Bill wrote:
Doug Miller wrote:

Or even an amateur who knows what he's doing. Bill, if you're
reading this, ask any of the long-term regulars here if I have my
s**t together on electrical issues, and remember that I'm only about
fifteen, twenty minutes up I-65 from you.

I don't need to ask. I think that you and Mike both know what you are
doing. I appreciate it when anyone takes the time to help teach me
something. And I hope you can see without me saying so; I have
learned a great deal. I have been comingling alot of it into good use
recently! TYBVM

Bill

Bill - you really have learned a lot. It's clear you like to investigate,
and to learn new things. It's also clear that you take a great pride in
that, and that's good stuff. My suggestions were only in the spirit of
getting you there with fewer misunderstandings and false assumptions.

--

-Mike-

Bill wrote:
Mike Marlow wrote:

Bill - my advice to you is to get out of your own head. You really
do not understand electricity, NEC, or anything associated with
work like this.


My uncle who used to work as an electrician told me that it sounds
like I know what I'm doing and he thinks I can do it, so go figure. So
far, it seems like he's right.


There is not a doubt in my mind you can do it Bill. My suggestions were
only to help you bypass the route of wrong assumptions.

--

-Mike-

Bill wrote:
I bought some "grounding pigtails" to screw into my (obviously metal)
electrical boxes.

The pigtails are #12 stranded wire (I stripped the loose end), but the
three ground wires I intended to connect to them are solid wire.

My wiring book, "Stanley: Complete Wiring" provides the idea of
twisting the solid wires and then wrapping the stranded wire about,
leaving an 1/8" of the stranded wire extending beyond the end of the
solid wire (before attaching a wire nut and electrical tape)--however
they are not working with three #12 wires in their example.

I was wondering whether it might be preferable to attach a piece of
solid copper wire to the box instead so that stranded wire is not
involved in the wire connection. It seems this may result in a more
robust connection (but I recognize that this is an opinion based upon
my intuition).

Bill

Either way will work. One advantage to the stranded wire is its flexibility
which can make it easier to tuck into the box when you're done. It's not
much of an advantage though, because the down side is that it sometimes
wants to spring back. Solid wire folds and stays in place quite nicely.
Properly done, both connections are equally robust.

--

-Mike-

Bill wrote:
Mike Marlow wrote:
if
you're going to do this stuff, and accept what is established as
acceptable, without applying your own sense of reasoning to each
step of this process. Your ideas are not bad ideas, but you are
re-inventing wheels that have long been invented. You go overboard
in the things you do. You would really benefit yourself if you
spent the time to learn the realities of electrical work, and not
rely so much on the ideas in your head.

Perhaps best if you don't seek a career in science thinking like
that... I'll tell ya what, why don't we respect each others'
processes. In my field, if you don't go "overboard", you don't get
anything.
We have to go pretty far overboard to get much at all.
Just saying.

Point taken, but are you dabbling in science practices now, or electrical
practices?

--

-Mike-

On 7/10/2010 4:04 AM, Bill wrote:
Mike Marlow wrote:
if
you're going to do this stuff, and accept what is established as
acceptable,
without applying your own sense of reasoning to each step of this
process.
Your ideas are not bad ideas, but you are re-inventing wheels that
have long
been invented. You go overboard in the things you do. You would really
benefit yourself if you spent the time to learn the realities of
electrical
work, and not rely so much on the ideas in your head.

Perhaps best if you don't seek a career in science thinking like that...
I'll tell ya what, why don't we respect each others' processes.
In my field, if you don't go "overboard", you don't get anything.
We have to go pretty far overboard to get much at all.
Just saying.

Bill, electrical wiring is not science, it's a skilled trade, and if you
go at it like a tradesman you'll make more progress faster. There's a
thick, moderately expensive (by textbook standards), poorly bound book
called the "National Electrical Code Handbook" from the NFPA (not to be
confused with the similarly titled book from McGraw-Hill) that you might
want to get. Has the full text of the NEC and explanatory material that
shows how it is to be applied in many commonplace situations. Most
decent libraries will have a copy.

