F
Frontier05
Looks like some funky code stuff going on there.
Work calls though. I'll try to post later.
Work calls though. I'll try to post later.
The answer is and always will be C.One of the practice problems calculating wire size from the NEC Codebook involved derating the wire, derating it again, derating it a third time, then undoing the first derate based on fine print in line X of Paragraph Y of Subsection Z, Note #Q. I could get three but the fourth adjustment killed me.
How funky will the code stuff be on the Exam? I'm good to two, maybe three levels of funkiness. Four is no good and five is right out.
:drunk:
Wake me up when October ends
There are two requirements in the NEC for derating ampacities that I know of:One of the practice problems calculating wire size from the NEC Codebook involved derating the wire, derating it again, derating it a third time, then undoing the first derate based on fine print in line X of Paragraph Y of Subsection Z, Note #Q. I could get three but the fourth adjustment killed me.
How funky will the code stuff be on the Exam? I'm good to two, maybe three levels of funkiness. Four is no good and five is right out.
:drunk:
Wake me up when October ends
I'm not sure about the last 2 above. Are you refering to lugs? NEC 110-14© tells you how to use the wiring chart for 60 and 90 degree so it accounts for it ....... hopefully that's the code since I'm going from memory.From (fried) memory, the derates in the problem were:
1.) Temperature adjustment,
2.) Multiple conductor in raceway,
3.) 60deg rated upstream overcurrent device versus 90deg cable derates cable to 60deg,
and then evil #4), something like you can undo the derating in #3 in the middle when adjusting the rating of the cable.
The solution seemed to pick a starting cable size and run through the iteration to see if it worked. Silly me, I tried using math. Everyone knows that the NEC has nothing to do with math, except when it does, as stated in Article III, Section ?, Column Q, Row *, line 5, paragraph @, Item (7), word 11.
Good luck to all.
BRING IT ON!
(...oh, it's broughten)
:drunk:
Wake me up when October ends
I'm not sure why Kaplin did this, but just as an update on this problem for new test takers.Hahahaha. Maybe I should have chosen a different word beside funky. Guess most things funky are not a good thing!
Looks like Kaplin let some get by: Problem #1.22-1.26
The code references are old being it?s still using the dash notation.
Problem 122. The answer they selected is a direct NEC code violation. This is a building, buildings are at 60 Hz cycles, not some control device or an airplane that operates at higher frequency
Problem 124: Obviously factors like harmonics are taken into consideration as well and unbalance. Choosing the neutral the same as the phase conductor is a very sound engineering decision, but it?s not per NEC minimums. Neutral sizing is per NEC 220.61
Problem 125: This is using chap 9 table 5 which is standard aluminum. Most building today, that are approved to use aluminum, use compact aluminum on table 5A. It reduces conduit size being the diameters are different. The problem doesn't specify so how do you know which table to use??
Problem 126: Obviously this GEC size will change due to the change needed to be made in #122 above.
Agree?
Kaplin 4.38 should say three phase, not single.
Enter your email address to join: