Powercon prices?

Just beware that im pretty sure - @STEVETERRY - your homemade powercon jumpers won't meet NEC because they are not UL listed assemblies and are not 12/3 SO, etc. That could cost - of maintain a UL shop - is not insignificant.

Will they work and be safe? Probably. If there's an injury or property loss incident that has anything to do with the jumpers will there be a problem? Possibly.

There is no way I can see this information being correct, I think common sense tells the story. That would mean every fixture you get out of the box such as a source four that come with bare ends is illegal because you put the end plug on which wasn't part of the UL approval. It would also mean that every structure wired in America is illegal because UL didn’t inspect the end job; not to mention every dimmer rack install, etc. I would say any cables made should have all UL components, they should then retain proper safety standards as long as assembled properly. I don't see how a jumper cable would be classified as a device. If that is the case, who wants to tell all the major rental houses that their cables they make are not legal.
 
Last edited:
There is no way I can see this information being correct, I think common sense tells the story. That would mean every fixture you get out of the box such as a source four that come with bare ends is illegal because you put the end plug on which wasn't part of the UL approval. It would also mean that every structure wired in America is illegal because UL didn’t inspect the end job; not to mention every dimmer rack install, etc. I would say any cables made should have all UL components, they should then retain proper safety standards as long as assembled properly. I don't see how a jumper cable would be classified as a device. If that is the case, who wants to tell all the major rental houses that their cables they make are not legal.
I could be wrong so waiting for Steve or Mitch or Ken or one of those guys to respond. You did miss the distinction I made between recognized component and listed device. A stage pin plug is a listed device. A Powercon is a recognized component. There is a significant difference in how they can be used by code.

PS: http://www.ul.com/marks/ul-listing-...ing-guidelines/specific-guidelines-and-rules/

UL Listing means that UL has tested representative samples of the product and determined that it meets UL’s requirements. These requirements are based primarily on UL’s published and nationally recognized Standards for Safety.

UL’s component recognition service covers the evaluation of components or materials intended for use in a complete product or system. These components are intended only for incorporation into other end-use products that may be eligible for UL’s Listing, Classification or Certificate Service.
 
Just beware that im pretty sure - @STEVETERRY - your homemade powercon jumpers won't meet NEC because they are not UL listed assemblies and are not 12/3 SO, etc. That could cost - of maintain a UL shop - is not insignificant.

Will they work and be safe? Probably. If there's an injury or property loss incident that has anything to do with the jumpers will there be a problem? Possibly.

Can we please, as a community work on not jumping to conclusions, and assuming things about people, without asking? Nobody ever said what type of cable would be used. Why would you assume that the OP would not use SO cable. The question was about the cost to purchase jumpers, and the advice given was that they could be made cheaper using THE CORRECT cables, and CORRECTLY termination them.

It's is very insulting respond assuming that the OP would not buy the correct materials; its fine to point out caveats, but please be polite and respectful. There is a difference between being informative, and being a jerk.
 
Can we please, as a community work on not jumping to conclusions, and assuming things about people, without asking? Nobody ever said what type of cable would be used. Why would you assume that the OP would not use SO cable. The question was about the cost to purchase jumpers, and the advice given was that they could be made cheaper using THE CORRECT cables, and CORRECTLY termination them.

It's is very insulting respond assuming that the OP would not buy the correct materials; its fine to point out caveats, but please be polite and respectful. There is a difference between being informative, and being a jerk.
It wasn't that I assumed OP wouldn't use the right cable, it's that I'm pretty sure code acceptable cable, like 12/3 SO, won't fit in a powercon, and therefore not possible.

Mike J - it seems like you are just intent on stalking me and not so much on serious debate and constructive comments. I'll work hard at not commenting on your posts if you'll not comment on mine.
 
It wasn't that I assumed OP wouldn't use the right cable, it's that I'm pretty sure code acceptable cable, like 12/3 SO, won't fit in a powercon, and therefore not possible.

Mike J - it seems like you are just intent on stalking me and not so much on serious debate and constructive comments. I'll work hard at not commenting on your posts if you'll not comment on mine.

Type SJ Junior Hard Service cord is now allowed on luminaire supply cords up to 2m (6.6 feet) in length per the 2017 NEC and UL1573--this is a new length allowance.

As to the question of a "field assembled" cord: that is allowed with listed cable and listed connectors. Unfortunately, the Powercon is UL Recognized, not UL Listed--as its listing comes from the listed equipment it is used in.

