2012 code - Electrician Talk - Professional Electrical Contractors Forum

farlsincharge · 02-29-2012, 10:21 PM

Any provinces adopted the 2012 code yet?

I was surprised to see table 17 gone.

I haven't had time to dig further, but it would seem they have really jacked the ampacity ratings of #8, #6, etc...

Any other thoughts or comments?

Vintage Sounds · 02-29-2012, 10:41 PM

I hope there are no expanded AFCI requirements or common trip for MWBCs. I heard outdoor 120v receps are going to require in-use bubble covers.

Pinoysparky · 02-29-2012, 10:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by farlsincharge

Any provinces adopted the 2012 code yet?

I was surprised to see table 17 gone.

I haven't had time to dig further, but it would seem they have really jacked the ampacity ratings of #8, #6, etc...

Any other thoughts or comments?

In my province we're not using code. Here is land of the free.

The_Modifier · 02-29-2012, 11:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pinoysparky

In my province we're not using code. Here is land of the free.

And unfortunately more than likely home of a lot of accidents.

The_Modifier · 02-29-2012, 11:05 PM

The Ontario Electrical code will be in effect May 1st 2012. Starting March 1st is when the C.E.C takes effect.

Pinoysparky · 02-29-2012, 11:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Modifier

And unfortunately more than likely home of a lot of accidents.

Not really. I break egg in water and say prayer while butcher chicken and i can see in the water if install will be a safe one.

HARRY304E · 02-29-2012, 11:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pinoysparky

In my province we're not using code. Here is land of the free.

That's great news.

kaboler · 02-29-2012, 11:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by farlsincharge

I haven't had time to dig further, but it would seem they have really jacked the ampacity ratings of #8, #6, etc...

Sounds good!

farlsincharge · 03-01-2012, 12:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vintage Sounds

I hope there are no expanded AFCI requirements or common trip for MWBCs. I heard outdoor 120v receps are going to require in-use bubble covers.

Bubble covers, yes. convenience receptacles on RTU's, yes. I don't believe AFIs or handle ties were changed.

I have the new book, but am waiting on the documentation they always send us that just lays out the updates.

The_Modifier · 03-01-2012, 06:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pinoysparky

Not really. I break egg in water and say prayer while butcher chicken and i can see in the water if install will be a safe one.

Smells like a troll soup recipe.

gardiner · 03-01-2012, 10:11 AM

I went to the CSA Update Seminar a couple of weeks ago. From what they said they expect Alberta to adopt in September. There are a number of changes to try and close the distance between the NEC and the CEC at least that is the way they are selling some of the changes but I suspect some changes may have been driven for “other” reasons.
According to the instructor they expect Alberta to adopt in September.

electricguy · 03-01-2012, 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by farlsincharge

Any provinces adopted the 2012 code yet?

I was surprised to see table 17 gone.

?

Revised Rule 10-812 Grounding Conductor Size fo Alternating-Current Systems and for Service Equipment

Size of the gronding conductor connected to a grounding electrode conforming to rule 10-700 is to be not smaller than No, 6 AWG

table 17 has been deleted

farlsincharge · 03-01-2012, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by electricguy

Revised Rule 10-812 Grounding Conductor Size fo Alternating-Current Systems and for Service Equipment

Size of the gronding conductor connected to a grounding electrode conforming to rule 10-700 is to be not smaller than No, 6 AWG

table 17 has been deleted

There is a complete clarification of it in appendix b as well

dg1871 · 03-01-2012, 05:01 PM

Arc fault study to be done anytime you add something to a panel. No more side work without a electrical engineer unless you can get your hands on the software. Also all switches to have a neutral, no more 2 wire.

dg1871 · 03-01-2012, 05:13 PM

Sorry I was referring to NEC 2011

Mshea · 03-01-2012, 06:56 PM

We worked a long time on the 2012 CEC and it has more rule changes than the last 2 codes combined. There are a lot of projects come to fruition too like the ampacity harmonization project. Merican rules won there.
There is an entirely new section on reneewable enrgy, a huge rework of solar rules and of course the deletion of table 17 which was my proposal, except that it startes as a correction to an interpretation of some questions on the 2009 rule of 10-812.
This rule will have a negative cost effect for services that could have used a ground wire smaler than #6 but in fact most services needed ground wires larger than #6. We just went back to basics. Grounding is not meant to carry current. It is there to ensure an equipotential plane which can save a life when a ground fault occurs. Maybe ther was a day of ground returns when ground wires were ment to carry current but that has not been the case in Canada for decades. We use the identified conductor for that purpose.

farlsincharge · 03-01-2012, 08:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mshea

We worked a long time on the 2012 CEC and it has more rule changes than the last 2 codes combined. There are a lot of projects come to fruition too like the ampacity harmonization project. Merican rules won there.
There is an entirely new section on reneewable enrgy, a huge rework of solar rules and of course the deletion of table 17 which was my proposal, except that it startes as a correction to an interpretation of some questions on the 2009 rule of 10-812.
This rule will have a negative cost effect for services that could have used a ground wire smaler than #6 but in fact most services needed ground wires larger than #6. We just went back to basics. Grounding is not meant to carry current. It is there to ensure an equipotential plane which can save a life when a ground fault occurs. Maybe ther was a day of ground returns when ground wires were ment to carry current but that has not been the case in Canada for decades. We use the identified conductor for that purpose.

Right on, can you comment more on Table 2. I don't really understand the purpose of bumping up the ampacity of 14,12,and10 and then limiting their overcurrent device. Is it for derating purposes?

Am I really going to be allowed to push #8, #6, etc that much higher?

electricguy · 03-01-2012, 10:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mshea

We worked a long time on the 2012 CEC and it has more rule changes than the last 2 codes combined. There are a lot of projects come to fruition too like the ampacity harmonization project. Merican rules won there.
There is an entirely new section on reneewable enrgy, a huge rework of solar rules and of course the deletion of table 17 which was my proposal, except that it startes as a correction to an interpretation of some questions on the 2009 rule of 10-812.
This rule will have a negative cost effect for services that could have used a ground wire smaler than #6 but in fact most services needed ground wires larger than #6. We just went back to basics. Grounding is not meant to carry current. It is there to ensure an equipotential plane which can save a life when a ground fault occurs. Maybe ther was a day of ground returns when ground wires were ment to carry current but that has not been the case in Canada for decades. We use the identified conductor for that purpose.

I noticed your mentioned a fair amount in the beginning of the code

Pinoysparky · 03-01-2012, 10:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Modifier

Smells like a troll soup recipe.

No its not a food.

eddy current · 03-02-2012, 06:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mshea

We worked a long time on the 2012 CEC and it has more rule changes than the last 2 codes combined. There are a lot of projects come to fruition too like the ampacity harmonization project. Merican rules won there.
There is an entirely new section on reneewable enrgy, a huge rework of solar rules and of course the deletion of table 17 which was my proposal, except that it startes as a correction to an interpretation of some questions on the 2009 rule of 10-812.
This rule will have a negative cost effect for services that could have used a ground wire smaler than #6 but in fact most services needed ground wires larger than #6. We just went back to basics. Grounding is not meant to carry current. It is there to ensure an equipotential plane which can save a life when a ground fault occurs. Maybe ther was a day of ground returns when ground wires were ment to carry current but that has not been the case in Canada for decades. We use the identified conductor for that purpose.

With table 17 gone and a #6 ground is now good for all ampacities, why do we still have to use table 16 for bonds? No current on a bond wire but we still have to increase it's size with the ampacity?

eg. 600 amp main will only need a #6awg ground but still needs a #1awg as a bond?