>From the Document scope for the 2011 NEC: 90.2 Scope. (A) Covered. This Code covers the installation of electrical conductors, equipment, and raceways; signaling and communications conductors, equipment, and raceways; and optical fiber cables and raceways for the following: (1) Public and private premises, including buildings, structures, mobile homes, recreational vehicles, and floating buildings (2) Yards, lots, parking lots, carnivals, and industrial substations (3) Installations of conductors and equipment that connect to the supply of electricity (4) Installations used by the electric utility, such as office buildings, warehouses, garages, machine shops, and recreational buildings, that are not an integral part of a generating plant, substation, or control center. (B) Not Covered. This Code does not cover the following: (1) Installations in ships, watercraft other than floating buildings
I suspect that the docks and their associated wiring would be considered a "floating building" from the NFPA's perspective. -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of James Maynard Sent: Monday, April 04, 2011 3:40 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [K3] Why fuse the negative lead from a battery? On 2011-04-04 12:38 AM, Jim Brown wrote: > It's critical to realize that Codes and Standards are written for specific situations. NEC applies ONLY to premises wiring, and to some > extent, to wiring connected to premises wiring (like a standby > generator, or an accessory building, like a garage powered from the same > service). It does NOT apply to vehicles, or boats, or to the power > company's wiring outside the premises. > > When Standards and Codes are written, very smart and experienced > engineers cogitate and discuss all the possible implications of the > requirements of the proposed standard, trying very hard to consider how > the system would react to any of the myriad of things that might go > wrong, and with serious attention both to how things are done in the > real world, and to the laws of physics.For about ten years, I've been a > part of that process as a member of the AES Standards Committee, and am > a principal author of all of our published standards on EMC. A typical > Standard takes 3-5 years to be conceived, written, and adopted. I have a > great deal of respect for my colleagues, and others who do this, and > for the resulting standards and codes. > > 73, Jim Brown K9YC Indeed. The "Scope" section of a standard is Very Important Indeed. So if I am to make disparaging comments about the use of NEC, it behooves me to purchase my own copy of it. Thank you for making that point. I, too, have been involved in the standards development process, first for computer codes and character sets (I was a member of ANSI X3L2, the same committee that had -- before my participation -- given us ASCII, the American National Standard Code for Information Interchange. Later I was a member of a committee under RTCA, developing standards for the use of GPS in the navigation systems of aircraft.) These people work hard, and it's a lot of fun meeting people from other companies and government agencies involved in the developing those standards. Do you know, Jim, whether the definition of "premises" in the NEC would include an entire marina? Not the boats kept in the marina, but the wiring of such structures as floating docks? 73, Jim Maynard K7KK ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[email protected] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[email protected] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
