Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.electronics.design > #451353 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-03-11 11:53 -0800 |
| Last post | 2017-03-11 20:14 -0600 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 94 — 14 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.electronics.design
Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-11 11:53 -0800
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> - 2017-03-11 13:03 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-11 12:31 -0800
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-11 18:36 -0800
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-12 07:10 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-03-11 13:09 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-11 12:34 -0800
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-03-11 14:13 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-11 16:00 -0800
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-03-11 17:22 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-11 21:40 -0500
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-12 07:07 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-03-12 07:59 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-12 08:16 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-03-12 12:16 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-13 11:19 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-03-15 12:52 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-16 08:01 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-16 10:19 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-16 10:37 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-16 16:12 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-16 16:33 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-16 20:15 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-12 20:43 -0400
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-13 02:05 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-13 21:33 -0400
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-14 06:38 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-14 12:47 -0400
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-14 12:00 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-14 20:44 -0400
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-15 05:53 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-15 12:53 -0400
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility kevin93 <kevin@whitedigs.com> - 2017-03-15 15:11 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-15 16:34 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-15 20:38 -0400
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-16 08:03 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-16 20:36 -0400
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-17 16:54 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-17 22:35 -0400
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-18 07:42 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-18 10:47 -0400
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2017-03-14 05:12 +0000
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-14 12:48 -0400
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-13 11:20 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-12 20:39 -0400
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 16:53 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-03-13 17:13 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-14 08:06 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-12 20:36 -0400
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-13 11:54 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-03-11 13:27 -0800
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-11 16:02 -0800
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-03-11 16:33 -0800
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-12 07:14 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-12 11:38 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-13 15:49 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-14 06:40 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-14 07:59 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-14 12:51 -0400
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-14 11:57 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-03-14 14:01 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-14 14:21 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-14 16:59 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Chris Jones <lugnut808@spam.yahoo.com> - 2017-03-16 00:50 +1100
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-15 07:26 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-03-15 11:17 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-15 16:31 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-03-15 16:59 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-15 19:06 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Chris Jones <lugnut808@spam.yahoo.com> - 2017-03-16 23:26 +1100
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-16 10:12 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-14 20:47 -0400
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-14 20:47 -0400
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-16 08:06 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> - 2017-03-17 16:29 -0400
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-17 22:39 -0400
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-18 01:52 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-18 09:45 -0400
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-18 07:37 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-18 10:48 -0400
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-18 09:18 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-18 14:13 -0400
