# Small Panel I did



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

Those are some really curious looking romex connectors. Special for Canada? I also wonder why you didn't just come in the back of the panel? Some Canadian rule?


----------



## Bkessler (Feb 14, 2007)

Well..............it's level.


----------



## JPRO2 (Dec 17, 2008)

Bkessler said:


> Well..............it's level.


 
is there something you don't like about it ? I am an apprentice so i wanna hear comments/critisicm so i can improve 


i am not sure about coming in the back this is just how my journeyman wanted it done i will check out the code book though 

and we call the connectors 40/40's or 20/20's they are made by iberville


----------



## Bkessler (Feb 14, 2007)

It looks good, and just from that photo I am sure your going to be a great electrician....the part I don't like is the exposed romex entering through the sides of the panel instead of the back, or the top protected with a conduit or something. I am not sure what the CEC says about surface protection for romex.....but that is what I don't like. And if it is a considered a shotty way of doing it then by no means are you to blame. It'd be the J-man on the job.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

As far as the panel makeup goes, it's fine. If you pull the conductors across the round shaft of a screwdriver, though, it makes them straighter and takes most or all of the wave out of them. I probably wouldn't have done any better than you, to be frank about it. For me, good enough is good enough. What I don't like is the way the romexes are brought into the panel, but that might be typical for Canada. I'd have come in the back.


----------



## JPRO2 (Dec 17, 2008)

around here its not uncommon for loomex(romex) to enter the panel unprotected in CEC it says it must be protected where it is ran less then 1.5ms above floor level and this is roughly 2 meters i believe so we should check out ok come inspection

coming in the top wouldn't have been an option because thats where we are bringing the feeders thanks for the replies


----------



## Bkessler (Feb 14, 2007)

JPRO2 said:


> around here its not uncommon for loomex(romex) to enter the panel unprotected in CEC it says it must be protected where it is ran less then 1.5ms above floor level and this is roughly 2 meters i believe so we should check out ok come inspection
> 
> coming in the top wouldn't have been an option because thats where we are bringing the feeders thanks for the replies




Trust me you could come in the top and still have plenty of room for the feeders.


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

A 3-phase panel and no 3-phase loads?


----------



## leland (Dec 28, 2007)

Looks fine. :thumbsup:
must have been a bear for the drywall guy to make all those holes.
Don't forget to Identify(re identify) all those whites on the 2-poles (if called for by CEC).
I too would have dropped in the top.

Keep up the good work.


----------



## JPRO2 (Dec 17, 2008)

there are some Make up air units outside the building that are three phase this is 1 of the 2 panels ..the smaller one i might add haha the units are fed out of the other panel though.


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

I hope the circuits that you ran with 12/2 and 14/2 aren't 120/240-volt loads.


----------



## JPRO2 (Dec 17, 2008)

why do you say that? is it because i will only have 110/208?
all of the 12/2 is for heaters mounted at every exit 
the 14/2 is for fart fans and there is a 10/3 for a dryer


----------



## TOOL_5150 (Aug 27, 2007)

JPRO2 said:


> coming in the top wouldn't have been an option because thats where we are bringing the feeders thanks for the replies


Here in california - the other CA, we try to ONLY come in the top with everything.

See a few examples:





























~Matt


----------



## TOOL_5150 (Aug 27, 2007)

Well, The first pic the feed comes in the back so I guess that doesnt count, but all the loads came in the top.

~Matt


----------



## Bkessler (Feb 14, 2007)

Nice panel 5150, looks like the perfect mix of doing it fast and neat. Sometimes to neat of a panel makes me shake my head......I worked with a guy who insisted on wasting 5 hours to trim out a panel I could make look like yours in an hour or less. His looked good though, but not worth the time put into it.


----------



## TOOL_5150 (Aug 27, 2007)

Bkessler said:


> Nice panel 5150, looks like the perfect mix of doing it fast and neat. Sometimes to neat of a panel makes me shake my head......I worked with a guy who insisted on wasting 5 hours to trim out a panel I could make look like yours in an hour or less. His looked good though, but not worth the time put into it.


Yeah, I figure if its worth doing, its worth doing right. "right" for me is a little above code minimum all the time. The customer gets what they pay for; if the want a panel change out, they get whats pictured above, if they want art then they will pay much more in labor. When doing a panel changout it is common for my customers to come out and take a peek at what I am doing. Some make no comments, some are happy to see the neatness of the work. I can tell you it doesnt get much better then being at an inspection with the customer, my boss and the inspector there, and the inspector makes a comment "This is very good work, Probably the best I have seen this month" That was a very good day :thumbsup:

~Matt


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Looks good to me. Not sure why people are picking on the NM cable coming in the side. Like anyone is going to care about that? :no:

is that the same romex we have here in the U.S.?


----------



## slowforthecones (Sep 13, 2008)

The first thing I see in California, exposed romex like that is a big no no... i'd be unscrewing all the faceplates to look and see how the romex enters the gang boxes. Offcourse I moonlight as a electrical inspector for a small town near san francisco, california.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

slowforthecones said:


> The first thing I see in California, exposed romex like that is a big no no...


Yeah, because it's so dangerous. :laughing:


----------



## JPRO2 (Dec 17, 2008)

i am surprised to see how much change there is between CA and the US 

i would assume it is the same stuff you guess use in the states it says romex on the sheath but everyone around here calls it loomex


----------



## slowforthecones (Sep 13, 2008)

From a inspectors view, if the romex is exposed like that entering/exiting the panel... one must think this electrician took a short cut elsewhere in the wire run. i.e. using 1 knock out for mutiple romex wires in & out of a gang box.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

slowforthecones said:


> From a inspectors view, if the romex is exposed like that entering/exiting the panel... one must think this electrician took a short cut elsewhere in the wire run.



