# Hmm what's wrong here...



## backstay

Looks like a temp setup for the raising of the building.


----------



## Rufeo

Ha no this was a supposedly permanent service install for a school trailer.


----------



## Englishsparky

You've caught me lol...


----------



## Dennis Alwon

Rufeo said:


> Oh boy sometimes I'd like to find these " electricians" who do this


My bet is they were not electricians.


----------



## erics37

I wonder what the purpose of that LL in the first pic is. :001_huh:


----------



## HARRY304E

Rufeo said:


> Oh boy sometimes I'd like to find these " electricians" who do this


Yup that right in the code Book..


----------



## HARRY304E

erics37 said:


> I wonder what the purpose of that LL in the first pic is. :001_huh:


Strain relief..:laughing::laughing:


----------



## Chris1971

The LL is for splicing purposes.:laughing::laughing:


----------



## erics37

Chris1971 said:


> The LL is for splicing purposes.:laughing::laughing:


At least they put the lid on it.


----------



## dowmace

That took me days to make it look that good...


----------



## McClary’s Electrical

Anybody care to quote a violation in the second picture. I don't see any


----------



## HARRY304E

mcclary's electrical said:


> Anybody care to quote a violation in the second picture. I don't see any


It is subject to physical damage.

And is not supported in accordance with 334.30

And it also violates 110.12.

*
110.12 Mechanical Execution of Work.​*​​​​Electrical equipment​
shall be installed in a neat and workmanlike manner




*338.12 Uses Not Permitted.*​
*(A) Service-Entrance Cable. *
Service-entrance cable (SE)
shall not be used under the following conditions or in the
following locations:
(1) Where subject to physical damage unless protected in
accordance with 230.50(B)
(2) Underground with or without a raceway
(3) For exterior branch circuits and feeder wiring unless
the installation complies with the provisions of Part I of
Article 225 and is supported in accordance with 334.30
or is used as messenger-supported wiring as permitted​in Part II of Article 396
​


----------



## backstay

mcclary's electrical said:


> Anybody care to quote *a* violation in the second picture. I don't see any


Harry, he said "a" violation. Don't hog them all. You could have put that in at least 4 post also:laughing:.


----------



## Rufeo

Wow how can you not see something wrong with the second pic. We as the leading trade should take pride in our work. It's our name on the jobs we do. People who do work like that shouldn't be allowed to call themselves electricians.

Sent from my Thunderbolt using Electrician Talk


----------



## McClary’s Electrical

HARRY304E said:


> It is subject to physical damage.
> 
> And is not supported in accordance with 334.30
> 
> And it also violates 110.12.
> 
> 
> 110.12 Mechanical Execution of Work. Electrical equipment
> shall be installed in a neat and workmanlike manner
> 
> 
> 
> 338.12 Uses Not Permitted.
> 
> (A) Service-Entrance Cable.
> Service-entrance cable (SE)
> shall not be used under the following conditions or in the
> following locations:
> (1) Where subject to physical damage unless protected in
> accordance with 230.50(B)
> (2) Underground with or without a raceway
> (3) For exterior branch circuits and feeder wiring unless
> the installation complies with the provisions of Part I of
> Article 225 and is supported in accordance with 334.30
> or is used as messenger-supported wiring as permitted
> in Part II of Article 396


Harry it is not subject to anymore damage than a crawlspace once they install the skirting. Also, there's only 3' of se cable showing, so your support code quote cannot be proven. 


I say as ugly as it is, there are no violations in that picture


----------



## McClary’s Electrical

Rufeo said:


> Wow how can you not see something wrong with the second pic. We as the leading trade should take pride in our work. It's our name on the jobs we do. People who do work like that shouldn't be allowed to call themselves electricians.
> 
> Sent from my Thunderbolt using Electrician Talk


Thats just a lone opinion that means nothing to me. 

That is not my work, I asked for a code article, not an opinion


----------



## Jlarson

mcclary's electrical said:


> I say as ugly as it is, there are no violations in that picture


I agree. 



Rufeo said:


> Wow how can you not see something wrong with the second pic. We as the leading trade should take pride in our work. It's our name on the jobs we do. People who do work like that shouldn't be allowed to call themselves electricians.


Aw there is gonna be a skirt over it (at least there better be if this is a school) and it'll probably never see the light of day again calm down. No need to waste time making hidden work look perfect.


----------



## Rufeo

Haha you talk as of you know what's in the actual picture. This is an exposed cable hanging on the side of a school trailer. So yes its exposed to physical damage, and is over 3 feet. As far as in a neatly manner? I think not and anyone would agree. Also expressing an opinion on a thread I started, what are you dense?

Sent from my Thunderbolt using Electrician Talk


----------



## Jlarson

Rufeo said:


> Haha you talk as of you know what's in the actual picture. This is an exposed cable hanging on the side of a school trailer. So yes its exposed to physical damage, and is over 3 feet. As far as in a neatly manner? I think not and anyone would agree. Also expressing an opinion on a thread I started, what are you dense?


What exactly do you want for us here. You post some little picture of what looks like cable that is, or will be run under a portable building. Then you get upset that people commented based on what we can see in the picture. From here is looks like a piece of se sleeved in PVC down a wall and LB'ing into what looks like the area underneath the trailer.


----------



## Rufeo

Sir I'm about as far from being "upset" as humanly possible haha. The reason I took these pictures were to point out how poorly this ser was run.

Sent from my Thunderbolt using Electrician Talk


----------



## HARRY304E

mcclary's electrical said:


> Harry it is not subject to anymore damage than a crawlspace once they install the skirting. Also, there's only 3' of se cable showing, so your support code quote cannot be proven.
> 
> 
> I say as ugly as it is, there are no violations in that picture


Yes it can..

Be sides the fact that it violates 110.12 which is a manditory rule not optional.

And it leave's the LB without the proper change over fitting.


*
230.51 Mounting Supports.​*​​​​Service-entrance cables or
individual open service-entrance conductors shall be supported
as specified in 230.51(A), (B), or (C).​
*(A) Service-Entrance Cables.​*​​​​Service-entrance cables shall
be supported by straps or other approved means within
300 mm (12 in.) of every service head, gooseneck, or connection
to a raceway or enclosure and at intervals not exceeding​
750 mm (30 in.).


----------



## McClary’s Electrical

Rufeo said:


> Haha you talk as of you know what's in the actual picture. This is an exposed cable hanging on the side of a school trailer. So yes its exposed to physical damage, and is over 3 feet. As far as in a neatly manner? I think not and anyone would agree. Also expressing an opinion on a thread I started, what are you dense?
> 
> Sent from my Thunderbolt using Electrician Talk


I.never commented on what was not seen in the picture...what are you dense? There is no violation pictured


----------



## McClary’s Electrical

HARRY304E said:


> Yes it can..
> 
> Be sides the fact that it violates 110.12 which is a manditory rule not optional.
> 
> And it leave's the LB without the proper change over fitting.
> 
> 
> 230.51 Mounting Supports. Service-entrance cables or
> individual open service-entrance conductors shall be supported
> as specified in 230.51(A), (B), or (C).
> (A) Service-Entrance Cables. Service-entrance cables shall
> be supported by straps or other approved means within
> 300 mm (12 in.) of every service head, gooseneck, or connection
> to a raceway or enclosure and at intervals not exceeding
> 750 mm (30 in.).


There is not a code in this world that requires a "changeover" fitting at that lb. Now you're just making stuff up


----------



## thegoldenboy

mcclary's electrical said:


> There is not a code in this world that requires a "changeover" fitting at that lb. Now you're just making stuff up


No, but it does have to be supported within 12" after leaving the fitting and needs to be supported every 30" thereafter. Which in the picture, it is not.


----------



## Rufeo

mcclary's electrical said:


> I.never commented on what was not seen in the picture...what are you dense? There is no violation pictured


Well while looking at the picture and using perceptive reasoning, possibly something you do not possess, it is quite obvious it is not supported within 36 inches. Unless of course you thought just out of sight the cable did a miraculous 90 degree straight up to the trailer.

Sent from my Thunderbolt using Electrician Talk


----------



## HARRY304E

mcclary's electrical said:


> There is not a code in this world that requires a "changeover" fitting at that lb. Now you're just making stuff up


 Yes i must be.

