Replies

1. 
   DanH | Mar 29, 2011 08:20am | #1

   In general, for a single circuit with multiple outlets, you run the cable from the source (breaker panel or existing box) to the nearest box, leave enough cable so that the cut ends can hang out of the box about 8" (when in doubt, leave more), then run from there to the next box, etc.  The cable should be anchored (stapled) to a stud near the box, so that if you tug on the cable in the box you don't pull it tight in the walls.

   There is (usually) no hard rule as to whether you should use an existing circuit or install a new breaker, but if this area might ever be used for, eg, a wood shop, it's not a bad idea to have these outlets on their own breaker.

   Note that if you extend an existing circuit, and it has a 20 amp breaker, you must use 12 guage (yellow) cable for your new work.  If you're extending a 15 amp circuit you can use 14 guage (white) cable.

1. 
   tincup57 | Mar 30, 2011 09:42am | #5

   Dan, thanks for the reply and it helped refresh my memory of the process. Perhaps I didn't ask the question clearly but I do have experience doing this type of work, just haven't done it in a while, regarding a "professional", I have a relative, a retired licensed electrician to come over for the final termination and take a good look at the work. Appreciate most of the responses. Thanks

2. 
   Scott | Mar 31, 2011 12:35am | #9

   No need for "pigtails" in

   No need for "pigtails" in your jurisdiction?

2. 
   xxPaulCPxx | Mar 29, 2011 12:20pm | #2

   You should go buy the big orange Home Depot 1-2-3 project book.  It covers stuff like this.  Your question is so basic, you really need a referance that covers the basics like this... complete with illustrations!

   Wiring doesn't take a rocket scientist to do, but it does require you to be diligent about details, like how you make wire connections, how you ground, where to GCFI, how to connect wire with wire nuts, etc.  Telling you ALL the details you need to know is not practical here - go buy the book!

3. 
   Shacko | Mar 29, 2011 04:38pm | #3

   Electrical Outlets

   I see where you have a couple of posts that say buy a book, they have a new thing out there where you can borrow them and it dosen't cost anything; it's call a library ;)

1. 
   [email protected] | Mar 31, 2011 11:33am | #14

   Donate the book

   I sometimes buy the more specialized books my library doesn't have, use them as a reference on my project, and then donate them to the library when I finish the project. 

   The last time I checked the local library for a book on home wiring, I found an Audells manual with a 1950 publication date.  I bought Cauldwell's,  "Wiring a House", and used it for my project.  Then when I was done donated it to the library. 

   That way I got to use an up to date reference, and could deduct the cost on my taxes. 

   I also donate a couple of magazine subscriptions to the library.  The librarian calls me when they arrive and holds them in reserve, for a week so I can come in and read them before the go in the rack. 

4. 
   Amish Electrician | Mar 29, 2011 06:06pm | #4

   How about ... let the pro do it?

   You'll save neither time nor money trying to DIY. Even a 'simple' job like this has a dozen little details where you can make a mess of things.

   Wire in, wire out? Then the smallest boxes are not big enough.

   GFI protection? A requirement, as might be AFCI protection. No one mentioned those details. You might even need to add a smoke detector. So much depends on what the garage is REALLY being used for.

   What size breaker? How many circuits? what size wire? Which receptacles to use? What about lighting?

   Stapling the wire .... boring the holes in the wood dead center ... making secure, reliable connections.  All things to ponder.

   Finally, the "P" word.  You need a permit.

1. 
   DaveRicheson | Mar 30, 2011 04:06pm | #7

   GFI protection? A requirement, as might be AFCI protection

   Have you seen the 2011 NEC?

   The new code requires AFCI's to be added if additional outlets are added to an existing circuit and for all new circuites. The work book even shows a picture of an AFCI receptical, that won't even become available on the market until next year.

   That whole article is going to blow the "grandfather clauses" in most local codes right out of the water if the new code is accepted in full by states and local authorities.

   IMO the manufacturers of electrical equipment are gaining way to much influence with the code board

   As it stands right now a simple addition of a recptical to an existing circuite just about tripled the cost of the job. Instead of a few feet of wire, a cut-in box and the receptical you have go back and add (replace the breaker with a $39 AFCI breaker. Most HO are going to freak at the additional cost and then find some jackleg to haywire something for them. They are really screwing things up for the home owners and the professional electricians. The results will be more catastrophic failures, then more regulations to protect us from ourselves.