Ummm...sure. Whatever you say. :blink:


----------



## slowforthecones (Sep 13, 2008)

peterd, i like your sig line.. your sig line applies to me too


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

slowforthecones said:


> peterd, i like your sig line.. your sig line applies to me too


LOL...yeah, I'm glad you like it.


----------



## JPRO2 (Dec 17, 2008)

maybe tomorrow ill snap a pic of the other panel my journeyman put together see whatcha guys think 

so far everyone thats saw the work we have done has been impressed and we have heard comments like "its good to see people taking pride in their work"


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

slowforthecones said:


> From a inspectors view, if the romex is exposed like that entering/exiting the panel... one must think this electrician took a short cut elsewhere in the wire run. i.e. using 1 knock out for mutiple romex wires in & out of a gang box.


Guess you haven't noticed yet that this is a Canadian installation, where this is a normal and accepted install?


----------



## slowforthecones (Sep 13, 2008)

MDShunk said:


> Guess you haven't noticed yet that this is a Canadian installation, where this is a normal and accepted install?


MD: I know. I was just adding my 2 cents in about it.. :jester:


----------



## bauler (Jan 2, 2008)

I like how neat the work looks in all the pictures, but I hate to have to work on these panels later. The no extra wire to work with. I usually leave a few extra inches. That is, I leave a drip leg before landing it on a breaker. The old geaser I worked for would have reamed me a new one if I did it the way you guys did.

Yes I think the inspectors here in California would have a problem with the exposed romex.


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

JPRO2 said:


> why do you say that? is it because i will only have 110/208?
> all of the 12/2 is for heaters mounted at every exit
> the 14/2 is for fart fans and there is a 10/3 for a dryer


120/240 loads must have 4-wire cables, not 3-wire.


----------



## JPRO2 (Dec 17, 2008)

..why do they need 4 wire cables? there shouldnt be a problem aslong as you use different phases


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

JPRO2 said:


> ..why do they need 4 wire cables? there shouldnt be a problem aslong as you use different phases


L1-L2, 240 volts. L1-N 120 volts. L2-N 120 volts. Plus a ground.


----------



## JPRO2 (Dec 17, 2008)

L1,and L2 would share a neutral would they not?


----------



## Ed Carr (Feb 14, 2009)

Actually, where are the grounds?
Ed


----------



## slowforthecones (Sep 13, 2008)

bauler said:


> I like how neat the work looks in all the pictures, but I hate to have to work on these panels later. The no extra wire to work with. I usually leave a few extra inches. That is, I leave a drip leg before landing it on a breaker. The old geaser I worked for would have reamed me a new one if I did it the way you guys did.
> 
> Yes I think the inspectors here in California would have a problem with the exposed romex.


Yup.. in my experience as a California electrical contractor and contract inspector for a local town. romex exposed like that feeding into a finished wall entering or exiting from a panel is the indicator of a hack or someone being sloppy. While technically it may pass, that just raises my eyebrows to look elsewhere in the wiring for code non-compliance.

you know contract inspectors are paid an inspection fee... also towns are hurting right now for revenue due to the economic situation...so yeah no pass... take it out and schedule a new inspection and pay a re-inspect fee.... sparky


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

Ed Carr said:


> Actually, where are the grounds?
> Ed


Top left. You can see the ground bar in the first photo.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

slowforthecones said:


> Yup.. in my experience as a California electrical contractor and contract inspector for a local town. romex exposed like that feeding into a finished wall entering or exiting from a panel is the indicator of a hack or someone being sloppy. While technically it may pass, that just raises my eyebrows to look elsewhere in the wiring for code non-compliance.


It's neither hack nor sloppy. Just because you're used to seeing things a certain way does not automatically condemn it for being "hack" when you see something different.


----------



## slowforthecones (Sep 13, 2008)

Peter D said:


> It's neither hack nor sloppy. Just because you're used to seeing things a certain way does not automatically condemn it for being "hack" when you see something different.


okie doke.. not my inspection assignment.. i shutup :laughing::laughing:


----------



## Bkessler (Feb 14, 2007)

Peter D said:


> It's neither hack nor sloppy. Just because you're used to seeing things a certain way does not automatically condemn it for being "hack" when you see something different.



Not in you opinion, but others it may and since Hack is not to be found in article 100, then it's up to interpretation, Instead of hack, I would say if i saw that panel that the installer was a lazy hack. But since we know it was done by an apprentice, I look past the lazy part due to his inexperience and look at the rest of the panel and can say said apprentice has done a very good job.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Bkessler said:


> Not in you opinion, but others it may and since Hack is not to be found in article 100, then it's up to interpretation, Instead of hack, I would say if i saw that panel that the installer was a lazy hack. But since we know it was done by an apprentice, I look past the lazy part due to his inexperience and look at the rest of the panel and can say said apprentice has done a very good job.



I guess you missed the part where this is a Canadian installation. The NEC or American preconceived ideas of "lazy hack" work do not apply.


----------



## Bkessler (Feb 14, 2007)

I did not miss that, and if I walked passed that panel in canada my opinion would not change.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Bkessler said:


> Not in you opinion, but others it may and since Hack is not to be found in article 100, then it's up to interpretation,


Wow, that's a really compelling argument. :blink:

No where in the NEC is exposed romex forbidden. Any interpretation that it is, is a false interpretation.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Bkessler said:


> I did not miss that, and if I walked passed that panel in canada my opinion would not change.



Ok, well than you're an ignorant American.  

I'll apologize on behalf of our Canadian friends that they don't do things up there the way you like them.


----------



## Bkessler (Feb 14, 2007)

Peter D said:


> Ok, well than you're an ignorant American.
> 
> I'll apologize on behalf of our Canadian friends that they don't do things up there the way you like them.



