Bus Conversions dot Com Bulletin Board
September 15, 2014, 05:56:05 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: If your computer is lost, damaged, or stolen, we will replace all of your E-Mags for free.
   Home   Help Forum Rules Search Calendar Login Register BCM Home Page Contact BCM  
Pages: 1 2 [All]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: 2008 NEC  (Read 2788 times)
David Anderson
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 844


South Texas in the Eagle Ford Shale area




Ignore
« on: October 14, 2009, 05:41:12 PM »

I've been told that in homes we now have to install arc-fault, tamper proof plugs in new construction or remolding.  Here is a summary in the Colorado agency that regulates such things. 

http://www.dora.state.co.us/Electrical/forms/HomeownerPermits.pdf

Another attempt at gov't protecting me from all risks, I guess.   I bet the device manufacturers really lobbied hard to get that into the NEC. 

Gee, how did I make it to my age with 2 pronged ungrounded plugs. 

I don't think I'll worry about it in my bus, however.

David
Logged
belfert
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5437




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: October 14, 2009, 05:48:50 PM »

This has been the case since the 2002 code I believe.  My house was built in 2001, but when I finished off some space in 2007 I had to AFCI breakers for the bedrooms.  I don't recall if I had to add AFCI to the smoke alarm circuit or not.

Different states adopt the codes at different times.  I suppose some states could still be on the 1999 code.  My reading of the 2008 code made it unclear if RVs needed AFCIs.
Logged

Brian Elfert - 1995 Dina Viaggio 1000 Series 60/B500 - 75% done but usable - Minneapolis, MN
John316
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3224

MCI 1995 DL3, DD S60, Allison B500.




Ignore
« Reply #2 on: October 14, 2009, 06:32:59 PM »

Our county is still back on 1997 Roll Eyes. Nice for us contractors Grin They are going to move up a year or two soon Sad. Oh well...

God bless,

John
Logged

MCI 1995 DL3. DD S60 with a Allison B500.
Chuck Newman
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 99




Ignore
« Reply #3 on: October 14, 2009, 06:55:06 PM »

David,

As Brian said the Arc Fault Circuit Interrupter (AFCI) requirement has been in the NEC for some time.  I was thinking it started in '05, but I don't work the area any longer and my memory is fading fast with dates.

Quote
install arc-fault, tamper proof plugs

The only AFCI currently being sold, around here at least, is the combination circuit breaker/AFCI in one unit.  Available in 15 or 20 versions.  I'm not aware of any associated tamper proof plugs.  But that certainly doesn't mean their aren't any.

I put an AFCI on my house master bedroom circuit.  It supplements the Ground Fault Receptacle (GFR) in the bathroom.  They do different jobs.  Contrary to what some say, they work fine in conjunction with each other.

I have put several of each in the bus AC wiring.  The only downside I have noted is they will not work on "2 wire" circuits or "multi-wire" circuits that you will find in many homes.

Keep in mind that States and Counties can add requirements to the NEC as deemed necessary by the "Local Authority".

Chuck

« Last Edit: October 14, 2009, 06:57:21 PM by Chuck Newman » Logged

1989 MCI 102A3, Series 50, DDEC III, Allison 740D
Sean
Geek.
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2552


'85 Neoplan Spaceliner "Odyssey"


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #4 on: October 14, 2009, 09:20:35 PM »

I've been told that in homes we now have to install arc-fault, tamper proof plugs in new construction or remolding.


These are two separate items.  Arc-fault circuit interrupters (AFCI's) are usually integral to a circuit breaker; tamper-resistant outlets are just what you'd imagine.

AFCI requirements have been in the code for quite some time.  What changed in 2008 is that the list of circuits requiring AFCI protection was expanded.

Quote
Another attempt at gov't protecting me from all risks, I guess.   I bet the device manufacturers really lobbied hard to get that into the NEC.  


You'd lose that bet.  In fact, most manufacturers resisted adding AFCI requirements to the code for a long time because they did not have a good way to make them.  The AFCI provisions were highly controversial because the need was clear, but the solution was not.

