# Ultimate SE cable install.



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

Probably not the best way to do this but looks pretty neat all in all.


----------



## JohnJ0906 (Jan 22, 2007)

Have you posted those somewhere before? I know I've seen this before.


----------



## rod213 (Mar 16, 2007)

Soo, how many groundrod's do you think was driven vs how many are required?

Around this way we would have probably had to drive 2 per 200 A service.

Is that a pvc mastpipe too?


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

rod213 said:


> Soo, how many groundrod's do you think was driven vs how many are required?
> 
> Around this way we would have probably had to drive 2 per 200 A service.


No way. Meter stacks are a different animal. It's one service, metered a dozen times. The GEC(s) connect inside the meter stack, on a bar for that purpose. Just two rods, hit the water line with another, building steel maybe, and maybe the gas line. 'Anywhere from the point of attachment to the first disconnect means', is where you can connect the GEC(s). You could run them clean up to the weatherhead and attach on there, if you wanted to get silly about it. 



rod213 said:


> Is that a pvc mastpipe too?


Un-huh. Nothing wrong with that.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

JohnJ0906 said:


> Have you posted those somewhere before? I know I've seen this before.


Maybe. Yes, as a matter of fact. There were some SE cable haters on another board, and I posted that picture just to jag them a little. Some people think that any exposed SE or NM cable is automatically in peril of being damaged. I'd like to do this job in pipe, but the budget didn't exist for that.


----------



## Speedy Petey (Jan 10, 2007)

rod213 said:


> Soo, how many groundrod's do you think was driven vs how many are required?
> 
> Around this way we would have probably had to drive 2 per 200 A service.
> 
> Is that a pvc mastpipe too?


Yup. What Marc said. 
It has nothing to do with the size of the service. It has to do with the size of the service entrance conductors.

Here is the wording from Table 250.66:
You base the GEC on the _"Size of Largest Ungrounded Service-Entrance Conductor or Equivalent Area for Parallel Conductors"
_


----------



## Hillbilly (Mar 20, 2007)

Looks like a pretty neat install to me. Sure,Pipe would look better,but things bein' what they are,ya gotta do what you can sometimes.

I wouldn't be ashamed of it by any means.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

Hillbilly said:


> Looks like a pretty neat install to me. Sure,Pipe would look better,but things bein' what they are,ya gotta do what you can sometimes.
> 
> I wouldn't be ashamed of it by any means.


It's just an old apartment building, anyhow. Nothing to make artwork out of.


----------



## Hillbilly (Mar 20, 2007)

MDShunk said:


> It's just an old apartment building, anyhow. Nothing to make artwork out of.


 Sometimes,good enough is best.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

Hillbilly said:


> Sometimes,good enough is best.


Sure, as long as it's legal. There's an installation method for every budget. Ideally, that metering equipment would have been indoors in a dedicated room, and EMT's run on the interior to each unit. That would have been 3x more expensive.


----------



## Hillbilly (Mar 20, 2007)

MDShunk said:


> Sure, as long as it's legal. There's an installation method for every budget. Ideally, that metering equipment would have been indoors in a dedicated room, and EMT's run on the interior to each unit. That would have been 3x more expensive.


Ok,you got my curiousity up. You would be allowed to put the metering equip. inside where you are?

Our POCO wouldn't allow that here.


----------



## rod213 (Mar 16, 2007)

Hillbilly said:


> Ok,you got my curiousity up. You would be allowed to put the metering equip. inside where you are?
> 
> Our POCO wouldn't allow that here.


 
I've seen it done around here, as long as the POCO meter reader had a key to the building.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

Hillbilly said:


> Ok,you got my curiousity up. You would be allowed to put the metering equip. inside where you are?
> 
> Our POCO wouldn't allow that here.


Yeah, with permission, which we always get with big stacks like that. In a tall building, it's almost always inside. There might be a meter room every 4 stories or so. Plans for a new 3 story apartment building I'm looking at have the metering equipment on the 3rd floor, right inside from the point of attachment. It will basically only have a big weatherhead sticking out of the wall. The POCO's, when they give permission, want their "own room" for the metering equipment. With the AMR meters that they're putting in all over the country now, it's becoming less and less of an issue where the meter is.


----------



## Hillbilly (Mar 20, 2007)

Well shucks,I guess I learned somethin'.

It's always interesting to me to find out how things are done,or can be done in other parts of the Country.


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

I agree with that meter stacks are the bottom of the line distribution equipment. I have had to repair, replace, temporary a fair amount of this stuff, Cheesy at best, Sq D had some decent stuff but it was pricey, so seldom utilized.