You can not have se cable come out an lb like that in mid air. ..

How is the fitting sealed.

And SE cable is not rated for direct contact with the earth..


----------



## McClary’s Electrical

Rufeo said:


> Well while looking at the picture and using perceptive reasoning, possibly something you do not possess, it is quite obvious it is not supported within 36 inches. Unless of course you thought just out of sight the cable did a miraculous 90 degree straight up to the trailer.
> 
> Sent from my Thunderbolt using Electrician Talk


 
You cannot enforce code with perceptive reasoning, and again we're talking about what's pictured, duhh



HARRY304E said:


> Yes i must be.
> 
> You can not have se cable come out an lb like that in mid air. ..
> 
> How is the fitting sealed.
> ..


 

What code requires that fitting sealed?


----------



## Rufeo

mcclary's electrical said:


> You cannot enforce code with perceptive reasoning, and again we're talking about what's pictured, duh


Like I said, dense

Sent from my Thunderbolt using Electrician Talk


----------



## McClary’s Electrical

Rufeo said:


> Like I said, dense
> 
> Sent from my Thunderbolt using Electrician Talk


I'll agree you are, yes


----------



## Rufeo

Wonder if all your posts include you being a pompous, close minded individual. I would have to agree, yes. Haha too funny

Sent from my Thunderbolt using Electrician Talk


----------



## thegoldenboy

Rufeo said:


> Wonder if all your posts include you being a pompous, close minded individual. I would have to agree, yes. Haha too funny
> 
> Sent from my Thunderbolt using Electrician Talk


25 post deeps and already creating tension? 

:tt2:


----------



## Rufeo

Ha hey its all good, take what I say with a grain of salt. Do I care not the least bit. It's funny I'm getn to this guy. He obviously doesn't want to admit there's violations in the picture. Go somewhere else

Sent from my Thunderbolt using Electrician Talk


----------



## HARRY304E

mcclary's electrical said:


> You cannot enforce code with perceptive reasoning, and again we're talking about what's pictured, duhh
> What code requires that fitting sealed?


First of all the LB is the wrong fitting for the application,,

They should have used a box so when they change over to se cable it leaves the box through an SE connector then the cable would be suported in a neat and workmanlike manner,,

Sometimes Good practice is not in the code..


----------



## thegoldenboy

:w00t:

It doesn't look like they even bothered to glue the LB onto the PVC!!

I think an LB is a fine choice for a temporary installation to get trailer power, which this is *not*. 

I would have to see the rest of the install to give my opinion on hackishness.

MORE PICS!!!

This thread is worthless without MORE pics. 

:laughing:


----------



## MF Dagger

thegoldenboy said:


> It doesn't look like they even bothered to glue the LB onto the PVC!!


Ideally it should always look like it isn't cemented, every pair of pants and shoes I own has a trace of pvc cement on them where i wiped it off the pipe and then onto whatever was handiest, usually my shoe if I don't have to bend over. Sometimes the back side of my screwdriver holder on my tool pouch.
In this case though I wouldn't imagine that they took the time to wipe off the cement.


----------



## oldtimer

Let's not disagree with Harry, his dog is smarter than most humans.:laughing:


----------



## thegoldenboy

MF Dagger said:


> Ideally it should always look like it isn't cemented, every pair of pants and shoes I own has a trace of pvc cement on them where i wiped it off the pipe and then onto whatever was handiest, usually my shoe if I don't have to bend over. Sometimes the back side of my screwdriver holder on my tool pouch.
> In this case though I wouldn't imagine that they took the time to wipe off the cement.


Ideally, not going to argue that. But realistically, judging from the install, there should be globs of it all over the place.