Sorry my apologies, next time I have an opinion I'll check with you tough guy.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Bkessler said:


> Sorry my apologies, next time I have an opinion I'll check with you tough guy.


You posted your opinion on a discussion forum, so your opinion is subject to my opinion. :thumbsup:


----------



## Bkessler (Feb 14, 2007)

2005 334.15 b


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Bkessler said:


> 2005 334.15 b


Yeah? And? Notice it says "where necessary." How is cable next to a panel subject to physical damage? Is someone swinging an axe at the panel? Beating on it with a sledge hammer? Protection is not necessary in that instance. 

So I guess you feel that all the typical installations with a panel surface mounted on a basement wall, with romex entering the top, are subject to damage too?

All I'm trying to do is to get you to think outside of whatever box it is you're stuck in. Things are done differently all over the country and in Canada too. To condemn things out of hand just because you don't like how they look is totally absurd.


----------



## Bkessler (Feb 14, 2007)

nope, sorry I just have a higher standard then you I guess.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Bkessler said:


> nope, sorry I just have a higher standard then you I guess.



Yeah, that must be it. :laughing:

What you have is an unbending opinion that can't accept any other kind of method other than what you think is right. And that's a cryin' shame. :no:

You still didn't answer my question though:
"So I guess you feel that all the typical installations with a panel surface mounted on a basement wall, with romex entering the top, are subject to damage too?" Yes, subject to damage?


----------



## Bkessler (Feb 14, 2007)

Nope, just the sides. Sorry. Your right I am set in my ways. Your awfully defensive, are you a lazy hack ?:no:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Bkessler said:


> Nope, just the sides. Sorry. Your right I am set in my ways. Your awfully defensive, are you a lazy hack ?:no:


I'm defensive? Have you read any of your own comments? :laughing: 

And yes, I'm defending my arguments, so yes, I'm awfully defensive when I am making a case for something. :thumbsup:


----------



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

Peter D said:


> I guess you missed the part where this is a Canadian installation. The NEC or American preconceived ideas of "lazy hack" work do not apply.


 
I disagree strongly, HACK IS UNIVERSAL. Just like the pics on the net of Pakistani and Indian power wiring, it maybe legal but HACK is HACK.


----------



## Bkessler (Feb 14, 2007)

I think Peter D is just experiencing his "time of month", he's very argumentative today.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

randomkiller said:


> I disagree strongly, HACK IS UNIVERSAL. Just like the pics on the net of Pakistani and Indian power wiring, it maybe legal but HACK is HACK.



So if the Canadian CEC allows the installation as pictured, it's still hack in your mind? Well, I guess I can't argue against that. :blink:

As far as the Indian wiring, that is just downright lethal. How can you even compare the two situations? There is a world of difference between a handful or romex cables neatly entering the side of a panel, and live wires strung haphazardly over a sidewalk.


----------



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

Bkessler said:


> nope, sorry I just have a higher standard then you I guess.


 
Your in good company my friend, I agree with your opinion 100%, as do the other JWs here that just saw the pics. But then again we are just a group of "ignorant Americans".


----------



## Bkessler (Feb 14, 2007)

Thanks, it's good to have a Marine or two on you side.


----------



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

Bkessler said:


> I think Peter D is just experiencing his "time of month", he's very argumentative today.


 
Ahh, I see, do they make plugs for pie holes?


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Bkessler said:


> I think Peter D is just experiencing his "time of month", he's very argumentative today.


Yes, I love a good argument. It makes me think and it gets others to think as well. Nothing wrong with getting people to think of different ways to do things. 

Oh, and regarding the "time of the month" comment, one of the classic signs of when you lost an argument is to attack the person making the argument rather than the argument itself. Look up "ad hominen" attack. :thumbsup:


----------



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

Peter D said:


> Yes, I love a good argument. It makes me think and it gets others to think as well. Nothing wrong with getting people to think of different ways to do things.
> 
> Oh, and regarding the "time of the month" comment, one of the classic signs of when you lost an argument is to attack the person making the argument rather than the argument itself. Look up "ad hominen" attack. :thumbsup:


 
Call it anything you like but just scanning through your posts today it looks like you have some bug up your rear compared to your normal posts.


----------



## Bkessler (Feb 14, 2007)

For my wife, yes. "Yes honey, of course your right". I am just stupid to think 2+2 = four.
"It = what ever you think it does".


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

randomkiller said:


> But then again we are just a group of "ignorant Americans".


I'm American too by the way - I can call other Americans ignorant - that's my right. :thumbsup:


----------



## Bkessler (Feb 14, 2007)

Peter D said:


> Ok, well than you're an ignorant American.



Hey I think your right about that losing an argument line.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

randomkiller said:


> Call it anything you like but just scanning through your posts today it looks like you have some bug up your rear compared to your normal posts.



I call it "getting people to think outside the box." But I forgot I'm dealing with electricians who are more or less incapable of doing that. :laughing:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Bkessler said:


> Hey I think your right about that losing an argument line.


I stand by what I said. Applying your American ideas of how something should be done to a foreign installation, without even knowing what the foreign code says, is the height of ignorance.


----------



## Bkessler (Feb 14, 2007)

Peter D said:


> I'm American too by the way - I can call other Americans ignorant - that's my right. :thumbsup:



Over the internet...........It'd be appropriate if you were standing in front of the bathroom mirror.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Bkessler said:


> Over the internet...........It'd be appropriate if you were standing in front of the bathroom mirror.



Well, since you are showing you cannot effectively make an argument, did you miss this post from JPRO2 from Canada?



> around here its not uncommon for loomex(romex) to enter the panel unprotected in CEC it says it must be protected where it is ran less then 1.5ms above floor level and this is roughly 2 meters i believe so we should check out ok come inspection


So this installation is not only common, but compliant with the CEC. Yet you condemn it out of hand from the very beginning, because you have a preconceived idea of what an installation should look like.