Quote
Gee, how did I make it to my age with 2 pronged ungrounded plugs.


You made it.  Others were not so lucky.  They are not here to tell us about their experience on the Internet.

Every provision in the code has a pile of dead bodies behind it.

-Sean
http://OurOdyssey.BlogSpot.com
« Last Edit: October 14, 2009, 09:24:51 PM by Sean » Logged

Full-timing in a 1985 Neoplan Spaceliner since 2004.
Our blog: http://OurOdyssey.BlogSpot.com
loosenut
Confidently Ignorant
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 407




Ignore
« Reply #5 on: October 15, 2009, 10:30:52 AM »

 
Every provision in the code has a pile of dead bodies behind it.

-Sean


Sean,

Do you know how large the pile for ARC?  GFI?  It has been several years since I looked but the only justification I found was hypothetical.  X number of people's lives could be saved by these changes.  I always suspected the insurance industry pushed the standards.

Mike 

Mike
Logged

Sold 85 Neoplan 33ft 6V92ta, sadly busless
Hi yo silver
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 818




Ignore
« Reply #6 on: October 15, 2009, 01:16:05 PM »

My recent experience in installing a ceiling fan on a circuit protected by AFCI; With the wall switch OFF, if you touch both conductors, your bare hand will pass sufficient current to trip the AFCI breaker even though there isn't even enough current to shock you.  Reminds me of the early GFCIs that would trip practically if you sneezed. LOL  I liked the remark above re. the requirement for them regardless of the fact that the technology hadn't been perfected.  Ain't that always the way?  Deliver us from our protectors...
Logged

Blue Ridge Mountains of VA   Hi Yo Silver! MC9
Sean
Geek.
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2552


'85 Neoplan Spaceliner "Odyssey"


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #7 on: October 15, 2009, 01:21:57 PM »

Do you know how large the pile for ARC?  GFI?


It's hard to say, because of the way in which statistics are compiled (or, more accurately, not compiled).  So, yes, the actual life saving potential is an estimate based on extrapolating from poor data.

What is not disputed, though, is that about 10% of all house fires are electrical in origin, and that at least some of those are from arcs that would have been prevented by arc-fault protection.  It does not take a very large percentage to add up to a lot of lives.

GFI's are more clear-cut, because virtually every electric shock that anyone ever gets from an AC appliance would be avoided by a GFI.  So at some level, you can say that anyone who was electrocuted using household power would have been saved by a GFCI.

The GFI history is also very illuminating, in terms of how the code really helps.  I'm sure everyone in the construction industry has known for a long time that GFI's save lives, and yet virtually no one installed them until it became mandatory (you can see parallels here in many industries -- look at air bags in cars, for example).  Unsurprisingly, GFCI's cost nearly $100 each when they first came out.

As the code requirements to install them ramped up, so did the number purchased and thus made, and the per-unit cost plummeted.  A GFCI receptacle today is a commodity item costing only a few dollars; as a result, people install them sometimes even where not required.  If there is any doubt in the mind of an electrician whether it's needed or not, he's probably just going to put one in.

Many safety innovations would not exist today or would not be affordable without mandatory regulations calling for them, because left to themselves, consumers will not elect to spend extra money on them.  I remember Lee Iacocca appearing before Congress saying he would love to put airbags in Chrysler's cars, but he couldn't afford to do it unless the playing field was leveled by Congress mandating everyone do it.  Yet, today, there is no question that these devices have saved hundreds of thousands of lives.

-Sean
http://OurOdyssey.BlogSpot.com
Logged

Full-timing in a 1985 Neoplan Spaceliner since 2004.
Our blog: http://OurOdyssey.BlogSpot.com
Sean
Geek.
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2552


'85 Neoplan Spaceliner "Odyssey"


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #8 on: October 15, 2009, 01:25:45 PM »

...  I liked the remark above re. the requirement for them regardless of the fact that the technology hadn't been perfected.  Ain't that always the way?  Deliver us from our protectors...