----------



## Roger123

HARRY304E said:


> *230.51 Mounting Supports. *
> ​​Service-entrance cables or​
> individual open service-entrance conductors shall be supported
> as specified in 230.51(A), (B), or (C).​​*(A) Service-Entrance Cables. *​
> 
> ​​Service-entrance cables shall​
> be supported by straps or other approved means within
> 300 mm (12 in.) of every service head, gooseneck, or connection
> to a raceway or enclosure and at intervals not exceeding​​​
> 750 mm (30 in.).​


I agree with this one, good job Harry!​


----------



## McClary’s Electrical

Roger123 said:


> I agree with this one, good job Harry!​


 

I don't see an enclosure , service head, gooseneck, or connection to a raceway in that picture...try again


----------



## BBQ

mcclary's electrical said:


> I don't see an enclosure , service head, gooseneck, or connection to a raceway in that picture...try again





> 338.10(B)(4)(b) Exterior Installations. In addition to the provisions
> of this article, service-entrance cable used for feeders or
> branch circuits, where installed as exterior wiring, shall be
> installed in accordance with Part I of Article 225. *The cable
> shall be supported in accordance with 334.30. *Type USE
> cable installed as underground feeder and branch circuit
> cable shall comply with Part II of Article 340.





> 334.30 Securing and Supporting. Nonmetallic-sheathed
> cable shall be supported and secured by staples, cable ties,
> straps, hangers, or similar fittings designed and installed so
> as not to damage the cable, at intervals not exceeding 1.4 m
> (41⁄2 ft) *and within 300 mm (12 in.) of every outlet box,
> junction box, cabinet, or fitting. *Flat cables shall not be
> stapled on edge.
> 
> Sections of cable protected from physical damage by
> raceway shall not be required to be secured within the
> raceway.


That LB is a fitting, you get a red tag.


----------



## McClary’s Electrical

BBQ said:


> That LB is a fitting, you get a red tag.


Yep,,the word " fitting" gets me there. It didn't make the list on 230.51(a)......you got me there.


----------



## MF Dagger

thegoldenboy said:


> Ideally, not going to argue that. But realistically, judging from the install, there should be globs of it all over the place.


I agree completely.


----------



## nrp3

Ponder this for a moment. When using a meter/disconnect, whether one piece or two seperate enclosures, coming out of the disconnect with SER, how else would you do it? Obviously you need proper support of the SER. I do something like this to get out of the bottom of the disconnect through the sill of a home and into the panel. SER could be exposed on the side of the house, but theres no weatherproof connectors for SER that I know of and no sillplates for SER either that I know of. I'd consider this a sleeve.


----------



## Jlarson

BBQ said:


> That LB is a fitting, you get a red tag.


I finally got back to my office and went over the whole LB = fitting thing guess I forgot about that, and so did the inspector that looked at my last trailer job :whistling2:


----------



## BBQ

Jlarson said:


> I finally got back to my office and went over the whole LB = fitting thing guess I forgot about that, and so did the inspector that looked at my last trailer job :whistling2:


It is obviously unsafe and will likely kill all within a 2 mile radius. :laughing:


----------



## Jlarson

BBQ said:


> It is obviously unsafe and will likely kill all within a 2 mile radius. :laughing:


:clap::clap:


----------



## manchestersparky

Picture number 2 is of SER feeding a trailer. Then the grounding conductor , in the feeder to the trailer, needs to be insulated.
Article 550


----------



## BBQ

Jlarson said:


> :clap::clap:



If you were not so busy ripping off your customers you would have used PVC coated RMC with stainless hangers. :thumbsup:


----------



## user4818

BBQ said:


> It is obviously unsafe and will likely kill all within a 2 mile radius. :laughing:


----------



## Jlarson

BBQ said:


> If you were not so busy ripping off your customers you would have used PVC coated RMC with stainless hangers. :thumbsup:


:laughing::laughing: Awesome


----------



## BBQ

Peter D said:


>



I told you, I warned you all !!!!!


----------



## gold

BBQ said:


> If you were not so busy ripping off your customers you would have used PVC coated RMC with stainless hangers. :thumbsup:


encased in 12" of concrete.


----------



## 220/221

I could give a **** about the LB but even I wouldn't lay that cable on the *ground*.


----------



## Johncin

backstay said:


> Harry, he said "a" violation. Don't hog them all. You could have put that in at least 4 post also:laughing:.


Ha. Should have used a drop cord supported by a bucket of water. Ha... Don't forget to staple to the bucket 6" from the edge. Haha


----------



## CFL

mcclary's electrical said:


> You cannot enforce code with perceptive reasoning, and again we're talking about what's pictured, duhh
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What code requires that fitting sealed?