What we have here is Doug Miller.


wrote in message
...
On Sat, 10 Jul 2010 04:00:06 GMT, (Doug Miller) wrote:
"What we have here is a failure to communicate."



--
Have your accounts been removed by other's complaints?
Do you like to force your opinions on others?
Do you need to use multiple names due to shame and fear?
Better rates for those requiring anonymity to survive!
******** easynews.com, trolling made easy **********

This is why I urged you to get an inspection for your wiring.

This would be a professional overviewing your work and giving you tips and
corrections. All these "nay" sayers would want to do this themselves also. I
see you as no different. If you do woodworking it would be assumed you have
some "do-it-yourself pride".

You stated you were a PHd in math and could separate the good tips from the
bad. Do it.

You can do this.


"Bill" wrote in message
...
Mike Marlow wrote:

Bill - get with Doug or an electrician. You really need to. You simply
cannot learn to wire by posting to a usenet newsgroup.


I held a wiring clinic in my driveway the other day. 2by4's, stapling,
wire stripping, wire-connecting (two wires, three wires,..), with both
#12 and #10 romex, using metal boxes, etc.

Keep in mind, you have no way of knowing what resources I used to learn
(some of the Worst are at the Borgs). I don't need to learn Everything
in order to learn Something. See the difference?

Here, for instance, is a website which shows how to install my subpanel.
For the moment, I don't have a need to understand how to install any
other sub-panels, just this one.

http://www.hammerzone.com/archives/e...nel/01/new.htm


Best,
Bill

Bill wrote:

I bought some "grounding pigtails" to screw into my (obviously metal)
electrical boxes.

The pigtails are #12 stranded wire (I stripped the loose end), but the
three ground wires I intended to connect to them are solid wire.

My wiring book, "Stanley: Complete Wiring" provides the idea of twisting
the solid wires and then wrapping the stranded wire about, leaving an
1/8" of the stranded wire extending beyond the end of the solid wire
(before attaching a wire nut and electrical tape)--however they are not
working with three #12 wires in their example.

I was wondering whether it might be preferable to attach a piece of
solid copper wire to the box instead so that stranded wire is not
involved in the wire connection. It seems this may result in a more
robust connection (but I recognize that this is an opinion based upon my
intuition).

Bill

I prefer to use the green wire nuts for this application. See:

http://www.grainger.com/Grainger/ite...ectors-_-6LU54

--
Jack Novak
Buffalo, NY - USA

In article , Bill wrote:

I bought some "grounding pigtails" to screw into my (obviously metal)
electrical boxes.

The pigtails are #12 stranded wire (I stripped the loose end), but the
three ground wires I intended to connect to them are solid wire.

My wiring book, "Stanley: Complete Wiring" provides the idea of twisting
the solid wires and then wrapping the stranded wire about, leaving an
1/8" of the stranded wire extending beyond the end of the solid wire
(before attaching a wire nut and electrical tape)--however they are not
working with three #12 wires in their example.\

It'll still work. Don't overthink this, buddy.

I was wondering whether it might be preferable to attach a piece of
solid copper wire to the box instead so that stranded wire is not
involved in the wire connection. It seems this may result in a more
robust connection (but I recognize that this is an opinion based upon my
intuition).

When I need a grounding pigtail, I always use solid copper. Several reasons:
first, it's easier to make the wirenut connection with all solid wires than
with a mix of solid and stranded. Second, I'm a cheap SOB, and scrap solid
wire is essentially free, nothing to buy. Third, I'm also a practical SOB, and
I *always* have scrap solid wire available. Scraps less than 6" go in the
trash, 6" or longer go in the toolbox. The nearest hardware store or home
center is at least a 30-minute round trip, but the bottom of my toolbox is
only seconds away.

