long before the wire caught fire.

  #97   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18,538
Default Breakers compatible with Federal Pacific Stab-Lok Load Center

On Mon, 30 Dec 2013 19:45:01 +0000, Let's get it right!
wrote:

replying to clare , Let's get it right! wrote:
clare wrote:

On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 19:49:02 +0000, Let's get it right!
A 15 amp breaker will no more protect a 10 amp cord than a 20 will
protect a 15 amp cord
You cannot legislate intelligence



Intelligence? You realize a 15-ampere circuit breaker provides more
protection than a 20-ampere circuit breaker? You are aware of that ...
aren't you?

As far as the ampacity of the conductors, it has nothing to do with the
problem ... as long as it's been evaluated as part of the "Listing"
effort.

So ... you gonna do it like the NEC requires, or or you gonna ignore the
responsibilities imposed upon you by NEC?

Have a save 2014! I'm done trying to educate the "EXPERTS"(?).

OK You cannot legislate COMMON SENSE. No matter what nanny-state
laws are put in place, stupid people will continue to kill themselves
and burn down their homes. When you get close to Idiot Proof, they
just come up with a better idiot.

If you never put more load on a cord than it was designed for AND
maintain the cord properly, using it for the purpose it was made for,
you won't have a problem.

If, on the other hand, you require 5 amp devices ONLY be plugged into
circuits that are protected to 5 amps, and 15 amp devices only be
connected to 15 amp protected circuits, you will need EVERY outlet
separately protected, and you will need numerous different outlets in
all locations so you can plug everything into an outlet that is
protected to the rating of the device, or you will require every
device to have it's own user resettable overcurrent protection in the
plug - which is how it has been done in some european countries
(where, by the way, the building wiring is not nearly as well
"protected" as it is in North America. Ring wiring topology is a real
bugger to adequately protect as it is fed from both ends.

So have a happy new year, and I'mm GLAD you are done trying to educate
experts. That way I don't need to add you to my filter.
  #100   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,415
Default Breakers compatible with Federal Pacific Stab-Lok Load Center

wrote:
On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 19:45:02 +0000, Let's get it right!
wrote:

replying to bud-- , Let's get it right! wrote:
null wrote:

Write a code change proposal. I am confident you will receive the
appropriate consideration.
Petition UL to change its standards. I am confident you will receive the
appropriate consideration.
A 15A circuit breaker does not protect #16 or #18 wires. Include in your
petition to UL and the NEC prohibiting anything smaller than #14 wire.
My desk lamp deserves a #14 cord.
And include in your code change proposal correction for the blatant
over-sizing of protection for fixture wires in 240.5-B-2.
Also include in your code change proposal correction for the blatant
over-sizing of circuit breakers for motors, and even worse, welders. And
I don't even want to think about what they do with fire pumps - it could
cause a fire.
Everyone understands your argument.
As I have explained several times, including quoted above, 110.3
(inspection) is not used for "listed" equipment. The AHJ does not second
guess the listing standard. The AHJ determines the device is used
according to the manufacturers instructions and conditions of listing.
I am a licensed master electrician. I have explained how the NEC and UL
work.
Are you Pete C. in drag?



U.L. isn't the problem. They are doing it right!
The problem is interpretation of NEC. You can't protect a listed device
that utilizes a NEMA 5-15 power cord set from a 20 ampere circuit breaker.
Goggle McMaster Carr, extension cords. None are rated at more than
15-amperes @ 125 VAC. See the problem?

Funny, I have both 20 and 30 amp extention cords.


Funny on store bought cords and equipment, the plugs fail either due to bad
crimps, or the little wires breaking off a bit at a time. It usually starts
to get hot right at the end of the molded connector. The more the cord is
moved around, the worse it gets over time.

Greg


  #101   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,644
Default Breakers compatible with Federal Pacific Stab-Lok Load Center

just too add.

arc fault breakers can detect faults at under their rating limit and trip.

plus even high current devices can and do have wiring rated lower than say 14 gauge fr 15 amp circuit breaker.

the NEC figures whatever the wire used inside a appliance is up to the appliance manufacturer
  #102   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,399
Default Breakers compatible with Federal Pacific Stab-Lok Load Center

On Monday, December 30, 2013 2:45:01 PM UTC-5, Let's get it right! wrote:
replying to clare , Let's get it right! wrote:

clare wrote:




On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 19:49:02 +0000, Let's get it right!