I know this is just the internet and you might not be such an ass in person, but why do so many people, like you, defend crap work like this? You cannot deny that that is crappy work. I can't stand that attitude of "it's never gonna be seen".


----------



## CFL

Johncin said:


> Ha. Should have used a drop cord supported by a bucket of water. Ha... Don't forget to staple to the bucket 6" from the edge. Haha


What the hell does that mean? Are you trying to be cool and mock the code? Most people who lack the skills to do things by the book and still turn a profit, tend to laugh at codes.


----------



## Johncin

#1,
I'm a grown man and "trying to be cool" when out in high school. I shouldn't have to explain myself but for your sake, I will. No I'm not mocking the code. I was using sarcasm to show that there IS a clear violation just as a bucket w staples would be a clear aviation. Just because one part is code doesn't mean the whole is able to pass( hence the 6" remark). Hopefully you gained some peace of mind from the appearant offense that you though you saw from my joke. # 2, lighten up, I'm easy to get along with


----------



## Johncin

Johncin said:


> #1,
> I'm a grown man and "trying to be cool" when out in high school. I shouldn't have to explain myself but for your sake, I will. No I'm not mocking the code. I was using sarcasm to show that there IS a clear violation just as a bucket w staples would be a clear aviation. Just because one part is code doesn't mean the whole is able to pass( hence the 6" remark). Hopefully you gained some peace of mind from the appearant offense that you though you saw from my joke. # 2, lighten up, I'm easy to get along with


Went*, thought*. Ha... Misprint. Ha. And no I'm not trying to mock correct spelling.... I just typed too fast Haha


----------



## thegoldenboy

Johncin said:


> Went*, thought*. Ha... Misprint. Ha. And no I'm not trying to mock correct spelling.... I just typed too fast Haha


You know, you can edit your posts instead of quoting them and editing them that way.:thumbup:


----------



## oldtimer

Johncin said:


> #1,
> I'm a grown man and "trying to be cool" when out in high school. I shouldn't have to explain myself but for your sake, I will. No I'm not mocking the code. I was using sarcasm to show that there IS a clear violation just as a bucket w staples would be a clear aviation. Just because one part is code doesn't mean the whole is able to pass( hence the 6" remark). Hopefully you gained some peace of mind from the appearant offense that you though you saw from my joke. # 2, lighten up, I'm easy to get along with


 Too bad you can't write English!:jester:


----------



## idontknow

BBQ said:


> 338.10(B)(4)(b)* Exterior Installations*. In addition to the provisions
> of this article, service-entrance cable used for feeders or
> branch circuits, *where installed as exterior wiring*, shall be
> installed in accordance with Part I of Article 225. *The cable
> shall be supported in accordance with 334.30. *Type USE
> cable installed as underground feeder and branch circuit
> cable shall comply with Part II of Article 340.


Since the exposed USE cable is only visible from under the building, I'm not so sure this code article applies. All parts that would be exposed on the outside are sleeved in pvc.


----------



## vasparky27

I lived in and seen many mobile homes jacklegged. Go figure.
The slogan you get what u pay for comes too mind.


----------



## BBQ

HARRY304E said:


> Be sides the fact that it violates 110.12 which is a manditory rule not optional.


The NFPA has stated that 'neat and workmanlike' is vague and possibly unenforceable. 

You can't enforce opinion.


----------



## Going_Commando

BBQ said:


> The NFPA has stated that 'neat and workmanlike' is vague and possibly unenforceable.
> 
> You can't enforce opinion.


Tell that to 95% of inspectors.

As far as that install goes, I would have pounded a few staples or clips onto that SER, and called it a day. When you sleeve cable through a raceway, you don't have to use connectors as long as the cable is properly supported on either end, from what I recall.


----------



## greenman

My bet is on the janitor!


----------



## Cl906um

erics37 said:


> I wonder what the purpose of that LL in the first pic is. :001_huh:


guy more than likely needed some kind of challenge. or maybe one wire is short so he needed a splice point. isnt it obvious?


----------



## erics37

Dammit I screwed up my thread resurrection post.


----------



## erics37




----------