In article , "Mike Marlow" wrote:
[major snippage]
Bill - you are trying to cheat your way out of real learning. That does not
seem consistent with what I see in you here - but for some reason, you
resist actually learing what you are trying to undertake. You need to
invest in that learning. You're not getting it - not in the least. You're
taking false securities in meaningless things like box heights, and you have
no clue what you're doing with the real threat - current. You can make
yourself feel comfortable with terms like "workmanlike manner",

Note: I was the first to use that phrase in this thread, not Bill.

or by being
stupid in the degree to which you hang a panel level, or the manner in which
you insist on hanging a metal box, but in the end that stuff is completely
meaningless. Absolutely meaningless. At this point Bill - you are more
dangerous than you are accomplished. Call Doug.

Mike, I don't read it that way at all. My take on this is that Bill is
probably -- like me -- something of a perfectionist. He's savvy enough to know
that electricity can be damned dangerous when misused. He's never done this
before. And because of those two facts, he wants to make sure that he does it
exactly right the first time.

What you see as "trying to cheat [his] way out of real learning" and "taking
false securities in meaningless things", *I* see as Bill simply not knowing
enough about the subject -- yet -- to be able to distinguish between things
that are done a particular way just because they should be done that way, and
things that are done a particular way because doing them any other way creates
a deadly hazard.

Bill, I have two suggestions for you. First, give me a call. I'm only about 20
minutes up the road from you, and I'm free most of the weekend. Email me at
'doug at milmac dot com' and I'll give you my phone number. Second, there's a
difference between safe and Code-compliant on the one hand, and
textbook-perfect on the other. I think you're trying to do textbook-perfect.
That's not necessary, and I think I can help you see the difference.

In article , "J. Clarke" wrote:
On 7/10/2010 4:04 AM, Bill wrote:
Mike Marlow wrote:
if
you're going to do this stuff, and accept what is established as
acceptable,
without applying your own sense of reasoning to each step of this
process.
Your ideas are not bad ideas, but you are re-inventing wheels that
have long
been invented. You go overboard in the things you do. You would really
benefit yourself if you spent the time to learn the realities of
electrical
work, and not rely so much on the ideas in your head.

Perhaps best if you don't seek a career in science thinking like that...
I'll tell ya what, why don't we respect each others' processes.
In my field, if you don't go "overboard", you don't get anything.
We have to go pretty far overboard to get much at all.
Just saying.

Bill, electrical wiring is not science, it's a skilled trade, and if you
go at it like a tradesman you'll make more progress faster. There's a
thick, moderately expensive (by textbook standards), poorly bound book
called the "National Electrical Code Handbook" from the NFPA (not to be
confused with the similarly titled book from McGraw-Hill) that you might
want to get. Has the full text of the NEC and explanatory material that
shows how it is to be applied in many commonplace situations. Most
decent libraries will have a copy.

Excellent advice all around. I'll add, too, that the Code Handbook from
McGraw-Hill is also a valuable resource.

This topic must at least be close to setting the longevity record for
topics that stay more or less on topic :-).

--
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw

Mike Marlow wrote:

Bill - you really have learned a lot. It's clear you like to investigate,
and to learn new things. It's also clear that you take a great pride in
that, and that's good stuff. My suggestions were only in the spirit of
getting you there with fewer misunderstandings and false assumptions.


Thank you, and thank you for not coming back over the top. I believe
everyone here likes to use their head, or we wouldn't be here.

Bill

Will show you how to get around the Inspector...LOL


"Doug Miller" wrote in message
...
In article , "Mike Marlow"
wrote:
[major snippage]
Bill - you are trying to cheat your way out of real learning. That does
not
seem consistent with what I see in you here - but for some reason, you
resist actually learing what you are trying to undertake. You need to
invest in that learning. You're not getting it - not in the least. You're
taking false securities in meaningless things like box heights, and you
have
no clue what you're doing with the real threat - current. You can make
yourself feel comfortable with terms like "workmanlike manner",

Note: I was the first to use that phrase in this thread, not Bill.

or by being
stupid in the degree to which you hang a panel level, or the manner in
which
you insist on hanging a metal box, but in the end that stuff is completely
meaningless. Absolutely meaningless. At this point Bill - you are more
dangerous than you are accomplished. Call Doug.

Mike, I don't read it that way at all. My take on this is that Bill is
probably -- like me -- something of a perfectionist. He's savvy enough to
know
that electricity can be damned dangerous when misused. He's never done this
before. And because of those two facts, he wants to make sure that he does
it
exactly right the first time.

What you see as "trying to cheat [his] way out of real learning" and "taking
false securities in meaningless things", *I* see as Bill simply not knowing
enough about the subject -- yet -- to be able to distinguish between things
that are done a particular way just because they should be done that way,
and
things that are done a particular way because doing them any other way
creates
a deadly hazard.

Bill, I have two suggestions for you. First, give me a call. I'm only about
20
minutes up the road from you, and I'm free most of the weekend. Email me at
'doug at milmac dot com' and I'll give you my phone number. Second, there's
a
difference between safe and Code-compliant on the one hand, and
textbook-perfect on the other. I think you're trying to do textbook-perfect.
That's not necessary, and I think I can help you see the difference.

On Sat, 10 Jul 2010 05:03:16 -0400, Bill wrote the
following:

Lew Hodgett wrote:

Seems he made up a test light with a 120V, 60W light bulb, a lamp
socket, and a couple of test leads.

To test his new toy, opened up a 480V panel and put the test leads
across the incoming buss bars.


From that, I take it you'd go with the solid metal ground rather than
the stranded version. I read that the #12 gauge versions of each are not
created equal w.r.t. capacity--and that they are not equal in a lot of
other ways too.

Sorry, Bill, but you just proved that Mike might have had it right.
Overvoltage and capacity (amperage) are two entirely different things
and you don't seem to grok the difference, which can be dangerous.
Be careful!

--

EXPLETIVE: A balm, usually applied verbally in hindsight,
which somehow eases those pains and indignities following
our every deficiency in foresight.

Josepi wrote:

Will show you how to get around the Inspector...LOL


You've clearly never really read Doug's posts on wiring. Oh well..

--

-Mike-

I want to give Doug Miller a public thank you for his willingness to
stop by my house today to inspect my electrical configuration/project.
He showed me some new tools and a trick or two with romex cable (that I
will have to practice before I employ). I showed him my small but
growing antique plane collection. He is obviously very knowledgeable,
and also a kind and articulate person (for the sake of those of you who
have not had the opportunity to meet him). Thank you Doug!

Bill

Are those the one that tell you not to worry about 120 volts 'cause they
really can't hurt you or one of his many other moronic posts?

Perhaps his troll lists to disclse his communication failures?

Pehaps his list of names he uses to agree with himself?

Do you have any cites for your stupidity?


"Mike Marlow" wrote in message
...

You've clearly never really read Doug's posts on wiring. Oh well..

--

-Mike-

On Jul 10, 9:45*pm, "Josepi" wrote:


Perhaps his troll lists to disclse his communication failures?


What language is that? (Speaking of failing to communicate)

In article , Bill wrote:
I want to give Doug Miller a public thank you for his willingness to
stop by my house today to inspect my electrical configuration/project.
He showed me some new tools and a trick or two with romex cable (that I
will have to practice before I employ). I showed him my small but
growing antique plane collection. He is obviously very knowledgeable,
and also a kind and articulate person (for the sake of those of you who
have not had the opportunity to meet him). Thank you Doug!

Thanks, Bill, I had a pleasant afternoon as well, and I'm glad I was able to
give you a little help.

Just finished my insulation. I ended up taking down the drywall in the
corner too, rather than leaving myself 2 butt-joints to make there. I
would have saved some time if I had decided that a month or two ago
rather than tip-toeing around it. While I was trimming things up a
question occurred to me--What sort of Lighting am I going to want while
doing the setting compound/sanding/finishing compound joint work?

There are presently 2 fluorescent lights, in the middle of the 20'x24'
area--but I'll need a more careful view while sanding right? I assume
I'll need direct lighting to do a good job. My first inclination is to
put my shop light (std. hand held/corded) on a movable stand of some
sort? Can you point me to something like that? I also have an extra
"living room lamp" at my disposal which I could move around as a fire
hazard. ; ) BTDT?

