Hide/Cover Sconce Light Fixture hole

Code05 · 05-29-2012, 11:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Macro

I disagree. Not all inspectors will red tag it. As I mentioned, it is very common to tape off K&T wiring. Maybe it's just a regional thing, you may not have as many old houses as we do in this area. But we can't go assuming what all inspectors will do.

K&T installs are a whole beast to themselves, but you can longer splice, tap, or terminate it like they did it the old days.

Quote:

I've never had an argument in real life since it's always been acceptable. I've had discussions online, this is the only time that other people got so heated about it tho

I am not heated a bit.

k_buz · 05-29-2012, 11:44 AM

My contention is that they (terminations) all are used to describe what you do to the end of a wire.

A wire nut can be a termination
A lug can be a termination
A ground screw can be a termination
A neutral bar can be a termination

More generally, a termination is a way to terminate the wiring...or end the wiring, and you cannot terminate a wire/cable anywhere but the end of the wire. Therefore, the termination point of a wire/cable is the end of the wire and must be in a box or conduit body.

Macro · 05-29-2012, 11:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Code05

K&T installs are a whole beast to themselves, but you can longer splice, tap, or terminate it like they did it the old days.

I assume you meant to say that "you can no longer...".

If so, then things are different around here. Taping off K&T is common practice, and I don't see anything restricting it or romex in the code.

Quote:

I am not heated a bit.

Me neither

k_buz · 05-29-2012, 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Macro

I assume you meant to say that "you can no longer...".

If so, then things are different around here. Taping off K&T is common practice, and I don't see anything restricting it or romex in the code.

Me neither

Knob and Tube wiring is not listed as one of the wiring methods that 300.15 requires a box or conduit body at termination points. 300.15 does list two specific termination points that they are required however.

Macro · 05-29-2012, 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by k_buz

My contention is that they (terminations) all are used to describe what you do to the end of a wire.

A wire nut can be a termination
A lug can be a termination
A ground screw can be a termination
A neutral bar can be a termination

In all of the hundreds of instances in the code that we know about, I don't know of a single one that refers to the loose end of a wire. If you know of one, then please cite it, I would genuinely like to know since I am here and enjoy discussions like this to learn.

A termination in all instances in code and in electrical speak is to attach that loose end to something. Taping off a loose wire is not terminating it.

Quote:

More generally, a termination is a way to terminate the wiring...or end the wiring, and you cannot terminate a wire/cable anywhere but the end of the wire. Therefore, the termination point of a wire/cable is the end of the wire and must be in a box or conduit body.

EVERY wire has an end somewhere, but not all wires are terminated.

Again, show me where the loose end of a wire is defined as terminated in any of the hundreds of places the word is used in the NEC. The fact that I have asked this question literally 11 times and no one has answered it pretty much proves the point that the NEC does not see the word "terminated" as the loose end of a wire.

Macro · 05-29-2012, 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by k_buz

Knob and Tube wiring is not listed as one of the wiring methods that 300.15 requires a box or conduit body at termination points. 300.15 does list two specific termination points that they are required however.

I agree with all of this. My examples of taping off K&T wiring no longer applies to this discussion.

k_buz · 05-29-2012, 11:59 AM

edit..

Code05 · 05-29-2012, 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Macro

I assume you meant to say that "you can no longer...".

yes, thank you

Quote:

If so, then things are different around here. Taping off K&T is common practice, and I don't see anything restricting it or romex in the code.

If it is existing and you do not touch it, fine: but any alterations must be brought to modern code. I wanted to leave K&T out of this because it was installed without boxes to start. Kinda muddles the thread a bit.

Quote:

Me neither

Good

Macro · 05-29-2012, 12:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by k_buz

You are changing the discussion by asking what a termination is.

I'm not changing the discussion. I started the discussion and I have been discussing the same exact thing since my first post

Quote:

I have answered that question.

LOL, WHERE?

Quote:

The code rule we are citing doesn't include the word terminations.

SORRY!!!!!! Leave off the last S for savings!!!!!!!!!

It doesn't include the word "terminations" but it does include the word "termination" with no S.

Quote:

The code rule is "each conductor termination point". All wires/cables have two termination points, and those termination points need to be accessible.

The termination point is the point of termination. There is no point of termination when a wire is not terminated, as in the case of a loose wire.

My question still remains. Why change the definition of "termination" for this one instance when it goes against the hundreds of other times the NEC uses the word?

