(206) 949-5683, Top Rated Plumber, Seattle
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 50

Thread: Do It Yourself Book

  1. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jwelectric View Post
    From time to time I get some information via email just because of what I do for a living.

    Any of you who might have bought a How To book lately should check out this link

    click here
    I clicked there and I would like your opinion if this guy is an expert or not?

    http://www.linkedin.com/in/mcalistermichael

  2. #17
    Sprinkler Guy Wet_Boots's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Metro NYC
    Posts
    798

    Default

    Despite the back-and-forth, there are still no actual examples of the errors that led to the book's recall. Absent actual examples, one could suspect production errors on the publisher's part, if it were diagrams alone that were at fault.

    I once contributed some knowledge to a how-to book, by way of conversing with the author by phone. My trust of how accurate information can get lost in translation is such, that my response to the author's offer to include my name in the "thank-you to...." section was "Like hell you will."

  3. #18
    Electrical Contractor/Instructor jwelectric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    2,523

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cookie View Post
    Just one more question, has there ever been a mistake published in the NEC code book? The teacher should know the answer to this one...

    Now I am outta here for a new year pretzel,
    Many many times and it is always addressed as soon as it is found. Most of the mistakes are typos and page numbering.

    In the history of the NFPA there has never been a life safety issue printed.

    The code making process is a long drawn out affair.

    At the beginning of each code cycle (we will use the 2008) for the first few months there is what is called the proposal stage. Any one can make a proposal to have something in the code changed. In the proposal the reason for the change must be substantiated why the change is needed. This substantiation must be valid and life safety issues are a major reason for the change.

    These proposals are then sent to one of the 20 Code Making Panels for their review. Here these 15 to 20 people will pick apart the proposal to see if it conflicts with some other part of the NEC and then they vote.

    This vote will result in one of the following;
    Reject: The panel can reject the proposal for any number of reasons. The panel will make a comment on why they rejected the proposal. I use this information quite often in the classroom.

    Accept in part: The code panel might see that part of the proposal is good but part is not so good and then vote to accept it in part. Here they will again give the reason why only part was accepted.

    Accept in principal: The code panel may see that the idea of the submitter was good but the wording was bad. Remember when the codes are adopted by a state or city they become law so the wording is very important. Again the panel will give a reason

    Accept: here the code panel just accepts the proposal as it is written

    After all this takes place the Report on Proposals are sent to those who made a proposal and then the next cycle starts.

    The comment stage;
    During the comment stage any one can make a comment on any proposal that has been voted on. This process goes on for a couple of months before everything is complied into the new code.

    For the 2008 code cycle I made five proposals. Four were accepted either fully or in part. One was rejected but I did get an informal ruling on what the intent of that particular code sections was.

    As you can see the NEC is not just written by a bunch of tie wearing people sitting around in the office with nothing else to do. The NEC is written by people just like you and me.

    Below is an example of a proposal that may have conflicted with another part of the NEC and the action taken by the Code Panel.
    This was my proposal

    1-39 Log #1299 NEC-P01 Final Action: Accept in Principle
    (100.Lighting Outlet)
    __________________________________________________ ___________
    TCC Action: It was the action of the Technical Correlating Committee that this Proposal be referred to Code-Making Panels 2 and 18 for comment.
    Submitter: Joseph Whitt, JW Electric
    Recommendation: Revise text to read:
    Lighting Outlet. An outlet intended for the direct connection of a permanently installed, cord and plug connected lampholder, a luminaire (lighting fixture), or a pendant cord terminating in a lampholder.
    Substantiation: As worded, a lighting outlet would require a direct connection to the premises wiring. This could be interpreted to mean that the luminary would be required to be installed to a box with wire nuts which would leave out a cord and plug connected luminary as outlined in 410.30. This would also negate Exception No. 1 of 210.70(A)(1).
    This would also clear up the confusion for inspectors and electrical contractors as to whether a receptacle used for the sole purpose to supply current to a luminary is a lighting outlet or not. This will help in clearing up the confusion over the use and switching of small appliance and laundry receptacles for permanently installed under cabinet luminaries.
    As an instructor of inspector classes in the state of North Carolina, I see those inspectors coming through my classes are split about fifty/fifty on this issue. This issue needs clarity.
    Panel Meeting Action: Accept in Principle
    Revise the definition to read as follows:
    “Lighting Outlet. An outlet intended for the connection of a lampholder, a luminaire (lighting fixture), or a pendant cord terminating in a lampholder.
    Panel Statement: The panel concludes this action meets the intent of the submitter. CMP-1 agrees that the definition may conflict with the requirement in 410.30(C)(1) and other code sections that allow for the use of attachment plugs for the connection of luminaires. CMP-1 disagrees that the existing definition negates 210.70(A)(1), Exception No. 1. CMP-1 has revised the definition by deleting the word “direct.” The panel recommends that the TCC forward this action to CMP-18.
    Number Eligible to Vote: 12
    Ballot Results: Affirmative: 12
    __________________________________________________ ___________

  4. #19
    Senior Robin Hood Guy Ian Gills's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,781

    Default

    You guys are just all reading the wrong books.

    This is my source for most of the work I do and I know Jar546 uses it .

    (Give it time to load - 23 megs).

    http://ia340902.us.archive.org/3/ite...00walsrich.pdf
    Last edited by Ian Gills; 12-31-2008 at 10:04 AM.

  5. #20
    Master Plumber Redwood's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    7,463

    Default

    Good ole Rex Cauldwell of Taunton Press

    I thought I remembered the name!
    What a Blooming Idiot!
    Here's his bio page on the web... Rex Cauldwell Bio Page
    Seems to be under construction and the links selling the books aren't working.
    Try searching for the name of the business that he claims to run in his bio...
    I couldn't get it to come up in several different searches I did.