But see my comments above.  GFI's would never have been perfected without the mandate to install them, and neither will AFCI's.  You have to start somewhere -- Schneider and Leviton are not going to invest millions in perfecting a technology for which there is no viable market.  Now that the mandate is there, they'll each trip all over themselves trying to make one more reliable than the other guy -- that's how they capture market share.

-Sean
http://OurOdyssey.BlogSpot.com
Logged

Full-timing in a 1985 Neoplan Spaceliner since 2004.
Our blog: http://OurOdyssey.BlogSpot.com
Len Silva
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4084


Angle Parked in a Parallel Universe


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #9 on: October 15, 2009, 03:01:10 PM »

We don't need no stinkin' Electrical Code nohow.  Damn government gettin' in our business all the time!
Logged


Hand Made Gifts

Ignorance is only bliss to the ignorant.
loosenut
Confidently Ignorant
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 407




Ignore
« Reply #10 on: October 15, 2009, 06:11:44 PM »

Do you know how large the pile for ARC?  GFI?

What is not disputed, though, is that about 10% of all house fires are electrical in origin, and that at least some of those are from arcs that would have been prevented by arc-fault protection.  It does not take a very large percentage to add up to a lot of lives.

You statement is exactly what I found.  There isn't any proof that any of the devices help.  Most fires are started from fires:  matches, cigarettes, stoves, fireplaces, fireworks etc.  Electrical wiring fires have been low to nonexistent since the advent of circuit breakers.

Here is what happened.  The National Code people sued for copyright protection.  They won.  This made them lots of money.  Now how does a publisher make more money?  Change the book under the guise of updating.  Much of the code has been foisted on us mainly to provide an income stream not because you or I am better protected. 

I understand why hospitals/nursing homes would adopt items such as GFIs.  I don't understand why it would be required for all of America adopt.  It doesn't provide one bit more protection for the average person.

What added protection do ARC devices provide over circuit breakers?

Mike
Logged

Sold 85 Neoplan 33ft 6V92ta, sadly busless
belfert
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5437




Ignore
« Reply #11 on: October 15, 2009, 06:45:03 PM »

Arc fault circuit interrupters are supposed to protect against things like nails through wiring that does not cause a direct short.  Apparently there have been cases where smoldering fires start from this.  They started with bedrooms because it is more likely someone asleep could be overcome.

I think AFCIs are just stupid.  I suspect most homes that could ever have this problem are older homes that aren't subject to AFCIs.

GFIs I have no problem.  People do stupid stuff with water and electricity all the time in bathrooms.

I've heard that a lot of the requirements in the NEC are due to lawsuits.  Enough lawsuits and eventually the NEC is changed to prevent that particular problem.
Logged

Brian Elfert - 1995 Dina Viaggio 1000 Series 60/B500 - 75% done but usable - Minneapolis, MN
Len Silva
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4084


Angle Parked in a Parallel Universe


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #12 on: October 15, 2009, 06:57:44 PM »

According to the CPSC  http://www.cpsc.gov/CPSCPUB/PUBS/afcifac8.PDF  there are about 40,000 residential electrical fires annually resulting in 350 deaths and 1400 injuries.  My guess is that the majority of those fires is from arcing circuits that are not drawing enough current to trip the breaker.

I know, the CPSC is another one of those government agencies that only exist to make life difficult for everybody.
    
The National Fire protection Association (NFPA is the organization that writes the National Electric code as well as the Life safety Code, the Sprinkler Code, the National Fire Alarm and Signaling code and others.

The mission of the international nonprofit NFPA, established in 1896, is to reduce the worldwide burden of fire and other hazards on the quality of life by providing and advocating consensus codes and standards, research, training, and education.

They are not there for profit, nor are they concerned about copyright.  

AFCI's will detect an arc and open the circuit even if there is not enough current being drawn to trip the breaker.

So when your grand mothers lamp cord gets caught under the rocking chair and sets the carpet on fire, she might not die.