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-18 13:20 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-18 20:00 -0400
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-18 18:40 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-18 22:17 -0400
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> - 2017-03-19 12:14 -0400
) Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> - 2017-03-12 01:12 -0500
Re: ) tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-12 03:51 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> - 2017-03-11 14:27 -0600
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-11 12:38 -0800
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Chris Jones <lugnut808@spam.yahoo.com> - 2017-03-12 23:57 +1100
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2017-03-12 07:17 -0700
Re: Very slightly OT: Circuit breaker compatibility Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2017-03-11 20:14 -0600
Page 4 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 Next page →
| From | Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-14 14:01 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <005da81f-171f-4b2a-88ad-65af0abf7bd1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #451800 |
Den tirsdag den 14. marts 2017 kl. 19.57.47 UTC+1 skrev Joerg: > On 2017-03-14 09:51, krw@notreal.com wrote: > > On Tue, 14 Mar 2017 07:59:32 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> > > wrote: > > > >> On 2017-03-14 06:40, tabbypurr@gmail.com wrote: > >>> On Monday, 13 March 2017 22:49:13 UTC, Joerg wrote: > >>>> On 2017-03-12 11:38, tabbypurr wrote: > >>>>> On Sunday, 12 March 2017 14:14:07 UTC, Joerg wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> I found a whole slew of those. However, you also see > >>>>>>>> breakers like that at yard sales and typically their > >>>>>>>> contacting screws are rusted shut. The material quality > >>>>>>>> wasn't all that great. That also was the case for all the > >>>>>>>> breakers I tore out of this panel. I had to snip the wires > >>>>>>>> as there was no way to loosen those screws one more time. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> http://www.ebay.com/itm/190797335710 > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Provided they did not store it in the basement, attic or garage > >>>>>> for 30 years. In the verious listings nearly none of the photos > >>>>>> shows the screw terminal. That's the part that rusts out and > >>>>>> makes a breaker de-facto unusable. That is what ruined all the > >>>>>> ones in the panel I was dealing with (non-heated room), even > >>>>>> one that was never used. > >>>>> > >>>>> sand/file/grind some rust off & solder to it. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> And then Monsieur L'Inspecteur waltzes in. One guy around here > >>>> soldered connections in his house wiring which IMHO made it much > >>>> safer than the usual fare. However, the inspector blew a gasket and > >>>> made him rip it all out. > >>> > >>> Soldered connections aren't necessarily safer, it depends. It's easy > >>> to inadequately mechanically support a soldered joint making it > >>> fragile & thus unsafe. It also can melt, raising resistance under > >>> adverse conditions. If you're an EE you oughta be able to do it > >>> properly though. > > > > No, the real reason it isn't allowed is that it hasn't been "listed" > > as an acceptable method. > >> > >> Yes, and if properly soldered and kept from moving they sure last longer > >> than those dreaded wire nuts. I can't even count anymore how many times > >> I opened a box and one of more of the wire nuts almost fell off. I've > >> also see my share of wire nuts where the plastic cover had clearly melted. > > > > Wire nuts are perfectly safe if the installer has half a brain. Of > > the billions in service, how many have failed? > > > > I haven't kept count but my estimate would be more than 1% of the > connections I came across. All by licensed electricians though that > doesn't always mean much. > > It only takes one wire nut coming loose ever so slightly to trigger a > house fire. wire nuts and supposedly licensed electricians wrapping stuff in tape, just makes me cringe. That wouldn't fly here
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-14 14:21 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <eir57hFj9lnU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #451829 |
On 2017-03-14 14:01, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote: > Den tirsdag den 14. marts 2017 kl. 19.57.47 UTC+1 skrev Joerg: >> On 2017-03-14 09:51, krw@notreal.com wrote: >>> On Tue, 14 Mar 2017 07:59:32 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> >>> wrote: [...] >>>> Yes, and if properly soldered and kept from moving they sure last longer >>>> than those dreaded wire nuts. I can't even count anymore how many times >>>> I opened a box and one of more of the wire nuts almost fell off. I've >>>> also see my share of wire nuts where the plastic cover had clearly melted. >>> >>> Wire nuts are perfectly safe if the installer has half a brain. Of >>> the billions in service, how many have failed? >>> >> >> I haven't kept count but my estimate would be more than 1% of the >> connections I came across. All by licensed electricians though that >> doesn't always mean much. >> >> It only takes one wire nut coming loose ever so slightly to trigger a >> house fire. > > wire nuts and supposedly licensed electricians wrapping stuff in tape, > just makes me cringe. That wouldn't fly here > Yeah, when I moved across the pond and opened such a box for the first time I stood there with my jaw dropped. Couldn't believe it. But what I saw a week ago really took the cake. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | tabbypurr@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-14 16:59 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <89072712-6255-4835-b578-761eb1f03b1a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #451833 |
