Hubbell twist-lock connectors

From: Robert Schaefer <rschaefe_at_gcfn.org>
Date: Tue Feb 12 19:56:08 2002

----- Original Message -----
From: "r. 'bear' stricklin" <red_at_bears.org>
To: <classiccmp_at_classiccmp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 03:41 PM
Subject: RE: Hubbell twist-lock connectors


> On Tue, 12 Feb 2002, Tothwolf wrote:
>
> > You won't find a 16A breaker in a branch circuit. You'd likely see a 15A
> > breaker (residential, probably 14Ga, maybe 12Ga wire), or a 20A breaker
> > (12Ga or 10Ga wire). A 15A circuit would not be safe at all, while a 20A
> > *might* be ok, but the system could still overload the receptacle and
plug
> > since they are still only rated for 15A.
>
> Wait a minute, isn't the only physical difference between NEMA 5-15 (110V,
> 15A) and 5-20 (110V, 20A) that one pin is rotated 90 degrees? In this
> case, since residential electrical code would mandate wiring capable of
> delivering 20A service on a circuit protected by a 20A breaker, wouldn't
> you say that the principle reason for NEMA 5-20 existing be to prevent
> user error more than anything else?

You can have NEMA 5-15R devices on a 20A circuit. It's a personal
hypotheses that the only difference between NEMA 5-15R and NEMA 5-20R is the
gripping force of the fingers inside the device. I do know (well, it was
told to me and emperical evidence agrees) that it is the only difference
between the various grades (ie spec & hospital) of devices.


FWIW I do commercial/industrial work, and the only time I've ever run #14 is
for the horn circuit of a fire alarm. Romex? That's called temporary where
I come from! ^_^

>
> ok
> r.

Bob
Received on Tue Feb 12 2002 - 19:56:08 GMT