I just cannot, for the life of me, understand why anyone would be reluctant to add a possible life saving device that costs so little.
Logged


Hand Made Gifts

Ignorance is only bliss to the ignorant.
belfert
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5437




Ignore
« Reply #13 on: October 15, 2009, 07:08:49 PM »

I have AFCIs.  I am just not convinced of the need for them.

It is getting to the point now where folks aren't going to be able to afford new homes if they keep mandating more and more safety stuff.  I've heard the IBC is soon going to require residential fire sprinklers.  Might be fine and dandy in the south, but in areas where it freezes the pipes have to be in heated spaces.
Logged

Brian Elfert - 1995 Dina Viaggio 1000 Series 60/B500 - 75% done but usable - Minneapolis, MN
Sean
Geek.
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2552


'85 Neoplan Spaceliner "Odyssey"


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #14 on: October 15, 2009, 07:11:53 PM »

....  Electrical wiring fires have been low to nonexistent since the advent of circuit breakers.


Spewing inaccuracies does not help your case.  See what I wrote above: about 10% of all residential fires are electrical in origin.  That's not a guess, it's a fact, and even 30 seconds of research would have revealed this information.

Quote
Here is what happened.  The National Code people sued for copyright protection.  They won.  This made them lots of money.  Now how does a publisher make more money?  Change the book under the guise of updating.  Much of the code has been foisted on us mainly to provide an income stream not because you or I am better protected.


Again, you're not very convincing.  The NFPA (publishers of the NEC and many other life-safety documents) is non-profit.  They exist strictly for the purposes of advancing life safety, and all the money they raise, whether that's through membership fees or sales of publications, goes to advance life safety.

Quote
I understand why hospitals/nursing homes would adopt items such as GFIs.  I don't understand why it would be required for all of America adopt.  It doesn't provide one bit more protection for the average person.


I beg to differ.  Millions of lives of "average persons" have been saved by fire and life safety codes promulgated by the NFPA and other similar organizations.

Would you really move into a house that someone else built without any codes or guidelines at all?  If so, I have a few properties I might interest you in...

Quote
What added protection do ARC devices provide over circuit breakers?


Regular circuit breakers protect only against overcurrent.  AFCIs protect against dangerous arcs that would not trip a regular circuit breaker.  Thousands of fires have been started by such arcs;  as recently as two decades ago, the technology simply did not exist to detect or prevent these.  Today such technology is readily available, and becoming more affordable and more reliable with each passing year.

The requirement for AFCIs first appeared in the 1999 edition of the code.  So we are only ten years into the evolution of this technology.  And understand that this is a technology designed to prevent an extremely rare problem -- but so is a cardiac defibrillator.  If you're the one having the sudden cardiac arrest, the invention of the defibrillator and its widespread deployment will seem like a good idea.  OTOH, if you're just the taxpayer paying to equip the fire department with them, maybe it seems like a poor tradeoff.

This is the balance that code-making organizations constantly wrestle with.  How many lives have to be lost before we make people spend money they don't want to spend on technology they don't understand?

-Sean
http://OurOdyssey.BlogSpot.com

(Apologies to Len for being repetitive:  we were typing simultaneously)
« Last Edit: October 15, 2009, 07:15:53 PM by Sean » Logged

Full-timing in a 1985 Neoplan Spaceliner since 2004.
Our blog: http://OurOdyssey.BlogSpot.com
loosenut
Confidently Ignorant
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 407




Ignore
« Reply #15 on: October 15, 2009, 10:42:43 PM »

Sean,

I know I'm not the brightest bulb so I may be missing the mark but I did a 10 min search before my earlier post.   All the statistics I saw were based on the NFIRS numbers.  The numbers broke down the fires by type.  Electrical distribution was one of the types but it included lights.  Again if I understood correctly, electrical distribution including lightbulbs only contributed for 1% of the casualties.  I would be willing to bet substantial money that most of the 1% was due to hot light bulbs being too close to combustable material.

The homeland security report broke down the numbers without an electrical distribution category in its 100%.  It includes other types of electrical fires, cookstoves, dryers and such.

