Jim Katen
-
Posts
10,273 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
News for Home Inspectors
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Posts posted by Jim Katen
-
-
Can someone illustrate this with color coding and block letters? Crayons maybe...(?)....
I don't have pictures, but I have three simple rules.
1: A separate building should have a grounding electrode system unless it's only fed by a single circuit or a single multi-wire circuit. Period.
2: Since 2008, all *new* sub panels need to have the grounds and the neutrals separated. Period. (That means that the feeder needs to have separate neutral and grounding wires - you can't omit the grounding wire if you separate the neutrals and the grounds.)
3: Before 2008, sub panels in separate buildings could be wired as in #2 above or, if there were no continuous metallic pathways between the two buildings, they could omit the feeder's grounding wire and use the neutral instead. (The grounds and neutrals would be connected together at the sub panel.)
-
[brThe existing 'continuous metallic path' is the low impedance path.
No, you can't rely on that for clearing faults. There's no way to know the impedance. Plus the metallic pathway usually isn't bonded to the electrical system. The concern is that a human can become part of that pathway - for instance if he were to touch the fence or the phone line.
If there's no continuous metallic path between house and separate building, join the neutral bar to ground bar, just like you would on the main panel in the house.That was acceptable pre-2008. After 2008, you always need a 4-wire feeder and ground/neutral separation regardless of metallic paths.
That's for sub-panels within the main structure.
Look at 250.32. The entire section deals with separate structures.
Is the drawing in 250.32 (A) a mistake? I know it's not part of the code but I can't explain it any other way.I'm not sure what drawing you're referring to. The NEC has no drawings of this. 250.32(A) has to do with grounding electrodes, not grounding wires in feeders. Look at the next section 250.32(B). It explains the need for the grounding conductor in the feeder.
What's your cite? The 08' is the latest I have and the one I used.In the 2008 NEC, here's the entire section dealing with this issue:
250.32 Buildings or Structures Supplied by a Feeder(s) or Branch Circuit(s).
(A) Grounding Electrode. Building(s) or structure(s) supplied by feeder(s) or branch circuit(s) shall have a grounding electrode or grounding electrode system installed in accordance with Part III of Article 250. The grounding electrode conductor(s) shall be connected in accordance with 250.32(B) or ©. Where there is no existing grounding electrode, the grounding electrode(s) required in 250.50 shall be installed.
Exception: A grounding electrode shall not be required where only a single branch circuit, including a multiwire branch circuit, supplies the building or structure and the branch circuit includes an equipment grounding conductor for grounding the normally non?current-carrying
metal parts of equipment.
(B) Grounded Systems. For a grounded system at the separate building or structure, an equipment grounding conductor as described in 250.118 shall be run with the supply conductors and be connected to the building or structure disconnecting means and to the grounding electrode(s). The equipment grounding conductor shall be used for grounding or bonding of equipment, structures, or frames required to be grounded or bonded. The equipment grounding conductor shall be sized in accordance with 250.122. Any installed grounded conductor shall not be connected to the equipment grounding conductor or to the grounding electrode(s).
Exception: For existing premises wiring systems only, the grounded conductor run with the supply to the building or structure shall be permitted to be connected to the building or structure disconnecting means and to the grounding electrode(s) and shall be used for grounding or bonding of equipment, structures, or frames required to be grounded or bonded where all the requirements of (1), (2), and (3) are met:
(1) An equipment grounding conductor is not run with the supply to the building or structure.
(2) There are no continuous metallic paths bonded to the grounding system in each building or structure involved.
(3) Ground-fault protection of equipment has not been installed on the supply side of the feeder(s).
Where the grounded conductor is used for grounding in accordance with the provision of this exception, the size of the grounded conductor shall not be smaller than the larger of either of the following:
(1) That required by 220.61
(2) That required by 250.122
-
. . .
If there's a continuous metallic path between house and separate building (such as a ground wire or metallic conduit) then don't join the neutral bar to the ground bar in the panel of the separate building because that might result in neutral currents in the metallic path. Ground rod connects only to ground bus.