----------



## Bkessler (Feb 14, 2007)

Peter D said:


> Well, since you are showing you cannot effectively make an argument, did you miss this post from JPRO2 from Canada?
> 
> 
> 
> So this installation is not only common, but compliant with the CEC. Yet you condemn it out of hand from the very beginning, because you have a preconceived idea of what an installation should look like.



go ahead and take an apprentices word for it, and I gave it a pass and complimented him on his work. Sorry having a preconceived idea of what an installation should look like, next time I'll go in blind.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Bkessler said:


> go ahead and take an apprentices word for it, and I gave it a pass and complimented him on his work. Sorry having a preconceived idea of what an installation should look like, next time I'll go in blind.


Yes, I did take his word for it. I'm assuming he's under supervision so why should I not take his word for it? 

You are missing my point completely. I will explain this one more time. To take an _American preconceived idea_ of how a job should be done, and apply it to a _foreign installation_ without knowing the foreign practice or code is _ignorant._


----------



## Bkessler (Feb 14, 2007)

Ok, I wasted enough time on this one ......you win.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Bkessler said:


> Ok, I wasted enough time on this one ......you win.


It has nothing to do with "winning." It has to do with getting you to _accept other ways of doing things._ In this case, a panel installation from Canada that's just a tad bit different that what you're used to. That's all I'm trying to do here.


----------



## BryanMD (Dec 31, 2007)

Even if it is compliant with CEC rules it is still leaving that wire exposed and at risk of damage when there is no (obvious) reason to do so. 

Some call that sort of thing "hack work"; I'm inclined to agree.


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

Peter D said:


> I call it "getting people to think outside the box." But I forgot I'm dealing with electricians who are more or less incapable of doing that. :laughing:


 
You have no idea who your dealing with online, there are guys on here that might think outside the box, trace you through your IP addy and stop by and pay a visit, "just to say hi". For all you know RK might just be one of those guys.


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

Peter D said:


> I stand by what I said. Applying your American ideas of how something should be done to a foreign installation, without even knowing what the foreign code says, is the height of ignorance.


 
No it's "arrogance" and yes it is a constitutional right.


----------



## 76nemo (Aug 13, 2008)

Wha, close this thread. This has turned into a p*ssing match and is now useless


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

MechanicalDVR said:


> You have no idea who your dealing with online, there are guys on here that might think outside the box, trace you through your IP addy and stop by and pay a visit, "just to say hi". For all you know RK might just be one of those guys.



Are you insinuating a threat? 

I'm so scared now.  

And I'm pretty sure RK lives in California. He's got a long drive to come "just to say hi." :laughing:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

MechanicalDVR said:


> No it's "arrogance" and yes it is a constitutional right.


You can split hairs all you want. Either way you can voice your opinion and I can voice mine right back. But apparently if I voice mine, someone might "come to just say hi." I wasn't aware that we lived in Communist Russia. Nice scare tactic! :thumbsup:


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

_"I'm single because I haven't met a woman dumb enough to marry me. :jester:_ "

So there is some truth in the written word ala Freud.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

MechanicalDVR said:


> _"I'm single because I haven't met a woman dumb enough to marry me. :jester:_ "
> 
> So there is some truth in the written word ala Freud.


You're not actually trying to analyze me based on my tag line, are you? Please tell me you're not. :laughing: :jester:


----------



## 5486 (Feb 18, 2009)

Peter D said:


> You're not actually trying to analyze me based on my tag line, are you? Please tell me you're not. :laughing: :jester:


Worse things could happen, I don't know you but think you have issues today. The signature line fits from my point of view. "RK" is a local 3 guy, most on here know that is NYC so I doubt he drives to NYC from California.
Maybe take a pill and come back tomorrow.


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

Peter D said:


> Are you insinuating a threat?
> 
> I'm so scared now.
> 
> And I'm pretty sure RK lives in California. He's got a long drive to come "just to say hi." :laughing:


 
I dunno. What I gather about RK is he's able to 'just say hi' 
from a mile away with one shot.
















Not saying he *would.* Jez saying he *could*.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

480sparky said:


> I dunno. What I gather about RK is he's able to 'just say hi'
> from a mile away with one shot.


So "RK" is random killer. Right. So when you say something and "RK" happens to disagree, you get threatened with violence. That's really professional here guys! :thumbsup:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

bigmikeb said:


> Worse things could happen, I don't know you but think you have issues today. The signature line fits from my point of view.


I see. So when someone has a strong opinion and is able to articulate and defend that position, that's having "issues." Got it! Thanks!


----------



## Bkessler (Feb 14, 2007)

Peter D said:


> So "RK" is random killer. Right. So when you say something and "RK" happens to disagree, you get threatened with violence. That's really professional here guys! :thumbsup:



In other words you've I think what message is trying to be conveyed is





SHUT DA FFFFFFFFF UP.

it's obvious you just need to go find some mud for your turtle.


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

Peter D said:


> So "RK" is random killer. Right. So when you say something and "RK" happens to disagree, you get threatened with violence. That's really professional here guys! :thumbsup:


Actually, I don't see in this thread where RK threatened anyone.

I was just stating my personal observation about him.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Bkessler said:


> In other words you've I think what message is trying to be conveyed is
> 
> SHUT DA FFFFFFFFF UP.
> 
> it's obvious you just need to go find some mud for your turtle.


Yup, silence dissent! Everyone fall in line! Nobody can disagree! That's the American way! :devil2:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

480sparky said:


> Actually, I don't see in this thread where RK threatened anyone.
> 
> I was just stating my personal observation about him.


No, RK did not threaten anyone directly, but it was strongly insinuated by DVR that RK might stop "just to say hi."


