Jim Katen

All true, but pure white cellulose? The white part is what threw me. And, it doesn't look like powder, it looks fibrous and clumpy. Sure looks like white fiberglass

I see cellulose over a wide range of colors from charcoal to manila. I've never seen pure white, but on my monitor, the stuff in the picture doesn't look pure white, but gray?

Nautical miles?

I thought you guys were on the metric system?

It looks like very fine cellulose.

UFFI was snow white and was a foam. It looks like meringue. It doesn't look like your pictures.

Gypsum (perlite) was also very white and didn't (still doesn't) clump together.

Vermiculite is more like coarse sand.

Fiberglass and mineral wool (Rockwool) don't look anything like that.

My money is on cellulose.

When it comes to raccoons, watch out for their poop. It's probably the most dangerous thing about them.

http://www.cdc.gov/parasites/baylisasca ... trines.pdf

With only 14 documented cases in the US and Canada, the risk seems rather low.

If you google the part, you'll find that replacements are readily available for $120 to $150 online.

Other than manually actuating it, I don't know how you'd test it. Maybe Plummen has an idea.

*Hypothetically* speaking, what (if anything) would you say about a case where the coil and duct are not equally sized and tape has been applied to close up a 2" or so gap on one side. If the tape is in place and there's no significant leakage, that is? The coil opening was larger, for the record.

I'd say that the ductwork was poorly installed, that it will leak in the future, and that someone should hire a good heating contractor to fix it.

He writes columns regularly for Time magazine. They are usually pretty good.

Time magazine still exists?

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar has written a number of books on a wide range of topics, and his first novel will soon be published. It seems that since his early years in the NBA, he has been a Sherlock Holmes buff, and his novel is about Sherlock's brother Mycroft.

I had no idea that he was an author. Is he a good writer?

I'm stoked. I got my sharpening station set up, ready to give it a fair work out.

I'll get both blades to an optimum edge, then experiment with some cutting and slicing on different materials. I'll be fair.

I'm thinking some abuse with cutting cardboard. I'll do some food slicing. I got a chunk of end grain white ash....I'll try and peel some end grain curls. I got a good steel to keep them burnished.

What else would be a good test procedure?

Toss a persimmon in the air and slice it in half - twice - before it hits the ground. Extra points for doing it blindfolded, like Zatoichi.

After all this I want to clarify what is in the OP picture.

Is it what I call the service lateral before it connects with the service entrance at the mast head?

That's what it looks like to me. In which case it's nobody's business but the POCO.

What I see damaged all the time is the outside bundle wrap of the SEC, but that is past the meter base.

In my area, the term "service lateral" refers to underground services, while "service drop" refers to those that run overhead. Also, around here, the demarcation line for the POCO is the splice where the service drop wires transition to the service entrance wires that form the drip loop. Any damage to the wires at the drip loop - even though it's before the meter - is the responsibility of the homeowner.

. . . Getting back to the service conductors, y'all are saying that they are no more dangerous than household wiring, but I do not accept that. There is no limit to the current. If high amperage was irrelevant, you could carry an arc welder around in your shirt pocket.

There are several ways in which the lack of overcurrent protection at the service conductors is more dangerous than it would be on the load side of the service. But all of them have to do with objects other than a human body. Conductive objects that have low resistance will allow huge currents to flow through them. Our bodies aren't like that. We die long before a 15-amp circuit breaker will trip.

• The only difference between the electricity at the service wires and the electricity at the household wiring is the presence of circuit breakers.

The car battery analogy is badly flawed when compared to household wiring. However you're just as likely to be shocked by any 12 volt battery. You were bitten because you were covered with very conductive salty water. I've been stung by one of my spare camera batteries that was in my pocket when my hands were soaking wet, and it's only 3.7 volts with some tiny amount of amperage. (It felt like I was being stung by a wasp.)

The voltage determines how hard the electricity pushes through you. The amperage is limited by your resistance. Once you pass a certain threshold, additional available amperage doesn't make the shock any worse.

E X I = P. 120 volts X 1000 amps = 120,000 Watts, and that is enough juice to light up the neighborhood.

The amount of wattage that's available is unimportant. If you connect a 60-watt bulb directly between one of the service conductors at the drip loop and the neutral conductor, it will only draw 60 amps, just as it would in a table lamp. The lack of an overcurrent protection device won't make it draw more. It doesn't matter how many are available. Likewise, if you touch the hot wire and the neutral at the same time, the resistance of your body will limit the amount of wattage that flows though you. I don't know what the number is - it might not even be calculable, but it will be a fairly small number, certainly not enough to trip a breaker even if there were one.

The only difference between touching a bare wire on a table lamp and a bare wire at a service drop is that there's an overcurrent device on the table lamp. That overcurrent device will do nothing to prevent you from being electrocuted. By the time enough current flows through you to trip a circuit breaker, you'd be fried. It might not even trip then.

Every dang time that man talks about something, I gotta get one.

I've a #12 on order.

Marc

I'll be interested to see what you think. Folks that understand steel usually like them.

Knife has arrived. Handle is very lightweight, makes you feel how heavy the blade is. Ripped the packing slip in two like a samurai sword despite the thick blade. Locks securely so you don't have to worry about it closing accidentally and injuring you. Like it.