On Tuesday, 14 March 2017 21:21:58 UTC, Joerg wrote: > On 2017-03-14 14:01, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote: > > Den tirsdag den 14. marts 2017 kl. 19.57.47 UTC+1 skrev Joerg: > >> On 2017-03-14 09:51, krw@notreal.com wrote: > >>> On Tue, 14 Mar 2017 07:59:32 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> > >>> wrote: > > [...] > > >>>> Yes, and if properly soldered and kept from moving they sure last longer > >>>> than those dreaded wire nuts. I can't even count anymore how many times > >>>> I opened a box and one of more of the wire nuts almost fell off. I've > >>>> also see my share of wire nuts where the plastic cover had clearly melted. > >>> > >>> Wire nuts are perfectly safe if the installer has half a brain. Of > >>> the billions in service, how many have failed? > >>> > >> > >> I haven't kept count but my estimate would be more than 1% of the > >> connections I came across. All by licensed electricians though that > >> doesn't always mean much. > >> > >> It only takes one wire nut coming loose ever so slightly to trigger a > >> house fire. > > > > wire nuts and supposedly licensed electricians wrapping stuff in tape, > > just makes me cringe. That wouldn't fly here > > > > Yeah, when I moved across the pond and opened such a box for the first > time I stood there with my jaw dropped. Couldn't believe it. But what I > saw a week ago really took the cake. Wire nuts were banned here in the 1950s (UK). But now we have push-in sprung connectors eg Wago, which are worse, as well as the traditional choc-block ones. Connector types tested to destruction: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2uYD8e7idnY NT
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Jones <lugnut808@spam.yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-16 00:50 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <MEbyA.262260$jg2.258877@fx11.fr7> |
| In reply to | #451851 |
On 15/03/2017 10:59, tabbypurr@gmail.com wrote: > On Tuesday, 14 March 2017 21:21:58 UTC, Joerg wrote: >> On 2017-03-14 14:01, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote: >>> Den tirsdag den 14. marts 2017 kl. 19.57.47 UTC+1 skrev Joerg: >>>> On 2017-03-14 09:51, krw@notreal.com wrote: >>>>> On Tue, 14 Mar 2017 07:59:32 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> >>>>> wrote: >> >> [...] >> >>>>>> Yes, and if properly soldered and kept from moving they sure last longer >>>>>> than those dreaded wire nuts. I can't even count anymore how many times >>>>>> I opened a box and one of more of the wire nuts almost fell off. I've >>>>>> also see my share of wire nuts where the plastic cover had clearly melted. >>>>> >>>>> Wire nuts are perfectly safe if the installer has half a brain. Of >>>>> the billions in service, how many have failed? >>>>> >>>> >>>> I haven't kept count but my estimate would be more than 1% of the >>>> connections I came across. All by licensed electricians though that >>>> doesn't always mean much. >>>> >>>> It only takes one wire nut coming loose ever so slightly to trigger a >>>> house fire. >>> >>> wire nuts and supposedly licensed electricians wrapping stuff in tape, >>> just makes me cringe. That wouldn't fly here >>> >> >> Yeah, when I moved across the pond and opened such a box for the first >> time I stood there with my jaw dropped. Couldn't believe it. But what I >> saw a week ago really took the cake. > > Wire nuts were banned here in the 1950s (UK). But now we have push-in sprung connectors eg Wago, which are worse, as well as the traditional choc-block ones. What don't you like about Wago connectors? (apart from the price)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | tabbypurr@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-15 07:26 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <dccd4580-7d39-4417-af43-9d6844b24d19@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #451939 |
On Wednesday, 15 March 2017 13:50:40 UTC, Chris Jones wrote: > On 15/03/2017 10:59, tabbypurr wrote: > > On Tuesday, 14 March 2017 21:21:58 UTC, Joerg wrote: > >> On 2017-03-14 14:01, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote: > >>> Den tirsdag den 14. marts 2017 kl. 19.57.47 UTC+1 skrev Joerg: > >>>> On 2017-03-14 09:51, krw@notreal.com wrote: > >>>>> On Tue, 14 Mar 2017 07:59:32 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> > >>>>> wrote: > >> > >> [...] > >> > >>>>>> Yes, and if properly soldered and kept from moving they sure last longer > >>>>>> than those dreaded wire nuts. I can't even count anymore how many times > >>>>>> I opened a box and one of more of the wire nuts almost fell off. I've > >>>>>> also see my share of wire nuts where the plastic cover had clearly melted. > >>>>> > >>>>> Wire nuts are perfectly safe if the installer has half a brain. Of > >>>>> the billions in service, how many have failed? > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> I haven't kept count but my estimate would be more than 1% of the > >>>> connections I came across. All by licensed electricians though that > >>>> doesn't always mean much. > >>>> > >>>> It only takes one wire nut coming loose ever so slightly to trigger a > >>>> house fire. > >>> > >>> wire nuts and supposedly licensed electricians wrapping stuff in tape, > >>> just makes me cringe. That wouldn't fly here > >>> > >> > >> Yeah, when I moved across the pond and opened such a box for the first > >> time I stood there with my jaw dropped. Couldn't believe it. But what I > >> saw a week ago really took the cake. > > > > Wire nuts were banned here in the 1950s (UK). But now we have push-in sprung connectors eg Wago, which are worse, as well as the traditional choc-block ones. > > What don't you like about Wago connectors? (apart from the price) Poor contact area. Poor grip on the wire. And in the overload test they were the only type to fail, producing smoke & fire before the others. NT