----------



## Bkessler (Feb 14, 2007)

Peter D said:


> Yup, silence dissent! Everyone fall in line! Nobody can disagree! That's the American way! :devil2:



No one's trying to silent dissent, dissent just does not know when to shut up.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Bkessler said:


> No one's trying to silent dissent, dissent just does not know when to shut up.



I thought you said you were wasting time with this thread, and that I "won." Now you're back. :confused1:

But since you're back, is that your bunny wabbit?


----------



## Bkessler (Feb 14, 2007)

Yeah, I am back and I am not arguing bout the panel anymore. 


Yup, that's ******...he's my buddy....


----------



## Bkessler (Feb 14, 2007)




----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Bkessler said:


> Yeah, I am back and I am not arguing bout the panel anymore.
> 
> 
> Yup, that's ******...he's my buddy....


He looks pretty big. I hope you're not planning on eating him for dinner. 

Or maybe you are???


----------



## Bkessler (Feb 14, 2007)

Peter D said:


> He looks pretty big. I hope you're not planning on eating him for dinner.
> 
> Or maybe you are???



No unless there is an earthquake and I run out of spam, then he's next, then our other rabbit, cat then dog, and then.....


----------



## RePhase277 (Feb 5, 2008)

MechanicalDVR said:


> You have no idea who your dealing with online, there are guys on here that might think outside the box, trace you through your IP addy and stop by and pay a visit, "just to say hi". For all you know RK might just be one of those guys.


Hahaha! Internet tough guys... You gotta love'em! He might stop by your house dressed like a Klingon and club you with a toy phaser! You never know... an internet tough guy might fall in a hole on his way to "pay a visit", and never be heard from again...


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Bkessler said:


> No unless there is an earthquake and I run out of spam, then he's next, then our other rabbit, cat then dog, and then.....


:chef: ..........


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

You guys are too late.​


----------



## Bkessler (Feb 14, 2007)

ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

480sparky said:


> You guys are too late.


That is just so wrong.


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

Peter D said:


> That is just so wrong.


I gotta be me!


----------



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

Peter D said:


> So "RK" is random killer. Right. So when you say something and "RK" happens to disagree, you get threatened with violence. That's really professional here guys! :thumbsup:


 
Funny but I don't remember saying anything of a threatening nature.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

randomkiller said:


> Funny but I don't remember saying anything of a threatening nature.


I never said that you did. MechanicalDVR is the one who made the insinuation about you.


----------



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

Bkessler said:


> Thanks, it's good to have a Marine or two on you side.


I showed the guys on the job the pics just before lunch, everyone of them commented on the romex coming out of the wall, and if those were actually romex connectors, all 13 of them from JWs down to a 3rd year. Words like butcher, hack, and scab were mentioned.


----------



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

Peter D said:


> I never said that you did. MechanicalDVR is the one who made the insinuation about you.


 
He has been around me since 1982 so I'd say he knows me pretty well. He has been my brother in law for the last two years as well.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

randomkiller said:


> I showed the guys on the job the pics just before lunch, everyone of them commented on the romex coming out of the wall, and if those were actually romex connectors, all 13 of them from JWs down to a 3rd year. Words like butcher, hack, and scab were mentioned.


I guess you forgot to tell them it was a Canadian installation and that's how they normally do it? And that it's compliant with their code?


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

randomkiller said:


> He has been around me since 1982 so I'd say he knows me pretty well. He has been my brother in law for the last two years as well.



I see...so he does the threatening for you. Understood. His words:

"You have no idea who your dealing with online, there are guys on here that might think outside the box, trace you through your IP addy and stop by and pay a visit, "just to say hi". For all you know RK might just be one of those guys."

Sure sounds like a threat to me.


----------



## JPRO2 (Dec 17, 2008)

i really do not see how that is "hack" or "scab" work everything is neat its a mechanical room its an inch away from the panel ....whats not real about the connectors


----------



## electricista (Jan 11, 2009)

JPRO2 said:


> i really do not see how that is "hack" or "scab" work everything is neat its a mechanical room its an inch away from the panel ....whats not real about the connectors


It is just not what the american EC's have seen for romex connectors. They look more like our emt connectors.
These are what we use


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

JPRO2 said:


> i really do not see how that is "hack" or "scab" work everything is neat its a mechanical room its an inch away from the panel ....whats not real about the connectors



Welcome back. Don't listen to these guys. They have to find fault with everything. 

In case you haven't noticed I've been your greatest defender in this thread. So much so, that people have threatened to "pay me a visit" at my house. :laughing:


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

JPRO2 said:


> i really do not see how that is "hack" or "scab" work everything is neat its a mechanical room its an inch away from the panel ....whats not real about the connectors


Ever see a two screw romex connector? They look like conduit connectors.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

*My 2 cents..*

I remember on the MH Forum there was a post about some "exposed romex" and the message it was safe unless there was a mad man running around with a chain saw. Having one inch of exposed wire in not a hazard. One thing electricians do on these forums it nit pick.. IMO :thumbup:


----------



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

Peter D said:


> I see...so he does the threatening for you. Understood. His words:
> 
> "You have no idea who your dealing with online, there are guys on here that might think outside the box, trace you through your IP addy and stop by and pay a visit, "just to say hi". For all you know RK might just be one of those guys."
> 
> Sure sounds like a threat to me.


 
Or just his way of saying back off or wise up.


----------



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

Black4Truck said:


> I remember on the MH Forum there was a post about some "exposed romex" and the message it was safe unless there was a mad man running around with a chain saw. Having one inch of exposed wire in not a hazard. One thing electricians do on these forums it nit pick.. IMO :thumbup:


 
Very true and there wasn't a guy on my job today that has had a piece of romex in his hand this year. It's pipe, greenfield, or MC for us.


----------



## electricista (Jan 11, 2009)

I am use to work that looks like this. These pictures are an attempt to redirect this argument.