Macro · 05-29-2012, 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Code05

If it is existing and you do not touch it, fine: but any alterations must be brought to modern code. I wanted to leave K&T out of this because it was installed without boxes to start. Kinda muddles the thread a bit.

k_buz was right about K&T being different anyway, as discussed in post #96.

ddawg16 · 05-29-2012, 12:13 PM

Quote:

ter·mi·na·tion (tûr

m

-n

sh

n)
n. 1. The act of terminating or the condition of being terminated.
2. a. The end of something in time; the conclusion.
b. An end of something in space; a limit or edge.

3. A result; an outcome.
4. Linguistics The end of a word, as a suffix, inflectional ending, or final morpheme

Quote:

Originally Posted by Macro

I just searched the 2008 NEC PDF for the word "Termination"*. There are 129 pages that have that word on it, some of the pages have the word 2, 3, or even up to 6 times. That means the word is used many hundreds of times in the NEC.

Out of hundreds of times the word has been used in the code, can you show an example of just one time that it is used to define a loose hanging wire not connected to anything on that end?

Can you show where it is used in normal electrical speak?

Out of the hundreds of times it's used in the code and the millions of times it's used in electrical discussions, if it's never used to define the loose end of a cable, why should we change the definition for that one instance?

The loose end of a wire is actually the exact polar opposite of what most electrician would consider "terminated".

* I only searched for the word "Termination". I did not search for "terminate" or any other variant. If I did, I'm sure there would be hundreds of more instances where it's used.

Your starting to sound like a lawyer.....you might want to look up "Inclusionary" vs "Exclusionary".

Quote:

Originally Posted by Macro

The termination point of a wire is where the wire is terminated. If the wire is not terminated, there is no termination point.

You ignored the question in post #87 yet again

Wrong....

Quote:

terminatedpast participle, past tense of ter·mi·nate (Verb)

Verb:

Bring to an end: "he was advised to terminate the contract".
(of a thing) Have its end at (a specified place) or of (a specified form): "the chain terminated in a ball covered with spikes".

Quote:

ter·mi·nate

/ˈtɜrməˌneɪt/ Show Spelled [tur-muh-neyt] Show IPA verb, ter·mi·nat·ed, ter·mi·nat·ing.
verb (used with object) 1. to bring to an end; put an end to: to terminate a contract.

2. to occur at or form the conclusion of: The countess's soliloquy terminates the play.

3. to bound or limit spatially; form or be situated at the extremity of.

4. to dismiss from a job; fire: to terminate employees during a recession.

No mater how hard you try to use inclusionary or exclusionary logic....one or more wires that just end....hooked up or not...live are not....are 'terminated'....

Code05 · 05-29-2012, 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Macro

Again, show me where the loose end of a wire is defined as terminated in any of the hundreds of places the word is used in the NEC. The fact that I have asked this question literally 11 times and no one has answered it pretty much proves the point that the NEC does not see the word "terminated" as the loose end of a wire.

It is not defined in the NEC specifically. However 90.4 allows an AHJ to interpret or define it, and many go with a ROP short of a formal interpretation.

And it is "termination point".

k_buz · 05-29-2012, 12:17 PM

The definition of termination isn't changing, you are just failing to accept one acceptable way to terminate a wire is to put a wirenut on it. You say it isn't a termination, the rest of us say it is.

I am done.

Macro · 05-29-2012, 12:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ddawg16

Your starting to sound like a lawyer.....you might want to look up "Inclusionary" vs "Exclusionary".

Who better than a lawyer to interpret law??

Quote:

Wrong....

No, what I said is very correct.

Quote:

No mater how hard you try to use inclusionary or exclusionary logic....one or more wires that just end....hooked up or not...live are not....are 'terminated'....

No, they are not.

You haven't brought anything new to the discussion, you've said the same thing that has been said 15 times already in this thread. Do you really want to go back and forth when you could just read what has been said earlier?

Macro · 05-29-2012, 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by k_buz

The definition of termination isn't changing, you are just failing to accept one acceptable way to terminate a wire is to put a wirenut on it. You say it isn't a termination, the rest of us say it is.

Yes, exactly. This was a well know fact since the beginning of the thread. There are people who see it your way and there are people who see it mine (altho only one of them is here in this thread and he's been gone for hours, leaving me all alone

). The fact is that the code is not clear at all and it can be interpreted either way. That's what I said at the very beginning.