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-15 11:17 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d1930ca7-cd85-4f62-98b7-c5e20b5fa764@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #451944 |
Den onsdag den 15. marts 2017 kl. 15.27.07 UTC+1 skrev tabb...@gmail.com: > On Wednesday, 15 March 2017 13:50:40 UTC, Chris Jones wrote: > > On 15/03/2017 10:59, tabbypurr wrote: > > > On Tuesday, 14 March 2017 21:21:58 UTC, Joerg wrote: > > >> On 2017-03-14 14:01, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote: > > >>> Den tirsdag den 14. marts 2017 kl. 19.57.47 UTC+1 skrev Joerg: > > >>>> On 2017-03-14 09:51, krw@notreal.com wrote: > > >>>>> On Tue, 14 Mar 2017 07:59:32 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> > > >>>>> wrote: > > >> > > >> [...] > > >> > > >>>>>> Yes, and if properly soldered and kept from moving they sure last longer > > >>>>>> than those dreaded wire nuts. I can't even count anymore how many times > > >>>>>> I opened a box and one of more of the wire nuts almost fell off. I've > > >>>>>> also see my share of wire nuts where the plastic cover had clearly melted. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Wire nuts are perfectly safe if the installer has half a brain. Of > > >>>>> the billions in service, how many have failed? > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> I haven't kept count but my estimate would be more than 1% of the > > >>>> connections I came across. All by licensed electricians though that > > >>>> doesn't always mean much. > > >>>> > > >>>> It only takes one wire nut coming loose ever so slightly to trigger a > > >>>> house fire. > > >>> > > >>> wire nuts and supposedly licensed electricians wrapping stuff in tape, > > >>> just makes me cringe. That wouldn't fly here > > >>> > > >> > > >> Yeah, when I moved across the pond and opened such a box for the first > > >> time I stood there with my jaw dropped. Couldn't believe it. But what I > > >> saw a week ago really took the cake. > > > > > > Wire nuts were banned here in the 1950s (UK). But now we have push-in sprung connectors eg Wago, which are worse, as well as the traditional choc-block ones. > > > > What don't you like about Wago connectors? (apart from the price) > > Poor contact area. Poor grip on the wire. And in the overload test they were the only type to fail, producing smoke & fire before the others. yeh, if you replace you fuse with a nail then shortly after the wires have caught fire and burned the house down, the wago connector might smoke a bit and it didn't fail, the wire failed, probably because it had been nicked when removing the insulation
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | tabbypurr@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-15 16:31 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <48c0af49-e45a-480a-9284-f45ecb4c0670@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #451982 |
On Wednesday, 15 March 2017 18:17:47 UTC, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote: > Den onsdag den 15. marts 2017 kl. 15.27.07 UTC+1 skrev tabb...@gmail.com: > > On Wednesday, 15 March 2017 13:50:40 UTC, Chris Jones wrote: > > > On 15/03/2017 10:59, tabbypurr wrote: > > > > Wire nuts were banned here in the 1950s (UK). But now we have push-in sprung connectors eg Wago, which are worse, as well as the traditional choc-block ones. > > > > > > What don't you like about Wago connectors? (apart from the price) > > > > Poor contact area. Poor grip on the wire. And in the overload test they were the only type to fail, producing smoke & fire before the others. > > > yeh, if you replace you fuse with a nail then shortly after the wires have > caught fire and burned the house down, the wago connector might smoke a bit In reality there are 69,000 domestic fires a year in UK killing 486 people (2001). So I don't want my electrical connections to be so flimsy that they don't even have a proper hold on the cable. What you saw in that test was new connections. 20 years later stuff gets oxidised if it's not gas-tight. Now I might be wrong but that Wago did not look in any way gas-tight to me. > and it didn't fail, the wire failed, probably because it had been nicked when removing the insulation The Wago did fail, and before anything else did. I count catching fire as failing. Use them if you want, I don't. NT
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-15 16:59 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <a01cee46-502c-4af9-b11e-38f5f53f68ac@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #452025 |
Den torsdag den 16. marts 2017 kl. 00.31.24 UTC+1 skrev tabb...@gmail.com: > On Wednesday, 15 March 2017 18:17:47 UTC, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote: > > Den onsdag den 15. marts 2017 kl. 15.27.07 UTC+1 skrev tabb...@gmail.com: > > > On Wednesday, 15 March 2017 13:50:40 UTC, Chris Jones wrote: > > > > On 15/03/2017 10:59, tabbypurr wrote: > > > > > > Wire nuts were banned here in the 1950s (UK). But now we have push-in sprung connectors eg Wago, which are worse, as well as the traditional choc-block ones. > > > > > > > > What don't you like about Wago connectors? (apart from the price) > > > > > > Poor contact area. Poor grip on the wire. And in the overload test they were the only type to fail, producing smoke & fire before the others. > > > > > > yeh, if you replace you fuse with a nail then shortly after the wires have > > caught fire and burned the house down, the wago connector might smoke a bit > > In reality there are 69,000 domestic fires a year in UK killing 486 people (2001). So I don't want my electrical connections to be so flimsy that they don't even have a proper hold on the cable. What you saw in that test was new connections. 