ozofprev

Thanks Mike. I have been providing the older NAHB numbers to clients who ask 'how long.' Of course there are many variables, but that's stated in the first sentence of the study. I believe it is a very good study (well done) but obviously that doesn't make it a useful study (due to all the variables). We all know there is no guarantee of anything. Even "Guarantees" aren't really guarantees - they just say, "Well, if it craps out, then we'll replace it." Everyone plays the odds.

???

I also don't like that the HI's who are products of this 'education' prey on people's fears. I was in homes with 100% 'covered in mold' walls and ceilings (Katrina volunteer). There were about 20 of us at one site. The mold bothered nobody aside from some sneezing. I'm not discounting the very real reaction a handful of people have to mold, but the HI's getting this training are not qualified to help. The only green slime they are concerned about is the undeserved Benjamins. So, ask me how I really feel.

Builder or AHJ may have wanted the option left open. "I don't think we'll need them, but..."

In an ideal world, you are correct, Sir.

Sorry my fine friend, but Douglas has been working on an update. I don't think he'd let his name be on it if it wasn't an equal or better book (but what do I know???) It would be good to know if you can get it from him directly. Either way, it's a must have.

Just what you would expect from two of the finest people on the planet. The world needs more of them!

Thanks Mike. That's what I thought. I have given both of them contact info...

"Yes, I'm serious, and stop calling me Shirley."

No info on the unit? Hate when that happens. I found some stuff by entering horizontal NTC6125KJG1 into Google...

No more 404's. Thanks Joe. But, I'm not sure what we are to take from that link. It's pretty basic. I guess the 2003 information is useful. Perhaps that's what Katen had in mind when he discussed (another thread) 'older' GFCI's behaving differently in bootleg ground situations. I'll store that as a ? in my head somewhere - there's lots of room![:-weepn]

Why, yes, you did. Works quite nicely now.

That link works, sort of. It takes you to a CDC page. If you type CFCI into the search field, it is the only article.

Understood. I'll add you to my cell.

Les, Well put. I always try to state the consequences of not following my advice, rather than regurgitating the code. I don't mind stating the code as an aid to the client, but I make sure they know this is not code enforcement - I make that clear verbally and in the written report.

Yes, that's what I inferred from your previous explanation. The fact that you have now posted thrice for this shows that you care about the 'student.' Again, MUCH appreciated.

Paul, One went to a rod, the other to the plumbing. The plumbing system for the duplex is combined - but that gives me something else to think about in the future. Your explanation is clear. I was told that things would be different in a heavy lightning area, but not why it is ok otherwise. Now, it makes perfect sense. I can't believe you have time to answer calls. I won't be bothering you, but your helpful attitude is greatly appreciated.

Bob, Understand that the advice you are getting here is possibly helpful for your first 3-phase inspection, but there is a lot more to it. Safety first! (Your experience indicates you already know that.) Then, as mentioned elsewhere, you MUST get Hansen's book. After that, I recommend Practical Electrical Wiring, 19th ed. by Richter and Hartwell - there is a smaller "Wiring Simplified," but I like to have more information. I have a computer engineering BS from an electrical engineering department, but I'm an idiot with much of this ("electronic" is way different from "electrical"), but once I get through these materials, I'll be a much better inspector. It's also fascinating to learn about Power factor, RMS, frequency differences between the phases, etc. (Ok, I think it's fascinating[:-paperba). Those things were covered in college but honestly, since it didn't apply to what I was doing with circuit boards, I let it go. BTW, Paul... since you offered, I haven't been able to get a good answer as to why this (picture) is ok. Facts: single drop to two meters, then SE to each panel. The left panel is for a downstairs apartment, right is for up. Only the left panel has the big copper grounds. Sure the panels are bonded at the meters - and at the pole for that matter, but isn't it important to ask, "bonded by what?" There is a big difference between the neutral conductors and that big honkin' copper. I'm sure it's ok, but I want to know why. Your help is much appreciated. Download Attachment: NotBoth.JPG 177.57 KB

Chris, R102.4 has this exception: Where enforcement of a code provision would violate the conditions of the listing of the equipment or appliance, the conditions of the listing and manufacturer's instructions shall apply.

2O2 + CH4 --> CO2 + 2H2O Download Attachment: howcold.jpg 42.38 KB

Eric, What do you fill out by hand? Your own form? Carson Dunlop book? Other? Thanks.

Way cool!! Thanks Kurt

Chad, let the boy get through kindergarten before you show that kind of tough love. Besides, he can always stay in a Holiday Inn Express. But you're right on the money about Kurt.

Ok, I'll go that far. Since you aren't saying a standard is a magic bullet, we're in agreement. Yep, you nailed it. I am tainted. One of my favorite lines - and I've used it before - is "The nice thing about standards is we have so many to choose from." But as these things go, ASTM is among the best and most established. I remember referring to their steel manuals a lot in college (back in '80). Back then, ASTM stood for American Society for Testing and Materials. They kept the letters after going international, but they don't stand for anything anymore. I'm not sure how the 'International' part of ASTM International will work with residential inspections. There is so much regional differentiation. Anyway, the blanket statement (not condemnation, sorry!) I was trying to make was this: Standards do not make a profession.

Au contraire, Gary. I offer as evidence, on another thread in this very forum, the fact that one of the national organizations (NAHI, I believe) has sought out the ubiquitous ASTM International for aid in standardization. That, my friend, be it for the good or the bad, will definitely get the ball rolling. Standardized test methods are what separate technicians from opinion spouters. Will that improve writing/communication skills? Read anything written by the average engineer to answer that question yourself. I think not. But perhaps the inclusion of a Reporting 101 or Technical Writing class as part of HI education/continuing education requirements would do so. Folks would be more inclined to invest in that sort of education if the profession was not treated as the proverbial "red headed step-child" of the technical fields. That kind of legitimisation begins with standardization. [:-wiltel] Hmmmm, I see where that will lead to standardization, but how does that raise the bar of professionalism or intelligence within the HI community? I disagree that 'legitimate' begins with a standard. Legitimate is driven by quality and ideals, while standards are driven by money and people who just like to make rules - good ones and terrible ones.