I don't understand why you think I'm against codes.  I'm against dufus requirements not codes.  I've owned several homes built before codes.  I owned one that didn't have indoor plumbing and was wired with extension cords from the fuse box to the outlets.  I fixed what was needed and left the rest.

Before the NFPA copyright suit I would have agreed with you that they were interested in safety.  Since then it looks like they have been more concerned with power and money.  Nonprofit but that doesn't mean they don't make lots of money. 

I worked for a company that gave themselves to a college because they could make more money as a nonprofit.  They just didn't call the money profit. 

You have a wider experience than I do.  Have you ever seen an arc?  Do they matter in this day and age of fire retardation. 

I don't think the nation should pay for the installation and upkeep of GFIs and ARCs for the nebulous .0001% of the population.

Mike

PS It was a pun.
Logged

Sold 85 Neoplan 33ft 6V92ta, sadly busless
Gary '79 5C
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 613




Ignore
« Reply #16 on: October 16, 2009, 02:25:41 AM »

Sean,

Good info on the the number of fires started due to electrical problems. I attended a Fred McPartland NEC code course years ago, and several lead by other instructors since. No one could convey the material quite like Fred.
He had several articles which the fire company indicated "The origin of the fire was unknown, Deemed it to be started electrical in nature"

Two other building fires were again blamed on "electrical problems", later confirmed that the electrical service for those exact buildings had been shut off two months prior.   Roll Eyes

His point was communicated with hyperbole, and the morbid fact if you are an electrical contractor, engineer, bldg mgr, be very wary as to your back...

BTW, I support the new safety devices and protective apparel. For 32 years I have designed, installed, strarted up, and maintained high voltage (up to 138KV) transformers and associated distibution equipment. I knew the hazards of the exposure present and the new rules will better our business. Maybe I have been lucky, maybe good living, maybe I just never made a mistake.

Gary
Logged

Experience is something you get Just after you needed it....
Ocean City, NJ
Sean
Geek.
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2552


'85 Neoplan Spaceliner "Odyssey"


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #17 on: October 16, 2009, 07:32:20 AM »

I know I'm not the brightest bulb so I may be missing the mark but I did a 10 min search before my earlier post.   All the statistics I saw were based on the NFIRS numbers.  The numbers broke down the fires by type.  Electrical distribution was one of the types but it included lights.  Again if I understood correctly, electrical distribution including lightbulbs only contributed for 1% of the casualties.  I would be willing to bet substantial money that most of the 1% was due to hot light bulbs being too close to combustable material.


OK, for starters, let me apologize for being overly harsh in my earlier response.  Thank you for calling attention to the research you have done.

For anyone following along, NFIRS (National Fire Incident Reporting System) is a database maintained by FEMA.

There are some problems with using NFIRS statistics to talk about electrical safety.  For starters, the statistics there are only for structure fires.  While structure fires are more likely to involve death or serious injury, they do not comprise the majority of all fires, many of which do not progress to "structurally involved."  Being a disaster responder myself, I know how FEMA thinks (if you can call it that) and what they track, and their interest is not prevention or life safety but rather response and recovery.

Another problem with NFIRS statistics is that they capture only those incidents that are subject to reporting.  Again, many fires do not meet this threshold.  Moreover, the data is only gathered once -- at incident response.  So there are a huge number of fires that get entered into the system as "cause unknown", many of which are actually attributed to a root cause later on.

Lastly, the way this database characterizes root causes, fires started electrically in appliances would be characterized as appliance fires, in heating equipment as heating fires, etc.; only fires that start in the "distribution system" fall into the category you cite as being about 1%. Remember that overload current (or electrical arcs, for that matter) is actually more likely to start a fire in or near utilization equipment than in part of the distribution.  Many arc-induced fires are reported as "other: spark."

The data are so loose, in fact, that FEMA warns they are inconclusive and should not be used for decision-making.  To make sense of all the information requires some digesting and further analysis.