20 years later stuff gets oxidised if it's not gas-tight. Now I might be wrong but that Wago did not look in any way gas-tight to me. > > > and it didn't fail, the wire failed, probably because it had been nicked when removing the insulation > > The Wago did fail, and before anything else did. I count catching fire as failing. Use them if you want, I don't. > what video did you watch? after several minutes of 70A and the wire burned to a crisp the wire failed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | tabbypurr@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-15 19:06 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d2627aaf-5724-4acf-8151-370af48d7463@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #452029 |
On Wednesday, 15 March 2017 23:59:33 UTC, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote: > Den torsdag den 16. marts 2017 kl. 00.31.24 UTC+1 skrev tabby: > > On Wednesday, 15 March 2017 18:17:47 UTC, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote: > > > Den onsdag den 15. marts 2017 kl. 15.27.07 UTC+1 skrev tabb...@gmail.com: > > > > On Wednesday, 15 March 2017 13:50:40 UTC, Chris Jones wrote: > > > > > On 15/03/2017 10:59, tabbypurr wrote: > > > > > > > > Wire nuts were banned here in the 1950s (UK). But now we have push-in sprung connectors eg Wago, which are worse, as well as the traditional choc-block ones. > > > > > > > > > > What don't you like about Wago connectors? (apart from the price) > > > > > > > > Poor contact area. Poor grip on the wire. And in the overload test they were the only type to fail, producing smoke & fire before the others. > > > > > > > > > yeh, if you replace you fuse with a nail then shortly after the wires have > > > caught fire and burned the house down, the wago connector might smoke a bit > > > > In reality there are 69,000 domestic fires a year in UK killing 486 people (2001). So I don't want my electrical connections to be so flimsy that they don't even have a proper hold on the cable. What you saw in that test was new connections. 20 years later stuff gets oxidised if it's not gas-tight. Now I might be wrong but that Wago did not look in any way gas-tight to me. > > > > > and it didn't fail, the wire failed, probably because it had been nicked when removing the insulation > > > > The Wago did fail, and before anything else did. I count catching fire as failing. Use them if you want, I don't. > > > > what video did you watch? after several minutes of 70A and the wire burned > to a crisp the wire failed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2uYD8e7idnY NT
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Jones <lugnut808@spam.yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-16 23:26 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <dwvyA.368413$w46.301708@fx39.am4> |
| In reply to | #452057 |
On 16/03/2017 13:06, tabbypurr@gmail.com wrote: > On Wednesday, 15 March 2017 23:59:33 UTC, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote: >> Den torsdag den 16. marts 2017 kl. 00.31.24 UTC+1 skrev tabby: >>> On Wednesday, 15 March 2017 18:17:47 UTC, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote: >>>> Den onsdag den 15. marts 2017 kl. 15.27.07 UTC+1 skrev tabb...@gmail.com: >>>>> On Wednesday, 15 March 2017 13:50:40 UTC, Chris Jones wrote: >>>>>> On 15/03/2017 10:59, tabbypurr wrote: >>> >>>>>>> Wire nuts were banned here in the 1950s (UK). But now we have push-in sprung connectors eg Wago, which are worse, as well as the traditional choc-block ones. >>>>>> >>>>>> What don't you like about Wago connectors? (apart from the price) >>>>> >>>>> Poor contact area. Poor grip on the wire. And in the overload test they were the only type to fail, producing smoke & fire before the others. >>>> >>>> >>>> yeh, if you replace you fuse with a nail then shortly after the wires have >>>> caught fire and burned the house down, the wago connector might smoke a bit >>> >>> In reality there are 69,000 domestic fires a year in UK killing 486 people (2001). So I don't want my electrical connections to be so flimsy that they don't even have a proper hold on the cable. What you saw in that test was new connections. 20 years later stuff gets oxidised if it's not gas-tight. Now I might be wrong but that Wago did not look in any way gas-tight to me. >>> >>>> and it didn't fail, the wire failed, probably because it had been nicked when removing the insulation >>> >>> The Wago did fail, and before anything else did. I count catching fire as failing. Use them if you want, I don't. >>> >> >> what video did you watch? after several minutes of 70A and the wire burned >> to a crisp the wire failed > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2uYD8e7idnY > > > NT > If the wire has already burnt off its insulation, probably shorted to its neighbours and set fire to my house, I won't mind too much if the Wago connector also burns after that. The solution to the problem is to install a proper circuit breaker, to prevent 70A from flowing through that wire. I really don't see much need for the connector to be safe at currents higher than what would make the wire itself dangerous, and higher than the current that would trip the circuit breaker. Similarly, I don't see much point in making the door of the house from 2 inch thick steel plate, if the adjacent wall is just made from plasterboard and wood. I have had the situation of electricians forgetting to tighten screw connectors so the wire pretty much fell out, and that could cause overheating at currents that would not trip the circuit breaker. That problem could not occur with the Wago connector. It would be interesting to get some real statistics about the rate of electical fires resulting from different types of connectors.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | tabbypurr@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-16 10:12 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <de113815-a832-4bf2-a8d5-3b5950957916@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #452104 |