I'd take a photo but I don't have the requisite slippers.

Marc

Now you're going to need one in each size.

No barbs or hooks, but these are about as close as I've gotten to something that grips.

I've been liking 5:11 Tacticals (canvas in winter and ripstop nylon in summer).

Check them out:

http://www.511tactical.com/511-tactical ... otton.html

For my body, they're more comfortable than the Duluth.

Did someone (CF?) advocate taping a service conductor with a potential from the pole of about 3000 amps? [:-crazy]

Don't do that. Spray some liquid tape on it maybe, but I would not touch it.

The available amperage shouldn't be an issue.

Just to be clear, there's not a "potential" of 3000 amps. There's a potential (at the most) of 240 volts. A well taped repair would be fine.

In many (most, in my area) cases, the splices at the weather head are only taped to begin with. Taped repairs in this location are fine.

There's enough amperage to supply 5 or 6 homes, no? OK maybe it's 1200 amps. When the linesman makes that connection, power if off at the transformer.

I have never even seen Liquid Tape so I wouldn't know if it is scary to use. I am just saying don't touch the service drop.

The available amperage isn't the issue. If you touch a wire, it only takes a fraction of an amp to kill you. 10 amps is just as deadly as 3,000 amps.

With regard to electrocution or shocks, a bare conductor at the drip loop is not any more dangerous than a bare conductor at a table lamp. Either one can kill. The amount of available amperage doesn't make it worse. (Think of it like drowning. You're just as much at risk of drowning in 10 feet of water as you are in 3,000 feet of water.)

The voltage is only 120 volts to ground or to the neutral, or 240 volts between the two hots. Deadly, yes, but not enough to jump out and grab you (as it might be when over 600 volts). If the service conductor insulation is still substantially intact, then deep cracks can be repaired with tape. While I'm sure that it would be wise to cut power from the transformer, I don't know any electricians who would actually do that for this kind of repair.

Did someone (CF?) advocate taping a service conductor with a potential from the pole of about 3000 amps? [:-crazy]

Don't do that. Spray some liquid tape on it maybe, but I would not touch it.

The available amperage shouldn't be an issue.

Just to be clear, there's not a "potential" of 3000 amps. There's a potential (at the most) of 240 volts. A well taped repair would be fine.

In many (most, in my area) cases, the splices at the weather head are only taped to begin with. Taped repairs in this location are fine.

Learn to sit down really quickly. The more surface you can put in contact with the surface, the better. About the only place where sitting down really fast doesn't seem to apply the brakes is on wet shakes and shiny painted metal roofs. Everything else - it's pretty effective.

I'm trying to get Carhart to come out with "caulk pants" that would have carbide spikes sticking out of the knees and butt.

I'm still wondering why people don't use chicken ladders more often.

Interesting. I don't see the punctures in CSST as arc related.

Marc

Really?!? I thought that the entire problem was current jumping from one path to another and causing pinholes in the steel.

When you bond a metal pipe system with a ground wire sized by the circuit likely to energize it, a ground for a 20 amp circuit is plenty. If the 20 amp circuit is attached to the metal pipe, the properly sized ground for that circuit makes a path back from whence it came and trips the breaker.

Following the same logic, what is the amperage of a lightening bolt or an induced charge from a nearby strike? Since there is no readily obtainable answer short of a swag, use the size of the largest conductor in the system, the GEC that goes to the ground rod, typically a #6 bare copper wire. Anything smaller and it might not be enough, anything larger and the rest o the GEC and GE may fail. You don't want the bonding conductor to be the weak link. The theory as I understand it is to get the charge into the ground and off of the CSST as quickly and easily as possible. It might not work, but it is worth a shot and there are some studies that have been done on the subject that might shed more light.

http://www.nfpa.org/~/media/Files/Resea ... report.pdf

Makes no sense. As I understand it, the problem is not too much current, but, rather, differences in voltage potential that can cause arcing between conductive materials. A fat wire isn't going to be any different than a skinny wire in that regard. The real solution is some kind of conductive shield, like what they use in modern-day CSST.

The fat wire is an illusory solution of the type used by sleight-of-hand artists.

I'm still unable to understand how the extra fancy bonding (#6 copper) is better than the regular bonding that's been required for this stuff since day one (bonding wire that's the same size as the wire that might energize pipe).

Every now and then, "'cause the rules say so".

I've heard you say it before.

I make recommendations "because they say so," but I don't achieve understanding because they say so.

I'm just trying to understand the rationalization behind what seems to be a stupid requirement.

It's repairable. Around here a few layers of good electrical tape will last for a decade or more.

The single thing I don't like about the Opinel is I can't open it with one hand. You have to "knock" it on a surface to pop the blade.

That's part of their charm, n'est-ce pas?

I'm still unable to understand how the extra fancy bonding (#6 copper) is better than the regular bonding that's been required for this stuff since day one (bonding wire that's the same size as the wire that might energize pipe).

Lightning currents are a different animal.

Marc

Clearly so. But that doesn't explain why the #6 would be any more effective than, say, a #14. Both will do pretty much the same job of reducing the chance of potentials that might cause arcing - even from nearby lightning strikes. (Which is to say that neither will do much.)