The seminal work in this area is "The U.S. Fire Problem Overview Report: Leading Causes and Other Patterns and Trends" by M. Ahrens published in 2003.  Unfortunately, I no longer have access to this document to quote anything reliable.  Also, this is published (as are many fire safety studies) by the NFPA, whom you seem to distrust; I'm not sure how to get around that.

Quote
I don't understand why you think I'm against codes.


Because you wrote "I don't understand why it would be required for all of America adopt.  It doesn't provide one bit more protection for the average person."

Perhaps I misunderstood you, but that seems to be a blanket statement condemning the requirement for an electrical code outside of institutional use.  You did not limit your statement to specific provisions of the code with which you might disagree

I can assure you that if there were no codes whatsoever, then builders would do whatever was cheapest, not safest, and so would many homeowners and hired repair contractors.  I have been to countries that enforce few or no building codes, and it is downright scary.

One can argue pros and cons for many individual provisions of any code.  As I wrote earlier, it is a delicate balancing act.  As hard as it is for safety advocates to swallow, there are many potentially life-saving technologies that are simply deemed too expensive to be justified.  So, yes, there are some number of lives that we all agree are not worth the cost to save.  For example, someone here has mentioned residential fire sprinklers.  There is absolutely no question that these would save thousands of lives and billions in property, not to mention response costs.  But so far, most agencies have felt that the cost this would add to a home would put homes that much further out of reach for so many people that it is a poor tradeoff.

Quote
...
Before the NFPA copyright suit I would have agreed with you that they were interested in safety.  Since then it looks like they have been more concerned with power and money.  Nonprofit but that doesn't mean they don't make lots of money. 


The fact that they defend their intellectual property (IP) aggressively does not, by itself, make them more interested in money than safety.  Like any organization, they need to protect their source of funds, and they also need to ensure that they retain editorial control of IP that can be attributed back to them.

I also aggressively defend my own IP, even though I do not make a dime from it today.

The NFPA is a completely open and transparent organization.  Anyone can join, and anyone can get on a committee.  Like many such organizations, its operations are governed by bylaws and articles of organization, and its leadership is openly elected through democratic process.

It should also be noted that the NFPA is not a regulatory body.  No state or municipality is forced to use anything they publish.  And yet every state has adopted the NEC (and many other NFPA documents) as law, because, on balance, they have done an outstanding job.

Quote
You have a wider experience than I do.  Have you ever seen an arc?  Do they matter in this day and age of fire retardation.


Yes and yes.  As I wrote earlier, the problems AFCIs will address are a minute fraction of situations.  But that's like saying that sudden decompression is a minute fraction of all aviation failures, so we shouldn't bother with oxygen masks on planes, or that sinking is a minute fraction (nowadays) of all maritime passenger vessel accidents, so we shouldn't bother with requiring lifeboats or life vests.  All of these things are true, yet few argue we should do away with aircraft or vessel safety equipment.

Quote
I don't think the nation should pay for the installation and upkeep of GFIs and ARCs for the nebulous .0001% of the population.
...
PS It was a pun.


Sadly, there are many who would agree with this statement, no pun intended.

-Sean
http://OurOdyssey.BlogSpot.com
Logged

Full-timing in a 1985 Neoplan Spaceliner since 2004.
Our blog: http://OurOdyssey.BlogSpot.com
belfert
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5437




Ignore
« Reply #18 on: October 16, 2009, 08:17:08 AM »

How many homes burn that are older and don't meet even the 1999 NEC versus new homes built to the 1999 NEC (Before the requirements for AFCIs)?  My brother lives in a development of homes all built in 1999 or 2000 and one of them did burn (I don't know cause.) a few years back, but that is very very rare.  Most fires around here are in the inner city or occasionally the first ring suburbs where teh homes are older.

It seems that the NFPA is responding to fires that happen in older poorly wired homes by making the requirements for new homes stricter and stricter.  But, if those older homes had met current codes (minus AFCIs) they probably wouldn't have burned anyhow.