On Thursday, 16 March 2017 12:26:59 UTC, Chris Jones wrote: > On 16/03/2017 13:06, tabbypurr wrote: > > On Wednesday, 15 March 2017 23:59:33 UTC, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote: > >> Den torsdag den 16. marts 2017 kl. 00.31.24 UTC+1 skrev tabby: > >>> On Wednesday, 15 March 2017 18:17:47 UTC, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote: > >>>> Den onsdag den 15. marts 2017 kl. 15.27.07 UTC+1 skrev tabb...@gmail.com: > >>>>> On Wednesday, 15 March 2017 13:50:40 UTC, Chris Jones wrote: > >>>>>> On 15/03/2017 10:59, tabbypurr wrote: > >>> > >>>>>>> Wire nuts were banned here in the 1950s (UK). But now we have push-in sprung connectors eg Wago, which are worse, as well as the traditional choc-block ones. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> What don't you like about Wago connectors? (apart from the price) > >>>>> > >>>>> Poor contact area. Poor grip on the wire. And in the overload test they were the only type to fail, producing smoke & fire before the others. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> yeh, if you replace you fuse with a nail then shortly after the wires have > >>>> caught fire and burned the house down, the wago connector might smoke a bit > >>> > >>> In reality there are 69,000 domestic fires a year in UK killing 486 people (2001). So I don't want my electrical connections to be so flimsy that they don't even have a proper hold on the cable. What you saw in that test was new connections. 20 years later stuff gets oxidised if it's not gas-tight. Now I might be wrong but that Wago did not look in any way gas-tight to me. > >>> > >>>> and it didn't fail, the wire failed, probably because it had been nicked when removing the insulation > >>> > >>> The Wago did fail, and before anything else did. I count catching fire as failing. Use them if you want, I don't. > >>> > >> > >> what video did you watch? after several minutes of 70A and the wire burned > >> to a crisp the wire failed > > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2uYD8e7idnY > > > > > > NT > > > > If the wire has already burnt off its insulation, probably shorted to > its neighbours and set fire to my house, I won't mind too much if the > Wago connector also burns after that. The solution to the problem is to > install a proper circuit breaker, to prevent 70A from flowing through > that wire. > > I really don't see much need for the connector to be safe at currents > higher than what would make the wire itself dangerous, and higher than > the current that would trip the circuit breaker. Similarly, I don't see > much point in making the door of the house from 2 inch thick steel > plate, if the adjacent wall is just made from plasterboard and wood. > > I have had the situation of electricians forgetting to tighten screw > connectors so the wire pretty much fell out, and that could cause > overheating at currents that would not trip the circuit breaker. That > problem could not occur with the Wago connector. It would be interesting > to get some real statistics about the rate of electical fires resulting > from different types of connectors. It would indeed. Hopefully some day all known causes will be recorded & the risks calculated. NT
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | krw@notreal.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-14 20:47 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <1p3hcc9adpdetq8ubpnustfvtnakij6gv9@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #451829 |
On Tue, 14 Mar 2017 14:01:31 -0700 (PDT), Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> wrote: >Den tirsdag den 14. marts 2017 kl. 19.57.47 UTC+1 skrev Joerg: >> On 2017-03-14 09:51, krw@notreal.com wrote: >> > On Tue, 14 Mar 2017 07:59:32 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> >> > wrote: >> > >> >> On 2017-03-14 06:40, tabbypurr@gmail.com wrote: >> >>> On Monday, 13 March 2017 22:49:13 UTC, Joerg wrote: >> >>>> On 2017-03-12 11:38, tabbypurr wrote: >> >>>>> On Sunday, 12 March 2017 14:14:07 UTC, Joerg wrote: >> >>>>> >> >>>>>>>> I found a whole slew of those. However, you also see >> >>>>>>>> breakers like that at yard sales and typically their >> >>>>>>>> contacting screws are rusted shut. The material quality >> >>>>>>>> wasn't all that great. That also was the case for all the >> >>>>>>>> breakers I tore out of this panel. I had to snip the wires >> >>>>>>>> as there was no way to loosen those screws one more time. >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> http://www.ebay.com/itm/190797335710 >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> Provided they did not store it in the basement, attic or garage >> >>>>>> for 30 years. In the verious listings nearly none of the photos >> >>>>>> shows the screw terminal. That's the part that rusts out and >> >>>>>> makes a breaker de-facto unusable. That is what ruined all the >> >>>>>> ones in the panel I was dealing with (non-heated room), even >> >>>>>> one that was never used. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> sand/file/grind some rust off & solder to it. >> >>>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> And then Monsieur L'Inspecteur waltzes in. One guy around here >> >>>> soldered connections in his house wiring which IMHO made it much >> >>>> safer than the usual fare. However, the inspector blew a gasket and >> >>>> made him rip it all out. >> >>> >> >>> Soldered connections aren't necessarily safer, it depends. It's easy >> >>> to inadequately mechanically support a soldered joint making it >> >>> fragile & thus unsafe. It also can melt, raising resistance under >> >>> adverse conditions. If you're an EE you oughta be able to do it >> >>> properly though. >> > >> > No, the real reason it isn't allowed is that it hasn't been "listed" >> > as an acceptable method. >> >> >> >> Yes, and if properly soldered and kept from moving they sure last longer >> >> than those dreaded wire nuts. I can't even count anymore how many times >> >> I opened a box and one of more of the wire nuts almost fell off. I've >> >> also see my share of wire nuts where the plastic cover had clearly melted. >> > >> > Wire nuts are perfectly safe if the installer has half a brain. Of >> > the billions in service, how many have failed? >> > >> >> I haven't kept count but my estimate would be more than 1% of the >> connections I came across. All by licensed electricians though that >> doesn't always mean much. >> >> It only takes one wire nut coming loose ever so slightly to trigger a >> house fire. > >wire nuts and supposedly licensed electricians wrapping stuff in tape, >just makes me cringe. That wouldn't fly here > Wire nuts are perfectly good. Tape is nuts.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | krw@notreal.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-14 20:47 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <lj3hccdme2npjt2sd1upm7uancor8tbiqb@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #451800 |
On Tue, 14 Mar 2017 11:57:45 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> wrote: >On 2017-03-14 09:51, krw@notreal.com wrote: >> On Tue, 14 Mar 2017 07:59:32 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> >> wrote: >> >>> On 2017-03-14 06:40, tabbypurr@gmail.com wrote: >>>> On Monday, 13 March 2017 22:49:13 UTC, Joerg wrote: >>>>> On 2017-03-12 11:38, tabbypurr wrote: >>>>>> On Sunday, 12 March 2017 14:14:07 UTC, Joerg wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I found a whole slew of those. However, you also see >>>>>>>>> breakers like that at yard sales and typically their >>>>>>>>> contacting screws are rusted shut. The material quality >>>>>>>>> wasn't all that great. That also was the case for all the >>>>>>>>> breakers I tore out of this panel. I had to snip the wires >>>>>>>>> as there was no way to loosen those screws one more time. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://www.ebay.com/itm/190797335710 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Provided they did not store it in the basement, attic or garage >>>>>>> for 30 years. In the verious listings nearly none of the photos >>>>>>> shows the screw terminal. That's the part that rusts out and >>>>>>> makes a breaker de-facto unusable. That is what ruined all the >>>>>>> ones in the panel I was dealing with (non-heated room), even >>>>>>> one that was never used. >>>>>> >>>>>> sand/file/grind some rust off & solder to it. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> And then Monsieur L'Inspecteur waltzes in. One guy around here >>>>> soldered connections in his house wiring which IMHO made it much >>>>> safer than the usual fare. However, the inspector blew a gasket and >>>>> made him rip it all out. >>>> >>>> Soldered connections aren't necessarily safer, it depends. It's easy >>>> to inadequately mechanically support a soldered joint making it >>>> fragile & thus unsafe. It also can melt, raising resistance under >>>> adverse conditions. If you're an EE you oughta be able to do it >>>> properly though. >> >> No, the real reason it isn't allowed is that it hasn't been "listed" >> as an acceptable method. >>> >>> Yes, and if properly soldered and kept from moving they sure last longer >>> than those dreaded wire nuts. I can't even count anymore how many times >>> I opened a box and one of more of the wire nuts almost fell off. I've >>> also see my share of wire nuts where the plastic cover had clearly melted. >> >> Wire nuts are perfectly safe if the installer has half a brain. Of >> the billions in service, how many have failed? >> > >I haven't kept count but my estimate would be more than 1% of the >connections I came across. All by licensed electricians though that >doesn't always mean much. Of course, you only tend to look at problematic circuits. For the record, Iv'e never found one bad one. Some were loose but the wires were still quite tightly wrapped (that's the point anyway). > >It only takes one wire nut coming loose ever so slightly to trigger a >house fire. Utter nonsense. The wire nut is not supposed to be the connection. If what you say were true, houses would never last a year without spontaneously combusting.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-16 08:06 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <eivnuoFgafjU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #451868 |
On 2017-03-14 17:47, krw@notreal.com wrote: [...] >> >> It only takes one wire nut coming loose ever so slightly to trigger a >> house fire. > > Utter nonsense. The wire nut is not supposed to be the connection. If > what you say were true, houses would never last a year without > spontaneously combusting. > https://dengarden.com/home-improvement/What-Causes-Electrical-Fires-in-the-Home -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-17 16:29 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <M9ydnTRLAfup2lHFnZ2dnUU7-bednZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #451786 |
krw@notreal.com wrote:
>
> Wire nuts are perfectly safe if the installer has half a brain. Of
> the billions in service, how many have failed?
Wire nuts are legal on commercial fire alarms, so the insurance
companies trust them.
--
Never piss off an Engineer!
They don't get mad.
They don't get even.