1. 
   Dreamcatcher | Mar 30, 2011 07:07pm | #8

   DaveRicheson

    "IMO the manufacturers of electrical equipment are gaining way to much influence with the code board."

   It's not just the electrical code, and it certainly isn't anything new

   " ...a simple addition of a recptical to an existing circuite just about tripled the cost of the job."

   I ain't saying I'm for or against but I guess I don't understand how an added $39 and the five minutes it would take to swap out a breaker triples the price of adding a receptacle? Heck, wouldn't you have already have the panel open to inspect it before attempting to add anything in the first place? 

   DC

    

1. 
   DaveRicheson | Apr 01, 2011 08:42am | #16

   Cost

   Like many HO looking at cost, you have forgotten something.

   Most electrician do not stock AFCI breakers. They need to first  know the panel manufacturer and then find out if the AFCI is available for it in the correct amperage. Ordering it or picking it up at a supply house or even a big box adds time to a job as well as the markup on the breaker.

   To add a receptical I would pull the panel cover and do a load check on that circuite. The rest of the job then pretty much standard fare. If I have to replace the breaker with an AFCI, I have to pull and check everything on that circuite. The darn things are tempermental about correct wiring. Agian more time and subsequentlly more cost. Then I have to consider the call back factor when the HO plugs a fryed cord appliance into that circuite and trips the AFCI. They ussualy reset it a few times themsellf, but eventually demand that you come back and fix something, after all they have already paid a proffesional to "do it right." Now I have a non chargeable trip to make and a search for the cause of the nusience tripping. There goes most of my profit in thejob in the first place and maybe some of my labor as well because none of the call back is billable time. BTDT.

   I have often reduced my minimum for small in and out jobs to help the HO be able to afford my services. I'm near 0% on call backs for normal work, so that makes my rate reduction reasonable and good business. With AFCI installs I can't do that. I have to charge my minimum time rate (3 hours) for the simplest install because I have a 50/50 chance of that call back.

   Most HO's don't pull permits for working on thier homes electrical system. Around here licensed professinal have to. They also have to have any work inspected, so ther county gets their $$. Getting HO complaints called into the building enforcement department can make life miserable for any contractor, even if the calls are bogus because of faulty wiring in/on an appliance. That is why I'll eat the second or even third trip to job involving AFCI's, but I won't do them for the same cost as simple receptical addition.

1. 
   Dreamcatcher | Apr 01, 2011 11:34am | #17

   DaveRicheson

   Lots of hypotheticals in that statement... a few holes too. Do you really just blindly quote jobs that involve adding a new circuit?

   From my point of view, I would visit the house to look over the job first; at which point I would peek at the panel to know brand and desired amps needed. This is the same on any job involving breaker replacement, AFCI or not. So the idea that there is a bunch of money lost tracking down the parts is invalid if you ask me. 

   "...pull and check everything on the circuit..." Really? or do you mean you check them all with an outlet tester like you should do anyway - and should be plenty.

   Again, I am not for or against AFCI but if they are tripping because of frayed cords I would consider that doing their job. Responding to complaints that are found to be the HO's fault is certainly a billable response to me. Maybe you should think about revising your contract to include such costs.

   As far as dealing with the building department is concerned, I would assume that if AFCI's are as temperamental as you indicate then they already know or will soon understand what all those complaints are about. I never understood why the work of a licensed electrician needs to be inspected anyway. 

   All in all, you haven't convinced me that AFCI's really triple the cost of a receptacle installation so much as you've proven how much you don't like code change. 

   Remember, people only disapprove of the government regulation that effects their means of income. But me, I like to eat hotdogs.

   DC

5. 
   Dreamcatcher | Mar 30, 2011 03:09pm | #6

   I'm not a professional electrician so maybe a pro-sparky can chime in but I am wondering why you'd think you need one circuit per three outlets in the garage? What is your son doing in the garage to want more outlets anyway?

   Being a remodeler by trade and having built my own garage which I finished out as a woodshop I decided two things that may be of help..

   1.) I am the only one who typically works in the shop and hence so, I can typically only use one tool - in one outlet at a time. My outlets are wired 20 amps and while I may simultaneously have a battery charger running, a minifridge, a task light or two, and a 15 A compressor that kicks on now and again while I am using a tool, I have never had a breaker trip. I could just be lucky/ignorant there though.