Bill

Bill wrote:
Just finished my insulation. I ended up taking down the drywall in the
corner too, rather than leaving myself 2 butt-joints to make there. I
would have saved some time if I had decided that a month or two ago
rather than tip-toeing around it. While I was trimming things up a
question occurred to me--What sort of Lighting am I going to want
while doing the setting compound/sanding/finishing compound joint
work?
There are presently 2 fluorescent lights, in the middle of the 20'x24'
area--but I'll need a more careful view while sanding right? I assume
I'll need direct lighting to do a good job. My first inclination is
to put my shop light (std. hand held/corded) on a movable stand of
some sort? Can you point me to something like that? I also have an
extra "living room lamp" at my disposal which I could move around as
a fire hazard. ; ) BTDT?


Just put up whatever light you feel you need to see well Bill. There is no
such thing as defining proper lighting - it's all up to your eyes. You're a
smart guy, you don't need to ask every little common sense thing - just try
a few of the common sense things, and you'll be fine. Don't know why you
would call your moveable living room light a fire hazard...

--

-Mike-

Bill wrote:
Just finished my insulation. I ended up taking down the drywall in the
corner too, rather than leaving myself 2 butt-joints to make there. I
would have saved some time if I had decided that a month or two ago
rather than tip-toeing around it. While I was trimming things up a
question occurred to me--What sort of Lighting am I going to want while
doing the setting compound/sanding/finishing compound joint work?

There are presently 2 fluorescent lights, in the middle of the 20'x24'
area--but I'll need a more careful view while sanding right? I assume
I'll need direct lighting to do a good job. My first inclination is to
put my shop light (std. hand held/corded) on a movable stand of some
sort? Can you point me to something like that? I also have an extra
"living room lamp" at my disposal which I could move around as a fire
hazard. ; ) BTDT?

Bill

I find that running my hand over the seams and joints often does a
better job of finding flaws than that of sight. Expect to do some
touch-ups after the primer goes on.

--
Jack Novak
Buffalo, NY - USA

On Sun, 01 Aug 2010 07:14:22 -0400, Bill wrote:

Just finished my insulation. I ended up taking down the drywall in the
corner too, rather than leaving myself 2 butt-joints to make there. I
would have saved some time if I had decided that a month or two ago
rather than tip-toeing around it. While I was trimming things up a
question occurred to me--What sort of Lighting am I going to want while
doing the setting compound/sanding/finishing compound joint work?

Lots!

There are presently 2 fluorescent lights, in the middle of the 20'x24'
area--but I'll need a more careful view while sanding right? I assume
I'll need direct lighting to do a good job. My first inclination is to
put my shop light (std. hand held/corded) on a movable stand of some
sort? Can you point me to something like that? I also have an extra
"living room lamp" at my disposal which I could move around as a fire
hazard. ; ) BTDT?

You're going to need a *lot* more lighting in your shop (another half-dozen 4'
dual shop lights ought to do). Might just as well put it in now. Add to that
a couple of 1kW halogen work lights, for the mud work, and you should be OK.

Something like these (though I generally put 300W bulbs in them).

http://www.homedepot.com/h_d1/N-5yc1...atalogId=10053

zzzzzzzzzz wrote:


You're going to need a *lot* more lighting in your shop (another
half-dozen 4' dual shop lights ought to do). Might just as well put
it in now. Add to that a couple of 1kW halogen work lights, for the
mud work, and you should be OK.


A couple of 1KW work lights? Holy cow - you're going to blind the poor guy
with the glare.

Seriously - one does not need tons of light to check for flatness. A modest
60W bulb, and a head tilted to view the wall from an angle is plenty
sufficient. As another poster suggested - use your hand and fingers to find
the high/low spots.

Bill - I paint cars a bit - and I insist on dead flat surface finishes. I
have a little insight into this stuff, and you don't need to over engineer
this lighting thing. A simple hand held trouble light will give you all the
light you need to check your joints. You *can* have too much light and end
up with glare off the walls and glare from the airborne dust.