They go for over unity! ;-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | krw@notreal.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-17 22:39 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <287pccd6gs2ilp253d8eis6rfe7q6q7tbk@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #452321 |
On Fri, 17 Mar 2017 16:29:41 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote: >krw@notreal.com wrote: >> >> Wire nuts are perfectly safe if the installer has half a brain. Of >> the billions in service, how many have failed? > > > Wire nuts are legal on commercial fire alarms, so the insurance >companies trust them. So do the fire underwriters (NEC) and they're pretty anal.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | tabbypurr@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-18 01:52 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <3ba0bb2f-b84f-4fb7-bc81-5d79b0805fe1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #452372 |
On Saturday, 18 March 2017 02:39:52 UTC, k...@notreal.com wrote: > On Fri, 17 Mar 2017 16:29:41 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell" > <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote: > >krw@notreal.com wrote: > >> > >> Wire nuts are perfectly safe if the installer has half a brain. Of > >> the billions in service, how many have failed? > > > > > > Wire nuts are legal on commercial fire alarms, so the insurance > >companies trust them. > > So do the fire underwriters (NEC) and they're pretty anal. Unless you're talking about a different type to the one I know as wirenuts, they don't produce a gas-tight join, and are thus a reliability & safety risk. US mains plugs were tested in the UK years ago and given a rating of 50v 2.5A max. US mains electrics is illegal here on a list of safety grounds. Why Americans think their country is the best at everything no-one knows. NT
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | krw@notreal.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-18 09:45 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <saeqccp1rg8orvshs6rtiaud316ipnmqjp@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #452387 |
On Sat, 18 Mar 2017 01:52:57 -0700 (PDT), tabbypurr@gmail.com wrote: >On Saturday, 18 March 2017 02:39:52 UTC, k...@notreal.com wrote: >> On Fri, 17 Mar 2017 16:29:41 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell" >> <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote: >> >krw@notreal.com wrote: >> >> >> >> Wire nuts are perfectly safe if the installer has half a brain. Of >> >> the billions in service, how many have failed? >> > >> > >> > Wire nuts are legal on commercial fire alarms, so the insurance >> >companies trust them. >> >> So do the fire underwriters (NEC) and they're pretty anal. > >Unless you're talking about a different type to the one I know as wirenuts, they don't produce a gas-tight join, and are thus a reliability & safety risk. Absurd. A few billion in the field say otherwise. >US mains plugs were tested in the UK years ago and given a rating of 50v 2.5A max. US mains electrics is illegal here on a list of safety grounds. Why Americans think their country is the best at everything no-one knows. More pompous Brit absurdity. A few billion say otherwise.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | tabbypurr@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-18 07:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <944f0c8f-ed52-43ef-9e4f-c75862b178a1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #452415 |
On Saturday, 18 March 2017 13:45:07 UTC, k...@notreal.com wrote: > On Sat, 18 Mar 2017 01:52:57 -0700 (PDT), tabbypurr wrote: > >On Saturday, 18 March 2017 02:39:52 UTC, k...@notreal.com wrote: > >> On Fri, 17 Mar 2017 16:29:41 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell" > >> <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote: > >> >krw@notreal.com wrote: > >> >> > >> >> Wire nuts are perfectly safe if the installer has half a brain. Of > >> >> the billions in service, how many have failed? > >> > > >> > > >> > Wire nuts are legal on commercial fire alarms, so the insurance > >> >companies trust them. > >> > >> So do the fire underwriters (NEC) and they're pretty anal. > > > >Unless you're talking about a different type to the one I know as wirenuts, they don't produce a gas-tight join, and are thus a reliability & safety risk. > > Absurd. A few billion in the field say otherwise. > > >US mains plugs were tested in the UK years ago and given a rating of 50v 2.5A max. US mains electrics is illegal here on a list of safety grounds. Why Americans think their country is the best at everything no-one knows. > > More pompous Brit absurdity. A few billion say otherwise. I think you'll find US rates of domestic electrical fires are worse than ours. Failure of connections to be gas tight has long been known to result in greater fire risk. NT
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | krw@notreal.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-18 10:48 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <35iqcc59t65001pa2qosafpfv6h5slo2sf@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #452424 |
On Sat, 18 Mar 2017 07:37:30 -0700 (PDT), tabbypurr@gmail.com wrote: >On Saturday, 18 March 2017 13:45:07 UTC, k...@notreal.com wrote: >> On Sat, 18 Mar 2017 01:52:57 -0700 (PDT), tabbypurr wrote: >> >On Saturday, 18 March 2017 02:39:52 UTC, k...@notreal.com wrote: >> >> On Fri, 17 Mar 2017 16:29:41 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell" >> >> <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote: >> >> >krw@notreal.com wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> Wire nuts are perfectly safe if the installer has half a brain. Of >> >> >> the billions in service, how many have failed? >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Wire nuts are legal on commercial fire alarms, so the insurance >> >> >companies trust them. >> >> >> >> So do the fire underwriters (NEC) and they're pretty anal. >> > >> >Unless you're talking about a different type to the one I know as wirenuts, they don't produce a gas-tight join, and are thus a reliability & safety risk. >> >> Absurd. A few billion in the field say otherwise. >> >> >US mains plugs were tested in the UK years ago and given a rating of 50v 2.5A max. US mains electrics is illegal here on a list of safety grounds. Why Americans think their country is the best at everything no-one knows. >> >> More pompous Brit absurdity. A few billion say otherwise. > >I think you'll find US rates of domestic electrical fires are worse than ours. Proving nothing, even if so. >Failure of connections to be gas tight has long been known to result in greater fire risk. Nonsense.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.electronics.design
csiph-web