Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+ampacity\,\s+overcurrent\s+protection\,\s+etc\.\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+ampacity\,\s+overcurrent\s+protection\,\s+etc\.\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] ampacity, overcurrent protection, etc. (score: 1): Author: Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net>; Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 14:00:44 -0800; Folks.. The rules in the NEC for conductor sizing and overcurrent protection are sort of complex, and one does not necessarily depend on the other. For code fiends, 240-3 has the OCP rules. Once you; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-01/msg01122.html (9,625 bytes)
2. Re: [TowerTalk] ampacity, overcurrent protection, etc. (score: 1): Author: Gary Schafer <garyschafer@comcast.net>; Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 18:17:02 -0500; Hi Jim, I have to take issue with you on some of this: Jim Lux wrote: Folks.. The rules in the NEC for conductor sizing and overcurrent protection are sort of complex, and one does not necessarily de; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-01/msg01127.html (12,535 bytes)
3. Re: [TowerTalk] ampacity, overcurrent protection, etc. (score: 1): Author: "Jim Lux" <jimlux@earthlink.net>; Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 18:31:04 -0800; Getting into a parsing thing here... OCP and conductor sizing both depend on the load, but one does not necessarily depend on the other. Sure you can.. I can put a 1 Amp breaker on a 4/0 wire.. but I; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-01/msg01133.html (15,163 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]