But in that case, you need to have an equipment grounding conductor in the feeder. Otherwise you have no low-impedance grounding path back to the service panel. The pre-2008 rule was that if there was a continuous metallic path, you needed a 4-wire feeder.
If there's no continuous metallic path between house and separate building, join the neutral bar to ground bar, just like you would on the main panel in the house.That was acceptable pre-2008. After 2008, you always need a 4-wire feeder and ground/neutral separation regardless of metallic paths.
-
In my area, that would be Pacific Dampwood Termites. In your area, I doubt it. Do you even have dampwood termites there?
-
$275 per brick.
I don't think so.
-
No numbers on the indoor coil or housing?
Compressor serial number?
-
Is that a new construction? Just wondering how it could have escaped the muni inspector.
Marc
In our area the inspections are by private inspection agencies. They do not open panels.
Seriously?
Around here, you need to have the panel cover off when the inspector arrives, or he turns around, gets in his car and drives away.
-
In the UPC, the 24-inch rule applies to traps on all fixtures, not just sinks.
I don't know about horizontal distances before you get to the trap. That doesn't seem to be addressed for a single fixture, but I'd think you'd want it to be as close as possible to the fixture.
-
I'm also a big fan of 5.11. Taclite Pro in summer and Tactical canvas in winter. I love the built-in pockets for kneepads - which Duluth offers as well. The 5.11 canvas isn't as heavy as the Duluth Fire hose stuff, but it wears like iron. It's hard to go wrong with either company.
-
They weren't agressive toward me, but they hated the motion light. Every time it came on there was a dozen of them banging into it.
Hive behavior. In and out of the eave, one after another for hours.
Those weren't cicada killers then.
-
Originally posted by kurt
. . . I'd guess that the job was well done based on the detail around the hose bibb.
Agreed. I'm not sure what the other guys are seeing as a problem here, unless they're unaware of flashings with end dams...
The fiber cement (or aluminum or whatever that is) is not caulked at the sides. That side of the J channel does nothing to prevent water entry.
Marc
It's vinyl and it's a rain screen. Water gets through vinyl all the time - flows through it like a sieve and flows right back out again. Caulk is seldom successful on vinyl anyway because it expands and contracts so much.
-
Originally posted by kurt
. . . I'd guess that the job was well done based on the detail around the hose bibb.
Agreed. I'm not sure what the other guys are seeing as a problem here, unless they're unaware of flashings with end dams.
These have been common in better siding installations in my area for the past 15 years or so. There's even a variant in which the end dam goes up and also goes down again, so there's no need to overhang the trim.
Pics attached.
Click to Enlarge
26.9 KB
Click to Enlarge
27.74 KB
Click to Enlarge
60.79 KB
Click to Enlarge
44.79 KB
Click to Enlarge
34 KB
-
I inspected a 1975 mansard yesterday that had what appeared to be Cicada Killer Wasps nesting in one of the large mansard cavities.
What makes a solitary ground wasp hive in a wall cavity?
Or, What social hive wasp looks like a cicada killer?
Thanks,
The cicada killer might be in the attic if the attic has some kind of insulation that mimics the properties of soil. I can see a cicada killer nesting in dense-pack cellulose, for instance. Their behavior is governed by simple sets of rules, like algorithms. She doesn't understand the difference between an attic and the ground, she's just looking for a substrate with the right properties.
On the other hand, you might have been looking at European Hornets. They're pretty big and might be mistaken for cicada killers, but their behavior would have been very different, especially if you were waving a ladder around the nest area.
-
It was inevitable.
-
That place is truly amazing. I always say that's the type of homeowner or buyer that helps keep the economy going by spending crazy money. Any idea of the price ?
Grapevine says 10.5
-
It didn't always do nothing. Something changed.
-
That's a brilliant site. I love it.
(Inspection Report blog, 5th paragraph, change effect to affect. - sorry can't help it.)
-
He says he wants to say it, but doesn't bother, because, 1) the client has better ways to spend his time, and 2) we all know the contractor won't be writing anything.Quite a few HVAC contractors don't seem to care at all about clearances to combustibles. I have seen hundreds of flue connectors for oil-fired equipment with less than the required clearance. All the installers would say it is fine.
