Evolution of the Quick connect [RE-wrenches]

[Mark Frye]

Here in lies some of the elements that make the 2008 Code cycle re:Article
690 cycle one of the worst in many years.

Take 690.31 vs. 690.33.

It appears that the intent of 690.31 was to make sure all PV DC wire (above
30v) is not readily accessible vis-avis having to be in a raceway.  So then
why 690.33 requiring readily accessible connectors to be locking. Under
690.31, there can be no such thing as a readily accessible connector,
because all conductors have to be in a raceway!

As far as 690.33 E, can the connector be allowed to protector personnel from
harm when opened under load, but become physically damaged such that it
cannot be used again?  Exactly how do the specifications of the current
vapor connectors match up to the language of the Code?

MPF



-----Original Message-----
From: John Berdner [mailto:jberdner at sma-america.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 2:17 PM
To: RE-wrenches at topica.com
Subject: RE: Evolution of the Quick connect [RE-wrenches]



Phil / Wrenches:

I was involved with some of the discussions with J. Wiles, W. Bower and
R. Wills on 690.31 (A).  2008 690.31(A)  was added to deal with the
situation of an untrained person, a small child for example, being able
to walk up to a ground or pole mounted array and grabbing onto single
conductor cables.  Even assuming locking connectors it could be possible
to pull the wire out of a terminal box or break the wire.  This could
result in live conductors and or possible arcing during the load break.


Think 5 year old hanging off the wiring jungle gym style.  I have asked
many wrenches out there if that image is ok in their minds and I have
not found one yet that thinks it is.

The key phrase in 690.31(B) is "readily accessible".  Rooftop PV for
example is not considered readily accessible under the NEC unless there
is roof access from an unlocked door, rooftop at ground level, etc.
Even if you have a ground mounted array you can make the wiring not
"readily accessible".  Building a fence or putting a cover on the back
of the array, expanded metal mesh for example.  Access to the wiring
then would require you to unlock the gate or remove the metal mesh with
a tool before you could gain access to the wiring thereby making the
wire no longer readily accessible.  I would expect that the structure
and/or module guys will come up with some innovative solutions fairly
soon that meet the requirement at relatively low cost.

This requirement is independent of the locking connector requirement.

I hope that helps shed a little light.

Best Regards,

John Berdner


- - - -
Hosted by Home Power magazine

To send a message: RE-wrenches at topica.com

Archive of previous messages: http://lists.topica.com/lists/RE-wrenches/read

List rules & how to change your email address: www.mrsharkey.com/wrenches/etiquette.php

Check out participant bios: www.mrsharkey.com/wrenches/

Moderator: michael.welch at homepower.com
--^----------------------------------------------------------------
This email was sent to: michael.welch at re-wrenches.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?bz8Qcs.bz9JC9.bWljaGFl
Or send an email to: RE-wrenches-unsubscribe at topica.com

For Topica's complete suite of email marketing solutions visit:
http://www.topica.com/?p=TEXFOOTER
--^----------------------------------------------------------------