--

-Mike-

On Sun, 1 Aug 2010 21:43:45 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
wrote:

wrote:


You're going to need a *lot* more lighting in your shop (another
half-dozen 4' dual shop lights ought to do). Might just as well put
it in now. Add to that a couple of 1kW halogen work lights, for the
mud work, and you should be OK.


A couple of 1KW work lights? Holy cow - you're going to blind the poor guy
with the glare.

Put 300W sticks in them. Bounce off the ceiling or an adjacent wall. One
light tends to throw shadows.

Seriously - one does not need tons of light to check for flatness. A modest
60W bulb, and a head tilted to view the wall from an angle is plenty
sufficient. As another poster suggested - use your hand and fingers to find
the high/low spots.

It's a lot easier to see with a *lot* of flat (indirect) light. At least it is
for me.

Bill - I paint cars a bit - and I insist on dead flat surface finishes. I
have a little insight into this stuff, and you don't need to over engineer
this lighting thing. A simple hand held trouble light will give you all the
light you need to check your joints. You *can* have too much light and end
up with glare off the walls and glare from the airborne dust.

Dust? ...and you paint cars? ;-)

zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Sun, 1 Aug 2010 21:43:45 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
wrote:

zzzzzzzzzz wrote:


You're going to need a *lot* more lighting in your shop (another
half-dozen 4' dual shop lights ought to do). Might just as well put
it in now. Add to that a couple of 1kW halogen work lights, for the
mud work, and you should be OK.


A couple of 1KW work lights? Holy cow - you're going to blind the
poor guy with the glare.

Put 300W sticks in them. Bounce off the ceiling or an adjacent wall.
One light tends to throw shadows.

Seriously - one does not need tons of light to check for flatness.
A modest 60W bulb, and a head tilted to view the wall from an angle
is plenty sufficient. As another poster suggested - use your hand
and fingers to find the high/low spots.

It's a lot easier to see with a *lot* of flat (indirect) light. At
least it is for me.

You need to try more techniques. One light will do the job. It's all about
the angles.


Bill - I paint cars a bit - and I insist on dead flat surface
finishes. I have a little insight into this stuff, and you don't
need to over engineer this lighting thing. A simple hand held
trouble light will give you all the light you need to check your
joints. You *can* have too much light and end up with glare off the
walls and glare from the airborne dust.

Dust? ...and you paint cars? ;-)

Oh... you might say...

--

-Mike-

On Sun, 1 Aug 2010 23:35:37 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
wrote:

wrote:
On Sun, 1 Aug 2010 21:43:45 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
wrote:

zzzzzzzzzz wrote:


You're going to need a *lot* more lighting in your shop (another
half-dozen 4' dual shop lights ought to do). Might just as well put
it in now. Add to that a couple of 1kW halogen work lights, for the
mud work, and you should be OK.


A couple of 1KW work lights? Holy cow - you're going to blind the
poor guy with the glare.

Put 300W sticks in them. Bounce off the ceiling or an adjacent wall.
One light tends to throw shadows.

Seriously - one does not need tons of light to check for flatness.
A modest 60W bulb, and a head tilted to view the wall from an angle
is plenty sufficient. As another poster suggested - use your hand
and fingers to find the high/low spots.

It's a lot easier to see with a *lot* of flat (indirect) light. At
least it is for me.

You need to try more techniques. One light will do the job. It's all about
the angles.

A couple of *dual* 1000W lights (with 300W bulbs in them instead of the
standard 500W) pointed on adjacent walls and ceiling will flood the area from
all angles. If there is any chance of shadows, I'll miss something.

Bill - I paint cars a bit - and I insist on dead flat surface
finishes. I have a little insight into this stuff, and you don't
need to over engineer this lighting thing. A simple hand held
trouble light will give you all the light you need to check your
joints. You *can* have too much light and end up with glare off the
walls and glare from the airborne dust.

Dust? ...and you paint cars? ;-)

Oh... you might say...

Mike Marlow wrote:
Don't know why you
would call your moveable living room light a fire hazard...