When I hear that the contractor said it is fine I often want to say "Have them put in writing that it does not comply with code, but its fine".
I've never understood this "put it in writing" business. What good does that achieve? Or is it just some kind of chest thumping intimidation thing?
When I was first getting started, I was given that advice and I tried it a few times. The contractors gladly put all sorts of stupid things in writing. I was left wondering what possible benefit there was to this technique.
As far as I can see, it's only virtue is that you get to say "I told you so" if anything bad happens. That seems like a questionable benefit. It's a perfect example of a home inspector covering his own butt at the expense of his client's butt. "Hey, get it in writing from the dumbass contractor. That won't help you one bit, but it'll save my sorry ass if there's ever a problem as a result."
-
Quite a few HVAC contractors don't seem to care at all about clearances to combustibles. I have seen hundreds of flue connectors for oil-fired equipment with less than the required clearance. All the installers would say it is fine.
When I hear that the contractor said it is fine I often want to say "Have them put in writing that it does not comply with code, but its fine".
I've never understood this "put it in writing" business. What good does that achieve? Or is it just some kind of chest thumping intimidation thing?
-
I put some in one of my gutters about 5 years ago. Still working fine. I used to have to clean out that particular stretch of gutter at least three times a year. Haven't cleaned it since I installed it and water still flows right through it.
-
The wife wanted them gone, so I sprayed them. I used a foaming spray with a 6" wand, half a can in the morning and half at night. Two cans in two days. No bees for a week.
I actually saw a new queen enter the hive yesterday. Round two starts in the morning.
Bees or yellow jackets?
Out here, the queens haven't yet emerged. Is your weather getting cold?
-
Would I be crazy to try and tie a french drain along the foundation into that old clay pipe? Would save me a ton of time not digging a 75' trench through the front yard.
Don't use the old pipe. The overwhelming likelihood is that it leads to a dry well. If that well were to fill with water, it could send water back into your drainpipes and actually push water into your basement.
-
Hard to tell from the photos, but its looks like you may have excavated below the bottom of the foundation wall at some areas. If so, that is not a good practice. There is a greater potential for settlement, especially if the soil below the foundation gets wet.
He'll have to excavate below the wall if the system is to be effective. But he shouldn't excavate below the wall *next to* the wall. He should stay about a foot out from the wall.
Regarding the corner with the concrete, not sure what is going on there. If the foundation has not been a problem so far, it is probably ok. Backfill with granular soil or crushed stone and don't get too agressive with compaction. Make sure you are draining the water away from the foundation, which is sounds like that is the plan.The best backfill in this case will be washed rock, either round or sharp, and all of about the same size. You don't want fines in there because you want water to just flow straight down through it. If you use 1-1/2" clean rock, no compaction will be necessary or, indeed, possible.
-
Another thing to add is I found an old clay drainage pipe. Looks like at one time this is what the down spout for the gutter? Once I pulled the first section off the line was bone dry and clear. Ran a hose down it for 20 min and it never backed up. Couldn't find any evidence of it exiting in the yard or curb side. Wonder where it's going?
It's probably going into a dry well on the property. You can run your hose and all of your neighbors hoses into it for a week and you won't see a thing at this time of year. But once the ground becomes saturated and the drywell starts to fill with water (late January most years), it will become less effective. It all depends on how large and how deep it is.
Separate building question
in Electrical Forum
Posted
The drawing is correct up to Building 2. The wiring to Building 3 is wrong and really quite dangerous - it was never allowed under any version of the NEC that I know of. Without a grounding wire between Buildings 2 and 3, the equipment grounding terminal at Building 3 has no way to clear a fault. You certainly can't rely on the connection to the earth or the continuous metallic path. This drawing is wrong in that regard.
That said, I think that the authors were not trying to illustrate the proper wiring between panels here. They were just trying to show where the grounding electrode conductors go in each case. At least that's what the caption seems to show. This doesn't excuse the error, but it explains it.