    He wrote a how to plumb book too! Here is an article he wrote for Fine Homebuilding Magazine http://www.taunton.com/finehomebuild...px?ac=ts&ra=fp on how to plumb the drains under a kitchen sink better too. Take a look at the picture below and see if you see anything wrong with it... It should be good for a belly laugh! Sorry about the bad copy but I was not going to buy it to get you a better view.
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    Last edited by Terry; 01-06-2009 at 05:18 PM.

  6. #21
    Master Plumber Redwood's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    7,463

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Billy_Bob View Post
    So far as learning new things and books go, I like to get three books on the same subject by different authors/publishers. I learn the most this way.

    With just one book, something might not be explained very well and I don't understand it. Then the second book with explain the same thing differently and I will then understand it. And sometimes two books will give conflicting advice, then the 3rd will confirm something should be done one way or another.

    Also the important stuff is drilled into my head three times by reading three books.

    BTW I read a LOT and it is not uncommon to see mistakes in books. (Frequently toward the back.) I think the proof readers get tired after going through the first part of the book and are not so careful with the rest.

    These books that Taunton Press publishes are hacker guides at best.
    I sincerely doubt the credentials of the authors. The stuff they write is just too unbelievable!

  7. #22
    Master Plumber Redwood's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    7,463

    Default

    Here is what I could find about Michael Litchfield

    http://www.nahww.org/content.aspx?pa...ember_id=45824

    Here's what I came up with for Michael Mcalister...
    http://www.infinitesmile.org/

    Seriously this is what I found.
    http://www.buildersbooksource.com/cg...ite/24390.html

    Maybe I should make up a webpage listing my credentials

  8. #23
    Master Plumber Redwood's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    7,463

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cookie View Post
    I clicked there and I would like your opinion if this guy is an expert or not?

    http://www.linkedin.com/in/mcalistermichael
    Cookie In think if this was the same guy that is writing books for Taugton Press they would have written a little more than He's an electrician.

  9. #24
    Moderator & Master Plumber hj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Cave Creek, Arizona
    Posts
    25,655

    Default errors

    I once saw one with a very complicated 3 way switch wiring, where the switches were breaking the neutral wire.

  10. #25
    DIY Senior Member CarlH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Northern VA
    Posts
    175

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Redwood View Post
    Take a look at the picture below and see if you see anything wrong with it... It should be good for a belly laugh! Sorry about the bad copy but I was not going to buy it to get you a better view.
    Is that an AAV way down low? Hard to tell from the picture.

    DW drain without an airgap, but at least there is a high loop.

    Are those rubber fittings kosher? Also, there seems to be a lot more junctions in the revised job than there were in the original. I guess the rubber fittings allow you to remove the trap since I can't tell how that PVC is put together. The trap configuration now looks more like an S trap than a P trap. I see comments regarding the use of an S trap. What's wrong with S traps?

    At least that is what these DIY homeowner eyes can see.

  11. #26
    Remodel Contractor GabeS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Brooklyn NY
    Posts
    294

    Default

    Redwood,

    I actually read that article and used it under one of my kitchen sinks. The idea was to keep the piping towards the back away from damage and also to increase the drain size coming off the strainer by using a pvc fitting on the outside instead of a washer would collects dirt and closes the opening a little.

    I'd like to hear all of your points on what is wrong with that setup.

    Bye the way I also read two other books by Rex and it says he's a licensed plumber and licensed electrician. Don't know if they would lie about that. The taunton does publish a lot of stuff. Never actually confirmed any of the information myself. But then again, I never confirmed the moon landing either.
    Gabe

    Don't follow my advice, I only know a thing or two about a thing or two.

  12. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Redwood View Post
    Here is what I could find about Michael Litchfield

    http://www.nahww.org/content.aspx?pa...ember_id=45824

    Here's what I came up with for Michael Mcalister...
    http://www.infinitesmile.org/

    Seriously this is what I found.
    http://www.buildersbooksource.com/cg...ite/24390.html

    Maybe I should make up a webpage listing my credentials
    Red,

    Here is what I found on Michael Mcalister is yours and mine the same guy? Mine says electrical, studied at Berkely.

    http://www.linkedin.com/in/mcalistermichael
    This man is more than qualified, but yet co-authored the book in question.

  13. #28
    Plumber jimbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    9,001

    Default

    One of the licence numbers listed in the link.....818870.. is inactive. The other CA contractors licenses are active and up to date, with bonds and workers comp posted.

  14. #29

    Default

    Could be a typo.

  15. #30
    Master Plumber Redwood's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    7,463

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CarlH View Post
    Is that an AAV way down low? Hard to tell from the picture.

    DW drain without an airgap, but at least there is a high loop.

    Are those rubber fittings kosher? Also, there seems to be a lot more junctions in the revised job than there were in the original. I guess the rubber fittings allow you to remove the trap since I can't tell how that PVC is put together. The trap configuration now looks more like an S trap than a P trap. I see comments regarding the use of an S trap. What's wrong with S traps?

    At least that is what these DIY homeowner eyes can see.
    No, that is a cleanout plug it is not vented properly. Or, even vented with an AAV for that matter.

    The requirement for an airgap is not required everywhere but it should be noted that it might be.

    Those rubber fittings should be outlawed! They are far from being Kosher!

    S-traps are just plain illegal and not to code. They cannot be properly vented.

    Last edited by Terry; 01-06-2009 at 05:19 PM.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •