Re: zinco panels
Originally posted by coppertreeelectric:
I will stop myself here and agree that it was right for the insurance company to require the upgrade, and also say it?s wrong for UL to still list FP products.
No need to stop...
I just had an "inspection" done on a FPE panel swap-out...I say "inspection" because while the AHJ was inspecting one of the three inspections I needed today, he asked: "Is that an FPE swap?" I replied "yes", his reply "There's nothing wrong with FPE.." .
I'm sure we can all agree that not every FPE CB will fail...and not every FPE failure will create a loss of life or property...but it can happen and that is why FPE is getting slapped with a suit (and for cheating on the UL listing).
In one of the links at the inspect-ny site, they give a couple of reasons as to why the FPE design is poor. When comparing the contact point of an FPE CB vs.,say , a Murray CB, the contact area is quite apparent. The FPE area is minute compared to the Murray - what the standard is, I don't know. Maybe this is the key point of the "cheating" issue? ? ? Is is also noted that a type "F" cb could fit into a type "E" buss...if I recall, the "F" is the thin CB - reducing the surface contact area when jammed into a type "E" buss.
If you read ALL the pages linked at inspect-ny, you will have a better understanding than I could relate here - mainly, because I forgot most of the content...I just hand customers a few "fact" sheets and let them decide for themselves....based on their own pocketbooks without me yelling "FIRE" in their ear.