However, as a practical matter, if you keep field-assembled Powercon Type SJ jumpers below 2m, I can't imagine that any AHJ would object. Over 2m with type SJ in an article 520 venue? You're on your own!

Now, you guys behave. :)

ST
 
Just confirming, new in 2017 NEC? Do jurisdictions adopt new versions or allow using it more than they do building and fire codes? Lots of jurisdictions I work in still on 2003 International Building Code.
 
Yes, the allowable length for Hard Usage (Junior Hard Service) cord in Luminaire Supply Cords per NEC 520.68(A)(3) changed from 1m to 2m in the 2017 edition. The UL1573 standard (Stage and Studio Luminaires) has been changed to harmonize with that.

Even if local jurisdictions lag in adopting the 2017 NEC, the fact that UL Listed Luminaires will now have 2m SJ cords will no doubt govern.

ST
 
Thought I would loop back to a conversation from LDI. So First @MikeJ asked why @BillConnerFASTC assumed that the OP wouldn't use SO with these cables. The reason is SO will not fit in a powercon plug. You may recall at LDI we stopped into the Neutrik Booth because a CB member wanted us to ask why there is no SO sized Powercon connector. To summarize a very passionate speech, we were essentially told the NEC is out of date on the capabilities of SJ and only your AHJ is qualified to interpret the NEC and say if SJ is acceptable or not. So ask your AHJ and they will probably say SJ is just fine. If your AHJ approves, you are in the clear.

This thread also leads us to another topic. I can't remember when the session was but I was at a conference a year or two back and the speaker said something along these lines: Standards, UL ratings, and codes are not law. You won't be sent to jail for making an SJ extension cord 7' long. However, if there is a fire, if someone dies, or if there is a deadly fall... The lawyers will come and you will be sued. When you are sued, you will be judged by those standards, UL ratings, and codes. So you can choose to follow them or not. You can say "it's safe enough". You can say "the code is out of date and ridiculous, I'm just being practical". But every time you choose to ignore standards, UL ratings, and codes, you are taking legal responsibility for that action.

@BillConnerFASTC and @STEVETERRY can be a bit of a buzz kill with their vast knowledge of code details. The codes themselves may seem difficult or ridiculous to follow. But it's there for the safety of your venue, audience, and performers in preventing a crisis AND it's also there for your protection in court after a crisis.
 
Well stated gafftaper. One technicality, most jurisdictions do adopt model codes, like the NEC or IBC, into law, often with amendments (usually to the administrative sections). Those model codes reference some standards, UL or others, and they then become a part of the code, and the law of the land where adopted. I agree you probably will never be subject to an SJ sting or a powercon radar trap. Likewise you're probably not going to be arrested for not wearing a hardhat when OSHA - which is also law - says you should.

As a design professional, I have greater responsibility and liability to design to the law than an employee in an institution does following it. I assume a manufacturer, like ETC who Steve represents, also has a very high liability to adhere strictly to the laws. The effects of tort law and deep pockets I suspect.
 
The codes themselves may seem difficult or ridiculous to follow.

Actually, at least with the NEC, that is not the case. However, there seem to be a couple of sentiments that have been floating around our industry for a while, to wit:

"I don't need to have a copy of the NEC, nor to I need to be familiar with it to get my production job done safely."
"The requirements of the NEC are not law, so I'll just pick the ones I want to follow."

Both of these sentiments are unfortunate, because the NEC contains vast amounts of both useful and approachable knowledge--not just the rules of electrical installations. That is why, for instance, if you want an ETCP Entertainment Electrician or Power Distribution Technician certification, understanding the NEC plays a key role in getting the certification and becoming a "qualified person" .

Does that knowledge make you better at your job, safer, and thus more marketable in the industry? I think it does.

ST
 
Then lets roll this back to one of the building blocks of this discussion. Why do we have a powercon through on fixtures, including the ones that ETC makes. Why even put that connector on there? It is extremely rare that 6' will cleanly get you from fixture to fixture on just about any rig you put up. 10' jumpers are the norm unless you are slamming fixtures yoke to yoke. So, manufactures are building the fixtures to do this. Cable vendors are building the cables: http://whirlwindusa.com/catalog/power-electrical-distribution/cables/nac3-length. There is no documentation on these fixtures that I have ever seen saying "don't run more then 6' out of this fixture".

Is this the industry just setting up the end user for a disaster?