----------



## bobelectric (Feb 24, 2007)

*Size of service*

How many amps did you request for this entrance, and why didn't you make a right turn under the windows instead above them? 

Bob O.84,Pa.15330


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

My guess safe entrance, unobstructed from the waste pipe and stairs, necessary height for entrance?


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

bobelectric said:


> How many amps did you request for this entrance,


I forget. I'm pretty sure it's paralleled 350 AL in the riser. Each apartment had almost no load. Gas kitchens, gas furnace on owner meter, gas water heating. 


bobelectric said:


> ...and why didn't you make a right turn under the windows instead above them?


I think it had to do with rotten wood. It's been a while. That building has that asphalt shingle type fake brick crap covering the old wood siding. Some of those cables look like they're strapped on weird places, mostly because there was mush-mush behind where they rightfully should have been strapped on at.


----------



## sbrn33 (Mar 15, 2007)

Sad is all I can say. Makes me very happy that my city has outlawed se cable for services or feeders.
The point of attachment is above the weatherhead
The mast is crooked and looks to be strapped with a couple 2x4s
Would have been a nice installation in 1940 but nowdays???


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

sbrn33 said:


> Sad is all I can say. Makes me very happy that my city has outlawed se cable for services or feeders.
> The point of attachment is above the weatherhead
> The mast is crooked and looks to be strapped with a couple 2x4s
> Would have been a nice installation in 1940 but nowdays???


Indeed, they are 2x4's. Pressure treated. We went first class. :thumbsup: 

That top strap on the weatherhead the lineman put on for me from his bucket. What do you expect for nothing? :jester: 

The point of attachment is above the weatherhead. No doubt about it. The lineman bolted on that 3-point rack. That rack is the utility's property in my neck of the woods. Shame on him. Plenty big drip loop, so it'll never cause a problem. 

I'm going into a corner to cry now.  

I mostly post provocative pictures. Pictures to generate discussion. This is an old job. Not sure if I'd do one this way again. There's a method for every budget.


----------



## sbrn33 (Mar 15, 2007)

Sorry I guess I didn't know it was your install. Makes me kind of a dikk.
I am just not used to seeing SE cable around Neb. It is probably a lot better( and safer) than the mess that was there before. I wish you had pics of that
Scott


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

sbrn33 said:


> Sorry I guess I didn't know it was your install. Makes me kind of a dikk.


No big deal, Scott. That's got to be among the top 10 ugliest things I've ever done. I thought it would get a couple of negative responses, which is sorta half the reason I posted it. I can do really nice work, too. Honest. :thumbup:


----------



## ailat (May 24, 2007)

This Job Is An Absolute Disgrace!
The Person Who Carried Out These Works Should Be Ashamed!


----------



## capt1012 (Oct 7, 2007)

*What the*

Sorry but if the slum lord cant do it the proper way dont do it!

You have to live with that horrible thing, I guess the owner does not care about ever upgrading the siding or selling the building to a new owner.

remember the refferral system is what we live with everyday .
you can have all the attaboys and one oops can mess you up .
remember craftsmanship ?


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

capt1012 said:


> Sorry but if the slum lord cant do it the proper way dont do it!


What is the "proper way", may I ask? Sure, it's not the way I'd have liked to have done it, but it's 100% legal and passed inspection. How is that not proper? There's an installation method for every budget. I have -zero- problem with guys with high standards; in fact, I envy you. What I can say for sure is that you pass over a lot of work and leave money laying on the table.


----------



## Andy in ATL (Aug 17, 2007)

I think it's pimp.! Installation for every budget. Truer words never spoken. It's all about the margin!


----------



## Mountain Electrician (Jan 22, 2007)

I wonder if its better to have a code compliant, safe, economical ugly installation or an old, outdated, unsafe service left in place because the owner can't or won't spend the money to upgrade to a more expensive installation? Ask anyone renting an apartment in that building and I'll bet I know what their answer would be. 

"An installation for every budget" Hmmm?? You got a copyright on that, MD?


----------



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

capt1012 said:


> Sorry but if the slum lord cant do it the proper way dont do it!
> 
> You have to live with that horrible thing, I guess the owner does not care about ever upgrading the siding or selling the building to a new owner.
> 
> ...


 
Ok cheif, how would you have done it that wouldn't affect the siding or future sale of the building? Please enlighten us.


----------



## capt1012 (Oct 7, 2007)

When I worked as a apprentice in local IBEW 35 they instilled pride and craftmanship in everything we did that includes sweeping up after your done working and looking to the future (adding additional empty pipe chases,Ect) 

I hope we have not sold out our proud heritage of former old timers who taught us how it should be done not how it can be done the cheapest way.

Believe me I have screwd up and went the cheap way and it caused me to think many times man I just dont like the way that came out.

We need to sell our experience with the customers not on price but on what we know is right in the long run.

plumbers do it everyday upsell,upsell,upsell and people still keep calling them back .

By the way I am not a chief ! I work for a living I am a union career firefighter in a city that has buildings with gasoline shingles on the walls they burn real good and when they do in this situation its gonna make  firefighters jump around to stay out of the way of possible energized circuits ( circuit breakers always trip on faults YEA RIGHT!!!) .

I also am a certified fire marshal and have seen many of these buildings torn down because not only were these buildings fire traps but eyesores to the community I wonder does he have working smoke detectors ?

Lets all be professional and lift this great trade up to the status it belongs in good pay,benefits and safe working conditions


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

capt1012 said:


> I hope we have not sold out our proud heritage of former old timers who taught us how it should be done not how it can be done the cheapest way.


I hope you're not saying that it's better for old installations to remain because the owner can't (or won't) afford the Cadillac type of replacement method? Like I say, I'm far from proud of this install, but it's 10 times better than what they had before, and it's code compliant.


----------



## Roger123 (Sep 23, 2007)

I once had an old car with lots of miles and rust and it needed tires to keep it operational. So, I installed new tires, no raised letters or white walls, just plain tires to keep the vehicle functional. They were not pretty tires but they did serve the practical purpose.


----------



## HighWirey (Sep 17, 2007)

We can always look back at anything we have done and find a better way. The install looks adequate to me.

What hits me is the degree of diffficulty in securing the cables after rising beyond the first floor!

Best Wishes


----------



## Bkessler (Feb 14, 2007)

The electricians that did that could just as easily piped it. Its the funding that was less not the quality of work.


----------



## 220/221 (Sep 25, 2007)

ailat said:


> This Job Is An Absolute Disgrace!
> The Person Who Carried Out These Works Should Be Ashamed!


 

Why Do Some People Capitalize The First Lettre In Every Word? It's Not The First Time I Have Seeb It And I Am Always Puzzled?


Exposed cable hater here BTW. It just doen't seem safe runnin a bunch of extension cords around the place like that :no:


----------



## JohnJ0906 (Jan 22, 2007)

capt1012 said:


> Sorry but if the slum lord cant do it the proper way dont do it!


So it was preferable to leave the old, aged, possibly overloaded, probably inadequate, existing wiring?

Sorry, can't agree. Better ugly and safe than leave the old and unsafe.


----------



## walkerj (May 13, 2007)

I think it is a dam fine job considering the circumstances!


----------



## DPDT (Nov 3, 2007)

capt1012 said:


> By the way I am not a chief ! I work for a living I am a union career firefighter in a city that has buildings with gasoline shingles on the walls they burn real good and when they do in this situation its gonna make firefighters jump around to stay out of the way of possible energized circuits ( circuit breakers always trip on faults YEA RIGHT!!!) .


Sooooo, just leave the original cloth covered SE which undoubtedly was cracked with bare conductors. I'm sure the said installation is miles above what existed. Not the way I would do it (cause we can't in MN) but better and safer. CODE COMPLIANT.


----------



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

capt1012 said:


> Sorry but if the slum lord cant do it the proper way dont do it!
> 
> You have to live with that horrible thing, I guess the owner does not care about ever upgrading the siding or selling the building to a new owner.
> 
> ...


----------



## Pierre Belarge (Feb 3, 2007)

There are many different budgets and that leads to all different kinds of installations.
In some neighborhoods, the budget is less. This does not mean that they should not be able to have the opportunity to have work performed.
It is good to see an install like this, as it may give someone else an idea of how to provide a code compliant installation and yet be able to provide it at a cost the less priviledged can afford. 
In the eyes of those who needed this done, it is a thing of beauty.


----------



## EPERINO (Apr 12, 2007)

this job is ugly and i would not admit to have did it


----------



## TOOL_5150 (Aug 27, 2007)

EPERINO said:


> this job is ugly and i would not admit to have did it


If your just going to say that, then show us some of your 'artwork'

I think Marc did a fine installation. As he said it depended on MONEY, he didnt do it this way because he thought it was the best or easiest. He did the best the customer could afford... Good job Marc!


~Matt


----------



## LGLS (Nov 10, 2007)

Looking at the building's size and imagining it's layout - what could possibly be in each apartment but one room? Is each apartment a 100a service?


----------



## leland (Dec 28, 2007)

It all is run very neatly. But ugly.

Would'nt 225.19 (D) (1) come into play here?

Clearances from buildings for conductors of not over 600 volts,nominal.


----------