----------



## JPRO2 (Dec 17, 2008)

Peter D said:


> Welcome back. Don't listen to these guys. They have to find fault with everything.
> 
> In case you haven't noticed I've been your greatest defender in this thread. So much so, that people have threatened to "pay me a visit" at my house. :laughing:



haha yah i noticed thanks for that i was reading through it all couldnt belive some of the comments over that little bit of exposed loomex


----------



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

electricista said:


> I am use to work that looks like this. These pictures are an attempt to redirect this argument.


 
What kind of use is that building, I haven't seen wood framing in a very long time.


----------



## electricista (Jan 11, 2009)

randomkiller said:


> What kind of use is that building, I haven't seen wood framing in a very long time.


That is a residence- a large one


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Black4Truck said:


> I remember on the MH Forum there was a post about some "exposed romex" and the message it was safe unless there was a mad man running around with a chain saw. Having one inch of exposed wire in not a hazard. One thing electricians do on these forums it nit pick.. IMO :thumbup:


Yes, it was probably me who said that, and I said it here as well this thead. Exposed NM cable is not a hazard, it's not hack, and nobody cares about it except some electricians on a forum. In the grand scheme of things it doesn't matter. People have their ideas about what's right and what's wrong and you can't change their minds. That's why they're called "electricians." :icon_wink:


----------



## JPRO2 (Dec 17, 2008)

that looks really good electricista


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

That is a really nice job!! All the posers here who throw the word "hack" out in a NY minute are going to have trouble finding something negative to say about all that exposed romex. Your job will always look good and people will admire it for many years.. way to go :thumbsup:


----------



## electricista (Jan 11, 2009)

JPRO2 said:


> that looks really good electricista


As much as I would love to play along and say I did it I cannot tell a lie. Peter did it..:laughing: Just kidding


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

*Look at all that horrible exposed romex!!! That's subject to physical damage!! That's hack scab work right there!! Someone should rip it all out and put in pipe!*


----------



## electricista (Jan 11, 2009)

Peter D said:


> *look At All That Horrible Exposed Romex!!! That's Subject To Physical Damage!! That's Hack Scab Work Right There!! Someone Should Rip It All Out And Put In Pipe!*


Peter we are trying to redirect to positive energy. That is not helping.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

electricista said:


> Peter we are trying to redirect to positive energy. That is not helping.



Yeah, sorry about that. :laughing: 

I'm just curious what the peanut gallery has to say about that installation. It's deadly exposed romex after all.


----------



## randas (Dec 14, 2008)

electricista said:


> It is just not what the american EC's have seen for romex connectors. They look more like our emt connectors.
> These are what we use


We use those here too. The connectors the OP used are iberville 40/40s.. nothing wrong with them. If you want to talk sketchy connectors how about those plastic romex connectors I've seen in pics on here of US installs? 

If you think the exposed romex in the OP pics is bad... you should see a typical residential panel install here. Usually the panel is mounted on a sheet of plywood on the wall in an un-finished storage/mechanical room in the basement. The romex comes down from the ceiling, stapled/strapped to the plywood, and enters the panel. :whistling2:


----------



## JohnJ0906 (Jan 22, 2007)

Peter D said:


> Yeah, sorry about that. :laughing:
> 
> I'm just curious what the peanut gallery has to say about that installation. It's deadly exposed romex after all.


Peter, it's good you came on over to enliven things.... I think.... :whistling2:


----------



## JohnJ0906 (Jan 22, 2007)

randas said:


> If you think the exposed romex in the OP pics is bad... you should see a typical residential panel install here. Usually the panel is mounted on a sheet of plywood on the wall in an un-finished storage/mechanical room in the basement. The romex comes down from the ceiling, stapled/strapped to the plywood, and enters the panel. :whistling2:


Typical here as well.


----------



## electricista (Jan 11, 2009)

randas said:


> We use those here too. The connectors the OP used are iberville 40/40s.. nothing wrong with them. If you want to talk sketchy connectors how about those plastic romex connectors I've seen in pics on here of US installs?


I did not mean to infer that your connectors were no good but only to explain why we were curious about them since we have never seen them. 

And you must mean these.  I use them when doing retro work but on a panel I use the metal ones.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

JohnJ0906 said:


> Peter, it's good you came on over to enliven things.... I think.... :whistling2:


Yeah, I guess time will tell if I get banned here, just like Marc got banned at M.H. :whistling2:


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

There was a BUY AMERICAN thread that MH mods pulled.. I don't see where that is against forum rules. Things really suck out there and they are not going to get better anytime soon. Keeping the dollar here can only help all of us in a round about way :thumbup:


----------



## randas (Dec 14, 2008)

electricista said:


> I did not mean to infer that your connectors were no good but only to explain why we were curious about them since we have never seen them.
> 
> And you must mean these.  I use them when doing retro work but on a panel I use the metal ones.


I'm surprised you guys don't have them down there. I don't see why you wouldn't be allowed to use them, especially considering your allowed the plastic ones.

I don't mind them. However they can be a pain to snap them in

Heres some pictures of them in-use

PS. I had nothing to do with this work :no:


----------



## electricista (Jan 11, 2009)

randas said:


> I'm surprised you guys don't have them down there. I don't see why you wouldn't be allowed to use them, especially considering your allowed the plastic ones.
> 
> I don't mind them. However they can be a pain to snap them in
> 
> ...


I like the one screw set up, similar to a mc connector. I get tired of screwing all day in my old age. :laughing:

The snap ins can be a pain the arse.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Uh oh, more pictures of that deadly exposed romex, only this time it's loomex from our friends up north.