A 15 amp breaker will no more protect a 10 amp cord than a 20 will


protect a 15 amp cord


You cannot legislate intelligence






Intelligence? You realize a 15-ampere circuit breaker provides more

protection than a 20-ampere circuit breaker? You are aware of that ...

aren't you?



Where is your data to show that this is a real safety issue in the
real world? The folks that deal with safety and have the statistics
of the real safety hazards, ie NEC, UL are aware of the fact that
you can have 15 amp receptacles on a 20 amp circuit. The NEC
specifically allows it. As Bud suggested, if you disagree, take
it up with them. I suggest you have your data available that shows
this is in fact a real safety issue.

There a hundreds of millions of 15 amp receptacles out there and
there are plenty of 10 amp, 18 gauge ext cords available. Some
of those circuits have 15 amp breakers, some 20 amp. Should
be easy to show us the devesatation being caused. Statistics please.
And also the statistics are going to show a clear difference
between the fires, etc caused by those on a 20 vs 15, right?




As far as the ampacity of the conductors, it has nothing to do with the

problem ... as long as it's been evaluated as part of the "Listing"

effort.



Nonsense. As has been told to you a dozen times now, you can buy
a 10 amp extension cord and plug it into a 15 amp receptacle on
a 15 or 20 amp circuit. To say that the ampacity of the conductors
has nothing to do with it is ridiculous. There are lights in my
house that have 18 gauge cords, UL listed, no fuses in the lights
for additional protection. The ampacity of the cords is basically
the core of your safety issue. An 18 gauge, 10 amp extension cord
is not rated to support 15 amps or 20 amps. You could have a partial short
in one of those lights so that it draws 15 amps, exceeding the
rating of the cord conductors.



So ... you gonna do it like the NEC requires, or or you gonna ignore the

responsibilities imposed upon you by NEC?


Who is the "you" that is ignoring exactly what?
At least tens of millions of homes have been
built with 15 amp receptacles on 20 amp breakers, as allowed by
the NEC. They have been inspected. More of those will be installed,
inspected and pass electrical inspection this week.






Have a save 2014! I'm done trying to educate the "EXPERTS"(?).


As Bud said, take it up with the NEC folks and UL. They are the
experts that matter and apparently they don't agree with you or
this would not be permitted under the code. I'm sure they
will give it the attention it deserves.
  #103   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,463
Default Breakers compatible with Federal Pacific Stab-Lok Load Center

On 12/30/2013 6:50 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 30 Dec 2013 19:45:01 +0000, Let's get it right!
wrote:

replying to clare , Let's get it right! wrote:
clare wrote:

On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 19:49:02 +0000, Let's get it right!
A 15 amp breaker will no more protect a 10 amp cord than a 20 will
protect a 15 amp cord
You cannot legislate intelligence



Intelligence? You realize a 15-ampere circuit breaker provides more
protection than a 20-ampere circuit breaker? You are aware of that ...
aren't you?

As far as the ampacity of the conductors, it has nothing to do with the
problem ... as long as it's been evaluated as part of the "Listing"
effort.

So ... you gonna do it like the NEC requires, or or you gonna ignore the
responsibilities imposed upon you by NEC?

Have a save 2014! I'm done trying to educate the "EXPERTS"(?).

OK You cannot legislate COMMON SENSE. No matter what nanny-state
laws are put in place, stupid people will continue to kill themselves
and burn down their homes. When you get close to Idiot Proof, they
just come up with a better idiot.

If you never put more load on a cord than it was designed for AND
maintain the cord properly, using it for the purpose it was made for,
you won't have a problem.

If, on the other hand, you require 5 amp devices ONLY be plugged into
circuits that are protected to 5 amps, and 15 amp devices only be
connected to 15 amp protected circuits, you will need EVERY outlet
separately protected, and you will need numerous different outlets in
all locations so you can plug everything into an outlet that is
protected to the rating of the device, or you will require every
device to have it's own user resettable overcurrent protection in the
plug - which is how it has been done in some european countries
(where, by the way, the building wiring is not nearly as well
"protected" as it is in North America. Ring wiring topology is a real
bugger to adequately protect as it is fed from both ends.

So have a happy new year, and I'mm GLAD you are done trying to educate
experts. That way I don't need to add you to my filter.