Well, because it's so top-heavy. I no doubt wrote that because
I had just read the following sentence in a book:

"If you have a fire hazard--I mean an attached garage, then...."

(and I thought it was humorous).

What I'm after, I think, is a way to make my $10 shop light solve
my current lighting needs. I could add some rope hooks to my aluminum
ladder (and convert it into an electrical hazard)...


Bill

zzzzzzzzzz wrote:

You're going to need a *lot* more lighting in your shop (another half-dozen 4'
dual shop lights ought to do). Might just as well put it in now.

Real shop lights are the next project. I've got wire and a switch all
set for them! "Insulation" was a "Might just as well do it now". The
sort of lighting I need to work in my shop, and the sort of lighting I
need to sand joint compound near the ceiling are different enough that I
don't consider it a "Might just as well do it now."! : ) I wouldn't
mind having one of those fancy 1kW light stands, but can't justify the
space for it at this point. Thanks for the ideas!

Bill

Nova wrote:

I find that running my hand over the seams and joints often does a
better job of finding flaws than that of sight. Expect to do some
touch-ups after the primer goes on.


Pessimist, huh? : )

Mike Marlow wrote:

Just put up whatever light you feel you need to see well Bill. There is no
such thing as defining proper lighting - it's all up to your eyes. You're a
smart guy, you don't need to ask every little common sense thing - just try
a few of the common sense things, and you'll be fine.

I'm just trying to see the light! : ) Well, maybe the reverse--but as
Paul McCartney sang, and just recently on PBS, "Let It Be"... ; )

Could you advise me on sand-paper (I really mean "screen"), in the
context of putting up drywall. I bought Stanley's book on drywall two
days ago and, to my surprise, this was not addressed.

I was going to get 120 grit (medium) and 220 grit (fine), since that is
what is offered at Lowes. My guess is that the 120 is for (heavier)
setting compound and the 220 is for the finishing compound.

Then (I pondered), someone who can apply joint compound nicely might not
even need the 120...

Is my intuition concerning the use of the sanding screens correct?

Bill

Bill wrote:
Mike Marlow wrote:
Don't know why you
would call your moveable living room light a fire hazard...

Well, because it's so top-heavy. I no doubt wrote that because
I had just read the following sentence in a book:

"If you have a fire hazard--I mean an attached garage, then...."

(and I thought it was humorous).

What I'm after, I think, is a way to make my $10 shop light solve
my current lighting needs. I could add some rope hooks to my aluminum
ladder (and convert it into an electrical hazard)...


Bill

In article , Bill wrote:
Just finished my insulation. I ended up taking down the drywall in the
corner too, rather than leaving myself 2 butt-joints to make there. I
would have saved some time if I had decided that a month or two ago
rather than tip-toeing around it. While I was trimming things up a
question occurred to me--What sort of Lighting am I going to want while
doing the setting compound/sanding/finishing compound joint work?

I use one of these:
http://www.lowes.com/pd_320775-337-T...ductId=3179077

Set it up so that it's almost parallel to the wall. Imperfections in the
surface will throw sharp shadows. If you can't see imperfections under a
thousand watts of unfrosted, unshaded, glaring light, nobody will be able to
see them under a couple hundred watts of frosted fluorescent lighting after
you're done.

Bill wrote:


I'm just trying to see the light! : ) Well, maybe the reverse--but
as Paul McCartney sang, and just recently on PBS, "Let It Be"... ; )

Or the old Hank Williams song "I Saw The Light"...


Could you advise me on sand-paper (I really mean "screen"), in the
context of putting up drywall. I bought Stanley's book on drywall two
days ago and, to my surprise, this was not addressed.

Seems to me the drywall sanding stuff is around 80 or 100 grit. That stuff
is a lot better than sandpaper in my opion.


I was going to get 120 grit (medium) and 220 grit (fine), since that
is what is offered at Lowes. My guess is that the 120 is for
(heavier) setting compound and the 220 is for the finishing compound.

Shouldn't need two grits. 120 might be a tad on the fine side. 220 is
definitely finer than you'll need.


Then (I pondered), someone who can apply joint compound nicely might
not even need the 120...