----------



## JPRO2 (Dec 17, 2008)

haha ..yah i know what you mean about snapping those 40/40s in for those sticky ones i use my channel locks


----------



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

JohnJ0906 said:


> Peter, it's good you came on over to enliven things.... I think.... :whistling2:


 
Funny, I kinda wish he stayed over there.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

randomkiller said:


> Funny, I kinda wish he stayed over there.


How will I ever go on?


----------



## cdnelectrician (Mar 14, 2008)

I do not see a problem with that installation, It is very rare that you see branch circuits entering the back of a panel in Canada. Some inspectors may not even permit it. As far as the exposed romex is concerned, this is totally acceptable as long as it is 1.5M above the ground. Now, if this were in a corridor and not a mechanical or electrical room...I would have a problem with that install. I would have flush mounted the panel in that case. I wish I could trust my apprentices to do work like that, good job! And as far as 3 phase vs single phase goes, even if he doesn't have any 3 phase loads in that panel right now, why would he install a single phase panel on a 3 phase service? How many times have I gone to a building where someone has installed a single phase panel on a 3 phase service and I need to hook an RTU etc. up. Well, now I have to run pipe all the way from the electrical room to the RTU because someone cheaped out on an extra wire and 3 phase tub.


----------



## slowforthecones (Sep 13, 2008)

randomkiller said:


> I showed the guys on the job the pics just before lunch, everyone of them commented on the romex coming out of the wall, and if those were actually romex connectors, all 13 of them from JWs down to a 3rd year. Words like butcher, hack, and scab were mentioned.


I think I am the first person to label that romex without protection a "hack". I am glad to hear other folks agree with me.


----------



## cdnelectrician (Mar 14, 2008)

slowforthecones said:


> I think I am the first person to label that romex without protection a "hack". I am glad to hear other folks agree with me.


 
Maybe where you come from, in Canada there is nothing wrong with the way it is done. I could say the word "hack" about a lot of the weird a$$ crap I have seen in the USA, but I don't because that is the way it is done in the USA. There is nothing wrong with the install in his pics, it will pass inspection and it is a lot neater than the stuff I see on a daily basis.


----------



## JPRO2 (Dec 17, 2008)

I agree just because its not the way the US does it doesnt mean its hack everyone does things differently.


----------



## RePhase277 (Feb 5, 2008)

cdnelectrician said:


> Maybe where you come from, in Canada there is nothing wrong with the way it is done. I could say the word "hack" about a lot of the weird a$$ crap I have seen in the USA, but I don't because that is the way it is done in the USA. There is nothing wrong with the install in his pics, it will pass inspection and it is a lot neater than the stuff I see on a daily basis.


I think hack is pretty much universal. It makes no difference between U.S. and Canada. The romex in the side of the panel wasn't hack work, and those who are saying exposed romex is hack have yet to say a word regarding the miles of exposed romex in the other pic. They have also not made mention of the millions of panels mounted on plywood with exposed romex coming into the top. 

Having said that, I too don't particularly like the look of coming into the side. The top would have been a better option and still had plenty of room for the feeders. Don't sweat the desk electricians that can find anything to pick apart.


----------



## slowforthecones (Sep 13, 2008)

We were just giving the apprentice newbie some grief.. good fun :thumbsup:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

InPhase277 said:


> The romex in the side of the panel wasn't hack work, and those who are saying exposed romex is hack have yet to say a word regarding the miles of exposed romex in the other pic. They have also not made mention of the millions of panels mounted on plywood with exposed romex coming into the top.


Yeah, you can really hear the crickets chirping in here now. :laughing:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

cdnelectrician said:


> Maybe where you come from, in Canada there is nothing wrong with the way it is done. I could say the word "hack" about a lot of the weird a$$ crap I have seen in the USA, but I don't because that is the way it is done in the USA. There is nothing wrong with the install in his pics, it will pass inspection and it is a lot neater than the stuff I see on a daily basis.


Yes, that's precisely what I was saying all along!! Yet I was lambasted, attacked, threatened and told to "shut up" for voicing that opinion. 

I wonder if any of the hypocrites will attack you now that you've defended JPRO2's installation as I've been doing all along. I doubt it. :no:


----------



## frank (Feb 6, 2007)

Back to JPR02.

As you progress the more you learn. The second most important thing is 'good to the eye finish'. There was no reason - given that the cables came from behind the wall , that you could not have put the enclosure OVER the cables. Drilling and bushing the newly formed holes to suit. Little things like this will make you a better journeyman but in the first instance it seems you care enough to look for critical advice and that is good. Best to you in your learning curve.


Frank


----------



## bauler (Jan 2, 2008)

I'm not knocking the installation. Interesting to see others work. Especially another country.

But I do think a inspector here in California would invoke the cable maybe subject to damage article. A inspector, AHJ, carries more weight than mine. Much of the code is fuzzy and is subject to interpretation. Exceeding the code a little just keeps things running a little smoother. I've always made sure romex is covered some how. My .02.


----------



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

frank said:


> Back to JPR02.
> 
> As you progress the more you learn. The second most important thing is 'good to the eye finish'. There was no reason - given that the cables came from behind the wall , that you could not have put the enclosure OVER the cables. Drilling and bushing the newly formed holes to suit. Little things like this will make you a better journeyman but in the first instance it seems you care enough to look for critical advice and that is good. Best to you in your learning curve.
> 
> ...


Well put Frank, I think that was what a few of us were trying to express.


----------



## eddy current (Feb 28, 2009)

Here are the Canadian codes that apply to the installation in the first post.

CEC 12-512 Romex can not be buried in plaster 
CEC 4-036 Can not use white as a hot conductor
CEC 12-506(3) Each wire needs it's own connector 

Can't see if each wire has it's own connector but I thought I'd put it in there. 