   2.) I installed my outlets in the wall prior to drywalling but after much pre-planning. Well that shop plan changed over and over after the drywall was up and in my shops current configuration a few of the outlets are blocked by tools, materials, and a storage cabinet - in one way or another rendering them inconvenient or impossible to use. I now wish I would have instead used conduit drops from the accessible attic above. It would've made drywall installation easier and I could effectively add, subtract, and relocate outlets as the shop evolves.

   Additionally, if your son just wants a typical garage you may consider using a power strip instead of more outlets or if he wants a more serious garage/workshop you may want to consider adding an abundantly sized subpanel to facilitate future power need.

   DC

6. 
   Dreamcatcher | Mar 31, 2011 07:44am | #10

   DanH

   I am curious WHY you would use pigtails in most cases ?  - aside from any code reqs.

   It seems to me like there are more disadvantages to using pigtails than advantages.

   But I'm no spark master.

   DC

1. 
   DanH | Mar 31, 2011 08:18am | #11

   In my experience, it's easier to cram the wires into the box.  And there are some pseudo-technical reasons -- safety arguments that I'm not really convinced of.

1. 
   Dreamcatcher | Mar 31, 2011 08:49am | #12

   that's funny, I always felt it made it more difficult to cram the wires into the box. There's also the added bulk of wire nuts.

   As far as safety, I would rather stick to as few connections as possible.

   DC

1. 
   Scott | Mar 31, 2011 10:08am | #13

   Our code requires them, so I've grown used to adjusting box fill as required; it's second nature now.

   The rationale here is so that a device can be removed/replaced without interfering with the rest of the circuit, but like Dan, I'm a bit skeptical. It's not like you're going to re/re a device on a hot circuit, at least I'm not.

1. 
   DanH | Mar 31, 2011 08:35pm | #15

   I've found that in a tight box you can pigtail the wires and, if you plan carefully, push the wire nuts flat against the back.  Then you have only half as many wires you have to fight as you push the device into the box.

7. 
   DaveRicheson | Apr 01, 2011 04:04pm | #18

   Revenue stream seems to be the reason  for a lot of things now days.

   I wasn't referring to the OP situatiion. What I'm talking about is the HO that wants to add a single duplex receptical to an existing circuit. The way the 2011 code reads is that it has to be an AFCI receptical, but since they won't be available untill next year, I have to switch out the breaker for the whole circuit, You just went from a single device and a little wire run costme around $10 to an additional $40 in material cost and the labor to install it. What is typicaly less than a two hour job, jumps to three or four hours. The Ho is now being told all this , but how many really believe when you tell them  so durring your initial visit. Then you submit a reasonable written quote and they go ape or don't ever call you agin. They just get ole Joe Bob down the street to do it for twenty bucks and a six pack.

   BTW I don't run an electrical business, but am a licensed master electrician. I work a few jobs for a friend that does have his contractor and masters license, insurance ,etc.

   The OP shouldn't have any trouble running his new circuit in an unfinished garage. I don't have a problem with aHO or relative of one doing that type of work. Having it inspected is the smart thing to do because even we pros make mistakes and our liabilty insurance reflects the risk involved. If a HO wants to assume that risk, that is thier business.

1. 
   Dreamcatcher | Apr 01, 2011 05:26pm | #19

   I see your point and I agree that the codes hurt professionals forced to follow them -- especially these days with the abundance of  "budget conscious" home owners. 

   Since I work dually in the field of construction and design I feel twice as affected; often finding myself saying "Yeah, I could do it that way but it would look horrible". Of course code trumps aesthetics but just building to code doesn't mean you'll walk away from the job without the feeling that an angry call will soon follow.

   DC

1. 
   DaveRicheson | Apr 04, 2011 06:32am | #20

   Dream

   The whole AFCI thing was driven by  a statiscal analysis of residential fires. I can't recall the exact numbers, but a large enough number of fires started in bed rooms, and were electrical in nature, for the NFPA to look for something to help reduce that risk. Square D and the AFCI came along with the solution. They were first only required in bedrooms only. Many home builder associations fought the inclusion in the local codes with the "signifcant added cost" arguement. That was in 2005.