It wouldn't be a sheetrock job if you didn't have fine white dust
everywehre - especially in your nose.


--

-Mike-

In article , Bill wrote:

Could you advise me on sand-paper (I really mean "screen"), in the
context of putting up drywall. I bought Stanley's book on drywall two
days ago and, to my surprise, this was not addressed.

I was going to get 120 grit (medium) and 220 grit (fine), since that is
what is offered at Lowes. My guess is that the 120 is for (heavier)
setting compound and the 220 is for the finishing compound.

That's what I use.

I also use one of these to control the dust:
http://www.amazon.com/MT800-Sand-Kle.../dp/B00005A1K8

Got mine at Home Depot about four, five years ago. Not sure if they still sell
them or not -- it doesn't seem to be on their website. The product is great,
and so is the manufacturer: I dropped the sanding head off the top of a ladder
onto a concrete floor and cracked part of it. Called them to order a
replacement -- told them exactly what happened, so they knew it wasn't a
warranty claim -- and they sent a complete new sanding head, free of charge,
by Priority Mail. I had it in two days.

The joint is half empty...


"Bill" wrote in message
...
Pessimist, huh? : )


Nova wrote:

I find that running my hand over the seams and joints often does a
better job of finding flaws than that of sight. Expect to do some
touch-ups after the primer goes on.

On Aug 2, 6:57*am, (Doug Miller) wrote:
In article , Bill wrote:
Could you advise me on sand-paper (I really mean "screen"), in the
context of putting up drywall. *I bought Stanley's book on drywall two
days ago and, to my surprise, this was not addressed.

I was going to get 120 grit (medium) and 220 grit (fine), since that is
what is offered at Lowes. * My guess is that the 120 is for (heavier)
setting compound and the 220 is for the finishing compound.

That's what I use.

Same.

I also use one of these to control the dust:http://www.amazon.com/MT800-Sand-Kle.../dp/B00005A1K8

Got mine at Home Depot about four, five years ago. Not sure if they still sell
them or not -- it doesn't seem to be on their website. The product is great,
and so is the manufacturer: I dropped the sanding head off the top of a ladder
onto a concrete floor and cracked part of it. Called them to order a
replacement -- told them exactly what happened, so they knew it wasn't a
warranty claim -- and they sent a complete new sanding head, free of charge,
by Priority Mail. I had it in two days.

I have one of those, too. It doesn't have the water filter on it,
though. I've found that the screen makes larger dust particles (than
sand paper) so a shop vac has no problems with it. It will plug a
filter, though. I wonder if a Dust Deputy would help.

On Aug 2, 2:37*am, Bill wrote:
wrote:
You're going to need a *lot* more lighting in your shop (another half-dozen 4'
dual shop lights ought to do). *Might just as well put it in now.

Real shop lights are the next project. *I've got wire and a switch all
set for them! * "Insulation" was a "Might just as well do it now". *The
sort of lighting I need to work in my shop, and the sort of lighting I
need to sand joint compound near the ceiling are different enough that I
don't consider it a "Might just as well do it now."! *: ) *I wouldn't
mind having one of those fancy 1kW light stands, but can't justify the
space for it at this point. *Thanks for the ideas!


It's a garage. When its not in use, hang it from the ceiling.

Doug Miller wrote:
In , wrote:
Just finished my insulation. I ended up taking down the drywall in the
corner too, rather than leaving myself 2 butt-joints to make there. I
would have saved some time if I had decided that a month or two ago
rather than tip-toeing around it. While I was trimming things up a
question occurred to me--What sort of Lighting am I going to want while
doing the setting compound/sanding/finishing compound joint work?

I use one of these:
http://www.lowes.com/pd_320775-337-T...ductId=3179077



Wow, the price is right too (~$39). Do you find it convenient for other
uses? I'd guess it's probably pretty hot so one might not want to be
right underneath it.

I've got a list of about 10 drywall-project related things to pick up
today (drywall hammer, ...), not including drywall and joint compound.
I'll have to see how I survive that first! : )

Bill