We would probably be better served by requiring wiring upgrades in older homes, but government can't do that and any proposal to do so would probably be political suicide.
Logged

Brian Elfert - 1995 Dina Viaggio 1000 Series 60/B500 - 75% done but usable - Minneapolis, MN
Sean
Geek.
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2552


'85 Neoplan Spaceliner "Odyssey"


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #19 on: October 16, 2009, 08:45:33 AM »

There are homes that still have knob-and-tube (just as there are still homes with asbestos tiles or lead paint).  There is little that can be done to make such older homes safer absent a burning desire by the occupants to do so.

That said, codes can be applied retroactively when upgrades are done.  Many jurisdictions today require panels to be upgraded before significant additions can be built, for example.

Currently, there is a recommendation (but no requirement) to retrofit AFCIs into older structures whenever possible.  Within a few years, I would expect to see code agencies starting to require AFCI retrofit any time circuits or outlets are added.

As you have already observed, AFCIs are actually of more benefit in older installations than they are in modern code-compliant construction, because older wiring and devices are more prone to arcing.  That said, arcs can and do occur even in brand new installations.

-Sean
http://OurOdyssey.BlogSpot.com
Logged

Full-timing in a 1985 Neoplan Spaceliner since 2004.
Our blog: http://OurOdyssey.BlogSpot.com
bobofthenorth
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2079



WWW

Ignore
« Reply #20 on: October 16, 2009, 08:55:34 AM »

What you guys are talking about is "regulatory creep" and it happens everywhere.  Regulators regulate - that's what they do.  They get up in the morning, go to meetings and there is always something that could be made "safer".  Whether it makes sense to make a given improvement in the broad societal context is a question that we are ill equipped to answer.
Logged

R.J.(Bob) Evans
1981 Prevost 8-92, 10 spd
My website
Our weblog
Simply growing older is not the same as living.
Sean
Geek.
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2552


'85 Neoplan Spaceliner "Odyssey"


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #21 on: October 16, 2009, 09:07:00 AM »

What you guys are talking about is "regulatory creep" and it happens everywhere.  Regulators regulate - that's what they do.  They get up in the morning, go to meetings and there is always something that could be made "safer".  Whether it makes sense to make a given improvement in the broad societal context is a question that we are ill equipped to answer.


Well said, Bob.

Few of us would want to live in the sort of anarchy that would come from no laws at all, and few of us would want to live in a totalitarian state, either.  Most of us prefer the middle ground, and probably each of us falls on a different and distinct spot on the spectrum in between.

A somewhat different but related notion is that most of us are in favor of regulating the other guy, and few of us are in favor of being regulated ourselves.  Put another way, most folks think they know the right way to do things for themselves, but don't trust others to do things the right way when called upon.

-Sean
http://OurOdyssey.BlogSpot.com
Logged

Full-timing in a 1985 Neoplan Spaceliner since 2004.
Our blog: http://OurOdyssey.BlogSpot.com
loosenut
Confidently Ignorant
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 407




Ignore
« Reply #22 on: October 16, 2009, 09:26:39 AM »

Sean,

I was involved with a building project during the NFPA crackdown.  NFPA sold their codes to government organizations.

For years they sold these books.  For just as long the buyers changed the codes to fit situations. 

Similar to termites undermining a structure over the years the code books undermined local abilities.  Why have a staff to write codes?  It was easier and cheaper to adapt the codes from the book.  It was easy to change a few words to fit the local needs and Viola...codes.

The processes needed to write codes atrophied.  Here was an organization a 'partner if you will' doing the heavy lifting. 

The crackdown completely blindsided the code department I used.  The oldtimers felt betrayed because they provided information, support and departmental access to a partner organization not a tyrant.

That was my 2nd hand experience with the NFPA; the people who dealt with NFPA thought them dishonest, or to pun BOTN regulatory creeps.

Not against codes.  Against stupid rules.  I don't think the time or money spent on these devices is warranted.  Don't have them in my bus.