As cdnelectrician said


> As far as the exposed romex is concerned, this is totally acceptable as long as it is 1.5M above the ground.


 he's right CEC 12-518

As for the wire passing through the drywall, I'd let that go but in conclusion, because of the white wire used as a hot.......I would not pass that installation ........*In Canada*


----------



## electricista (Jan 11, 2009)

eddy current said:


> in conclusion, because of the white wire used as a hot.......I would not pass that installation ........*In Canada*



Are there no exceptions, in Canada, for switch legs and 220 volt circuits if using a cable assembly such as nm ?


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

eddy current said:


> ..........CEC 12-506(3) Each wire needs it's own connector ......


Huh? So you need to seperate the wires in an NM assembly before it enters a box?


----------



## electricista (Jan 11, 2009)

480sparky said:


> Huh? So you need to seperate the wires in an NM assembly before it enters a box?



You know what he means , each cable needs it's own connector.


----------



## eddy current (Feb 28, 2009)

> Are there no exceptions, in Canada, for switch legs and 220 volt circuits if using a cable assembly such as nm ?


Switch legs yes [CEC 4-034(2)]but they make NM in a red sheath, 12awg, with a red, black and bare ground for 220volt circuits. Otherwize you'd have to permanently change the colour of the white at every junction point. *No coloured tape*
CEC 4-034(1)


----------



## Norcal (Mar 22, 2007)

What would have been said if the original posted pictures had been of a sideways mounted panel?:icon_cheesygrin: OK in Canada, prohibited by NEC 240.81 (2005).


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

Hi !


----------



## eddy current (Feb 28, 2009)

> What would have been said if the original posted pictures had been of a sideways mounted panel?:icon_cheesygrin: OK in Canada


Sure, sideways, upsidedown, no problem. 

In residential we have to keep our main service conductors and all the other wires seperate in the panel.
Most of our residential panels have a divider between the main breaker and all the other breakers. If you use a panel like that then only the service conductors can enter the top portion of the panel, all other wires in the other portion. Because of that rule your stuck putting the panel sideways or upside down when your service conductors come in the house at an odd height or from below.


----------



## Norcal (Mar 22, 2007)

eddy current said:


> Sure, sideways, upsidedown, no problem.
> 
> In residential we have to keep our main service conductors and all the other wires seperate in the panel.
> Most of our residential panels have a divider between the main breaker and all the other breakers. If you use a panel like that then only the service conductors can enter the top portion of the panel, all other wires in the other portion. Because of that rule your stuck putting the panel sideways or upside down when your service conductors come in the house at an odd height or from below.



I forgot about the separate compartment for Canadian SE panels.


----------



## SPRKY (Mar 1, 2009)

*Sprky(ga)*

A bit off the track. I heard a discussion today. He said he was running a 480 in to a panel after it had been operating a temp service from a generator and THINKS he night have gotten the L3 (Yellow) mixed up with the Neutral. I have never mixed the two and don't know what the out come was or would be. What do you guys think would happen when he turned it on.


----------



## JohnJ0906 (Jan 22, 2007)

SPRKY said:


> A bit off the track. I heard a discussion today. He said he was running a 480 in to a panel after it had been operating a temp service from a generator and THINKS he night have gotten the L3 (Yellow) mixed up with the Neutral. I have never mixed the two and don't know what the out come was or would be. What do you guys think would happen when he turned it on.


Well, any loads on L1/N and L2/N would be connected to 480v instead of 277.

Also, because the EGC is bonded to the neutral, you would energized anything connected to the EGC to 277v.

He might wish to check before he energizes that panel.


----------



## SPRKY (Mar 1, 2009)

*Sprky*

I talked to him today and he said everything is hunky-dorry. He said he was a bit worried but he checked and the only thing was some of the air handling equipment was running in reverse. I told him that could be contributed to the generator-to-general power switchover.

He did ask me to ask you guys if he ever did hook one up like that would it through the breaker or spark? I told him just double check next time.


----------



## Jeff000 (Jun 18, 2008)

I know this is an old thread, but wanted to say a couple things. 

Why is the white hot? Did that pass inspection?

I always move the ground bar to the bottom, or to somewhere thats not where all my wire is coming in. Makes things a lot easier. 

I dont really ever work with NM cable, but I would have probably brought everything into a splitter box and then several 1" pipe to the panel, but that could just be because thats how we do it, all the pipe drops into the splitter box, and then several pipes into the panel. This way I can make splices where needed. Not sure if you are allowed to splice in a panel in the states, but we can't.


If you were to come in the back of the panel how would you secure the cable? How would you add a circuit later when the owner says "Oh ya, we didn't tell you before, but now that everything is almost complete we need more circuits for these things we forgot to tell you about in the first place".


----------



## eddy current (Feb 28, 2009)

> I dont really ever work with NM cable, but I would have probably brought everything into a splitter box and then several 1" pipe to the panel


That works but you have to be careful about how many wires you put in each pipe, any more than three and you have to derate them all.



> Not sure if you are allowed to splice in a panel in the states, but we can't.


???? Why not? You can't use it as a junction box (wires in and then out without coming from a breaker) but joints are permitted as long as you don't fill the space in the panel past 75% CEC 12-3032(1)


----------



## Jeff000 (Jun 18, 2008)

eddy current said:


> That works but you have to be careful about how many wires you put in each pipe, any more than three and you have to derate them all.


True, but it would be easy to have a 1" (or even 3/4) for every 3 conductors coming in. 



> ???? Why not? You can't use it as a junction box (wires in and then out without coming from a breaker) but joints are permitted as long as you don't fill the space in the panel past 75% CEC 12-3032(1)


You are right. I don't recall reading that in school. And was always told by the JM I am working under to never put a splice in a panel. But I guess they said that as more of a looks better/company rule then code.


----------



## ampman (Apr 2, 2009)

480sparky said:


> A 3-phase panel and no 3-phase loads?


 have you never seen this


----------