Also, it does appear that you can get a piece of SOOW into a powercon, at least LEX thinks so. http://www.lexproducts.com/content/upload_products/20_Amp_PowerCON_Extension.pdf
 
I believe it was in a thread at Prosoundweb that there is some variation in the OD of SO cable and at least one brand of 12/3 SOOW would fit in a powercon. Then there is the True! which has an even smaller diameter.
 
Then lets roll this back to one of the building blocks of this discussion. Why do we have a powercon through on fixtures, including the ones that ETC makes. Why even put that connector on there? It is extremely rare that 6' will cleanly get you from fixture to fixture on just about any rig you put up. 10' jumpers are the norm unless you are slamming fixtures yoke to yoke. So, manufactures are building the fixtures to do this. Cable vendors are building the cables: http://whirlwindusa.com/catalog/power-electrical-distribution/cables/nac3-length. There is no documentation on these fixtures that I have ever seen saying "don't run more then 6' out of this fixture".

Is this the industry just setting up the end user for a disaster?

Also, it does appear that you can get a piece of SOOW into a powercon, at least LEX thinks so. http://www.lexproducts.com/content/upload_products/20_Amp_PowerCON_Extension.pdf

I think a valid question is whether the NEC could further allow the use of Hard Usage (SJ) cords in article 520. Perhaps this could be for "cables supported by pipes or structures" or something along those lines. That debate would only happen if someone makes a public proposal to do so, supported by a valid technical rationale.

There is perhaps a prototype for this in the Canadian Electrical Code section 44 (Theatres), albeit a very poorly worded and antiquated one (italics are mine):

44-354 Flexible conductors for portable equipment
Conductors for arc lamps, bunches, or other portable equipment shall be flexible cord of types suitable for extra hard
usage, as selected in accordance with Rule 4-012(1) or 4-040(1), but for separate miscellaneous portable
devices operated under conditions where the conductors are not exposed to severe mechanical damage, flexible
cord types suitable for other than hard usage, as selected in accordance with Rule 4-012(1) or 4-040(1), shall be
permitted to be used.

ST
 
Actually, at least with the NEC, that is not the case. However, there seem to be a couple of sentiments that have been floating around our industry for a while, to wit:

"I don't need to have a copy of the NEC, nor to I need to be familiar with it to get my production job done safely."
"The requirements of the NEC are not law, so I'll just pick the ones I want to follow."

Both of these sentiments are unfortunate, because the NEC contains vast amounts of both useful and approachable knowledge--not just the rules of electrical installations. That is why, for instance, if you want an ETCP Entertainment Electrician or Power Distribution Technician certification, understanding the NEC plays a key role in getting the certification and becoming a "qualified person" .

Does that knowledge make you better at your job, safer, and thus more marketable in the industry? I think it does.

ST
Fully concurring with, and supporting, your statements Sir.
Back in very late '94 or early '95, I was one of at least 20 attendees at an all day meeting held in your, then brand new, board room. You were chairing the meeting from one end of the table and two gentleman from TUV were next in order on either side followed by the rest of us running on down both sides of your table. You certainly won't remember me, I was next in line after the two fellows from TUV on your left and the only attendee with, then current, copies of both the American and Canadian codes in front of me bristling with 'stick-on' tabs flagging all pertinent points upon which I needed to grasp TUV'S interpretation. I was one of five department heads from a Canadian shop building all scenery and automation systems for a German production of the musical 'Tommy' and your shop was the LX supplier for the Broadway production at the St. James as well as the first U.S. tour and the first North American tour.
The U.S. LX designer wanted the entire German LX rig to come out of your shop and be shipped to Frankfurt. The LX designer had prior commitments but his associate, Dave Grill, was in attendance and strongly pushing for your shop's gear to be approved for use in Germany.
At the opposite end of the table sat two rep's from the German production company loudly trying to find fault with any / all of your gear so they could work with any of their three favorite German suppliers. Tommy's LX designers were demanding to work with your gear and the German producers had flown in a total of five gentlemen from TUV; four specialists (electrical, structural, materials / finishes and automation / safety) plus their boss, a generalist.
In the end, TUV ruled against your gear but you hosted and chaired a GREAT meeting plus the food was amazing with hot and cold breakfasts and lunches catered in along with essentially constantly available hot and cold beverages and finger foods. Someone footed the costs for that meeting with the German producers likely picking up the tab for everyone's airfares. There was a mountain of points to be gotten through with the meeting needing to wrap promptly at 5:00 p.m. in order for many to make their flights and you did a masterful job of keeping everyone on target and ensuring that everyone's concerns were discussed.
You proved yourself both a great host and chairman keeping that meeting moving forward and on target from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m including straight through lunch. (although you did allow people to speak with their mouths full)
Good stuff, Mr. Terry!
Toodleoo!
Ron Hebbard.
 