Mike
Logged

Sold 85 Neoplan 33ft 6V92ta, sadly busless
niles500
Niles500
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1188


ROSIE




Ignore
« Reply #23 on: October 16, 2009, 11:20:27 AM »

On the subject of sprinklering residential structures -  when the NFPA allowed the use of CPVC in residential dwellings I thought the use of sprinklers in residential structures would take off - At the time my net cost of installation for M & L was less than $2.00 sq.ft. - But by the time you got through with Engineering, Permitting (building and fire), the speciality valves/alarms/etc., and increased meter/supply sizes to accommodate max flow rate for min. head pressure,  along with the fact you had to use a state licen$ed installer, my installation costs quadrupled - At 2 0r 3 dollars a sq.ft. and a decent discount provided by the insurance company's for structures so equipped, the up front cost could be recouped in a fairly short period while saving how many lives and injuries (occupants and fire fighters), monetary costs, not to mention tax savings by necessitating fewer fire responders and fire houses. This, IMHO, is where the code writers and regulators are actually a hindrence to safety. FWIW
Logged

(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")  

- Niles
Sean
Geek.
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2552


'85 Neoplan Spaceliner "Odyssey"


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #24 on: October 16, 2009, 12:11:55 PM »

...
Similar to termites undermining a structure over the years the code books undermined local abilities.  Why have a staff to write codes?  It was easier and cheaper to adapt the codes from the book.  It was easy to change a few words to fit the local needs and Viola...codes.

The processes needed to write codes atrophied.  Here was an organization a 'partner if you will' doing the heavy lifting. 

The crackdown completely blindsided the code department I used.  The oldtimers felt betrayed because they provided information, support and departmental access to a partner organization not a tyrant.


OK, first off, let me say that I am not particularly an NFPA apologist; I'm not even a member.

But the argument you make (or the "old timers" made) does go both ways.

Having a national organization developing codes that are then adopted on a local level -- and this happens in all trades, so the NFPA is by no means unique: plumbing, framing, roofing, all have codes written by others -- has many advantages over each jurisdiction "rolling their own."  And, of course, local code officials (and their respective trade organizations) have significant representation in the NFPA (and similar bodies), so they are by no means "out of the loop."

The most apparent advantage is cost, as you've written.  But more systemic is training and best practice.  An electrician trained and apprenticed in say, Michigan can work fairly easily in, say, Texas, with only a minimal amount of re-training.  The same thing can be said for code inspectors, fire marshals, etc.  Beyond that is resources; a small jurisdiction with a handful of staff can't possibly keep up with the panoply of changes and improvements in best practice across the whole gamut of building trades, and their code base would suffer as a result.

There are advantages the other way, to be sure, including potentially more local knowledge, as you've written.  That's partially offset by the notion that, with a commonly accepted set of standards, when local knowledge about them is lacking, you can ask someone from the next town or next state.

Lastly, I put almost no stock in the grumblings of people whose jobs may have been eliminated or whose authority was preempted by the adoption of common codes written by deliberative bodies, as they clearly have axes to grind.  It is only natural for them to accentuate the problems and downplay the benefits.

I don't agree with every provision in the NEC, just as I don't agree with every traffic law.  But I don't want to live in a world where everyone takes it upon himself to decide which rules are OK to break.  The NEC (or the UBC, or the UPC, or any other comprehensive code) is not perfect, but it is, IMO, an acceptable compromise.

As an engineer, safety professional, responder, and now a member of this forum whose advice is often relied upon by others, it would be irresponsible for me to suggest that any part of the code can be "safely ignored," no matter what my personal opinion on any specific item might be.

As for AFCI's in bus conversions, you are not required to have them nor would I recommend them for this application (at the current state of the art).  GFCIs are another matter entirely; they are required by code, but more importantly they are a proven and inexpensive safety item, and I personally think anyone would be foolish to omit them.

-Sean
http://OurOdyssey.BlogSpot.com
Logged

Full-timing in a 1985 Neoplan Spaceliner since 2004.
Our blog: http://OurOdyssey.BlogSpot.com
Pages: 1 2 [All]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!