Many people don't understand that circuit breakers in North American
electrical systems have both a thermal trip and a magnetic trip. The
thermal part works like a slow blow fuse so motor starting loads don't
immediately kick the breaker but there is also a magnetic trip for when
there is a short circuit. That's why the table lamp with the 18awm cord
will trip a breaker if the light switch under the bulb shorts out but
you can also slowly add loads to a circuit until the breaker will trip
after a predetermined amount of time. If a breaker panel is hot due to
circuits carrying heavy loads, other breakers will trip from the heat
before normal overload current is reached. Of course there are all sorts
of different ratings for breakers like HACR for breakers used for
HVAC loads but your standard breaker won't trip immediately when a
microwave oven or window AC starts up but short the cord and it will
trip immediately. ^_^

TDD
  #106   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,430
Default Breakers compatible with Federal Pacific Stab-Lok Load Center

In article ,
wrote:

On Mon, 27 Jan 2014 11:45:39 -0800, "Malcom \"Mal\" Reynolds"
wrote:

In article ,

wrote:

On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 14:36:15 -0800, "Malcom \"Mal\" Reynolds"
wrote:

In article ,

wrote:

On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 19:44:01 +0000, Let's get it right!
wrote:

replying to krw , Let's get it right! wrote:
krw wrote:

On Wed, 18 Dec 2013 18:45:08 +0000, Let's get it right!
Now there's a response I completely expected; zero intelligence.
You're an idiot, plain and simple (with an emphasis on "simple").



It appears you have a denial problem

It appears that you're just stupid.

... and either refuse to debate the
issue ... or just can't.

You can't even read, so it's difficult to debate.

just like a fundie...blame everyone else for their failures. your
inability to debate is demonstrated on almost all of your posts, unless
in your feeble mind calling someone a PLCCF or Liberal or Lefty
qualifies as debate

Another lefty who believes that his lies trump facts. OTOH, if you
couldn't lie, you would be mute.


The idiot liar takes a month to come up with some lame lie that no one
will ever read.


I do accept your excellence in your ability to lie daily

Malformed is such a dumbass. But that goes without
saying because he is a lefty snot-nosed kid living under mommy's
skirts.


thank you for admitting that you are a no one
  #107   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,105
Default Breakers compatible with Federal Pacific Stab-Lok Load Center

On Tue, 28 Jan 2014 11:44:14 -0800, "Malcom \"Mal\" Reynolds"
wrote:

In article ,
wrote:

On Mon, 27 Jan 2014 11:45:39 -0800, "Malcom \"Mal\" Reynolds"
wrote:

In article ,

wrote:

On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 14:36:15 -0800, "Malcom \"Mal\" Reynolds"
wrote:

In article ,

wrote:

On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 19:44:01 +0000, Let's get it right!
wrote:

replying to krw , Let's get it right! wrote:
krw wrote:

On Wed, 18 Dec 2013 18:45:08 +0000, Let's get it right!
Now there's a response I completely expected; zero intelligence.
You're an idiot, plain and simple (with an emphasis on "simple").



It appears you have a denial problem

It appears that you're just stupid.

... and either refuse to debate the
issue ... or just can't.

You can't even read, so it's difficult to debate.

just like a fundie...blame everyone else for their failures. your
inability to debate is demonstrated on almost all of your posts, unless
in your feeble mind calling someone a PLCCF or Liberal or Lefty
qualifies as debate

Another lefty who believes that his lies trump facts. OTOH, if you
couldn't lie, you would be mute.


The idiot liar takes a month to come up with some lame lie that no one
will ever read.


I do accept your excellence in your ability to lie daily


It really is amazing that you so pathological that you are compelled
to make such obvious lies.

Malformed is such a dumbass. But that goes without
saying because he is a lefty snot-nosed kid living under mommy's
skirts.


thank you for admitting that you are a no one


I've never claimed to be anyone special, Malformed. I leave that up
to you idiot lefties. *YOU* are the ones who think they know what's
good for everyone else. *YOU* are "special" (as in education).
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Does Federal Pacific stab and lock make tandem breakers? Aaron Home Repair 19 August 4th 16 03:22 AM
skinny Federal Pacific breakers Mikepier Home Repair 19 April 24th 09 04:24 AM
Federal Pacific Circuit Breaker Box with Challenger breakers??? vic Home Repair 15 February 23rd 07 08:42 PM
Federal Pacific breakers rile Home Repair 25 January 17th 06 01:03 AM
Compatible Ckt Breakers For A LX112-24 Box by the Federal Pacific Electric Co. ? Robert11 Home Repair 7 August 9th 05 03:42 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:43 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 DIYbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about DIY & home improvement"