I think a valid question is whether the NEC could further allow the use of Hard Usage (SJ) cords in article 520. Perhaps this could be for "cables supported by pipes or structures" or something along those lines. That debate would only happen if someone makes a public proposal to do so, supported by a valid technical rationale.

There is perhaps a prototype for this in the Canadian Electrical Code section 44 (Theatres), albeit a very poorly worded and antiquated one (italics are mine):

44-354 Flexible conductors for portable equipment
Conductors for arc lamps, bunches, or other portable equipment shall be flexible cord of types suitable for extra hard
usage, as selected in accordance with Rule 4-012(1) or 4-040(1), but for separate miscellaneous portable
devices operated under conditions where the conductors are not exposed to severe mechanical damage, flexible
cord types suitable for other than hard usage, as selected in accordance with Rule 4-012(1) or 4-040(1), shall be
permitted to be used.

ST

Hey Steve,
Could you give us more info on this? http://www.fullcompass.com/prod/190...t-pti=190597&gclid=CN6k5rXH_tACFRJMDQodbfUOjA

There is very little info out there about it. Is it SOOW? I remember demoing a S4 LED a few years back and the whip sent with the fixture did feel a bit more heavy then the traditional SJ cable.
 
Why do we have a powercon through on fixtures, including the ones that ETC makes. Why even put that connector on there?

I think its about its physical form obviously.

And ETC currently catalogs a 10' Powercon jumper - which I thought was acceptable per code because the whole assembly was UL Listed, but now based on one of Steve's comments i'm not sure. I thought most of the restrictions applied to just field assembled cords, but again no longer sure.

The code on the cable type and size does seems to been from when piano boards were still in use. Look at the "technology on a stage 50-100 years ago, and Steve's point about probably time for a change in these regards has come, probably a while ago. Anyone can go to NFPA.ORG an find the page to submit a change. If even just a few people did that, pretty sure it would be seriousl considered, albeit for the 2020 edition. Throw as much as you can into why the less heavy cable is suitable today and Steve's idea of "when not on the floor" or such would get some relaxing.
 
Also, it does appear that you can get a piece of SOOW into a powercon, at least LEX thinks so. http://www.lexproducts.com/content/upload_products/20_Amp_PowerCON_Extension.pdf

I seem to recall that the issue here wasn't if you could fit the cable jacket in or not, but that if you could the bend radius on the cable coming off of the back of the fixture would very often interfere with the yoke, making it hard to focus the fixtures with the power cables hooked up, particularly if the fixture was pointed straight out from the yoke. This was the stretch of time where if you bought jumpers from ETC they provided you SO cables but you had to go elsewhere to get SJ jumpers.
 
The code on the cable type and size does seems to been from when piano boards were still in use. Look at the "technology on a stage 50-100 years ago, and Steve's point about probably time for a change in these regards has come, probably a while ago. Anyone can go to NFPA.ORG an find the page to submit a change.
This was a key point the guy at Neutrik made when asked why no SO connectors. He said that the ban on SJ cable goes back to the use of asbestos shielded cable not modern SJ.

Perhaps we need to start a little revolution here and get people to submit changes to the NFPA.
 
"I don't need to have a copy of the NEC, nor to I need to be familiar with it to get my production job done safely."
"The requirements of the NEC are not law, so I'll just pick the ones I want to follow."

Both of these sentiments are unfortunate, because the NEC contains vast amounts of both useful and approachable knowledge--not just the rules of electrical installations. That is why, for instance, if you want an ETCP Entertainment Electrician or Power Distribution Technician certification, understanding the NEC plays a key role in getting the certification and becoming a "qualified person" .

It seems worth pointing out here, too -- as my resi electrics teacher did in tech high school -- that the NEC is *minimum* requirements; with probably a few exceptions, there's no reason you can't do things *better* than NEC prescribes, as long as it works, and the client will pay for it.

Overspecifying wire gauge to reduce voltage drop is merely one on-point example (though not on-point to this particular thread).
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back