   Then came the 2008 code change that bumped the requirement to the whole house protection. Since the NFPA writes the NEC and has electrical manufacturers, amoung others, on the code board, it was apparent to everyone thatit was being pushed by someone above most of us grunts pay grade. Agian home builders fought the inclusion at the legistlative level and lost in most places. By 08 they had lost significant ecconmic clout, but the manufacturer's had not.

   Now we are in 2011 version of the code and they have gone after the "grandfathered" clause in most jurisdictions. They did it under the guise of answering the cry of electrical contractors  and builders for a less expensive divice, akin to the GFCI recepticals, to achieve the required protection. Instead of rolling out the AFCI receptical and having it code approved for new and construction and retro work, they saw the opportunity to increase the market through the code revistion IMO.

   I haven't looked at the NFPA numbers over the last several years, so I can't honestly say if they have shown a significant statiscal drop in the number of electrical fires in residents over the last six to eight years that these devices have been a code requirement. I would think that if that were the case they would be shouting it from the roof tops. That would be a better marketing ploy than just continueing to slip things into the code IMO.

   Sorry for the rant, but I thought you might apprecciate where my cynisim come from.

1. 
   DanH | Apr 04, 2011 07:08am | #21

   I wonder what the cost per prevented fire is for the AFCIs, and how that compares to, eg, residential sprinklers.  Residential fires in modern homes are exceedingly rare, and the cause is rarely electrtical.  I suspect that electrical fires occur mostly in homes that would never be brought up to code anyway.

   Note that electrical fires fell 30-40% in the period 1980-1998, before AFCIs really existed, and before any of the major recent code changes (other than GFCIs) could have any effect.  This suggests that the drop in fires is mainly due to the "retiring" (razing or remodeling) of older structures.  (NFPA numbers show that a 40-year-old house is 3-6 times more likely to have an electrical fire than a 10-year-old house, and likely the numbers for 60-year-old houses are even more strongly skewed.)

1. 
   Dreamcatcher | Apr 04, 2011 09:05am | #22

   DanH

    " I suspect that electrical fires occur mostly in homes that would never be brought up to code anyway. "

   Never a more true statement.  Unfortunately, codes don't apply to the average DIY-HO Macgyver type.

   " Note that electrical fires fell 30-40% in the period 1980-1998... "

   Could that drop be due to the installation of grounded outlets or the use of breakers instead of fuses? Still, I imagine code officials won't stop adding garbage until there are exactly zero electrical safety issues. But that "one is too many" creates confusion as the codes get more complicated. Not to mention it makes everything expensive. 

   I am not a fan of OVERPROTECTION or over engineering. Nor have I never really liked the statement "Belt and Suspenders." I buy my pants to fit properly and wear a quality belt. I have never needed suspenders too. While I am all about 'Be Prepared' there's a point where caution turns to ignorance. I mean are you gonna wear a helmet and safety glasses 24/7? You never know when or where an accident could happen. I would rather just use common sense than live by poor regulation. Not to mention that this planet is already overpopulated, why are we still trying to save lives? Sometimes I wonder if we'd be better off with under-protection just to thin the herd of those Macgyvers and morons.

   On a similar note, I don't think we bulldoze enough buildings. As a paradox, I am a pro remodeler and I went to school for architecture. Most people think I should be a preservationist - at least for buildings of some historic significance. Nope. I'm sensible, logical, and educated enough to know that old buildings are often dangerous, inefficient, and very expensive to modernize. I don't care if we're talking about a mobile home or Falling Water... If I were asked whether to raze or remodel, I'd suggest plowing 'em down. But most people don't come to me with that question, only the question "how much is this remodel going to cost me?" to which I am happy to respond "$$$".

   DC

    

2. 
   calvin | Apr 04, 2011 04:11pm | #23

   I don't wear suspenders either..........

   but I can see the need often.

   You don't because you still have an ass.  Wait 30 yrs and see how you feel.

   On the drop in fires.  Perhaps it might include the more use, install, and upkeep of smoke detectors along with the development of safety apparatus on appliances, heaters, etc.

   I'm sure it's not just one thing, but a combo of many including response time of emergency equipment and personel.

3. 
   DanH | Apr 04, 2011 08:04pm | #24

   I suspect that the biggest single factor has been the "aging out" of homes with fuses, along with the general "aging out" of homes with inadequate electrical systems in general.  My impression is that most electrical fires happen due to overloading, and overloading is exceedingly rare in any halfway modern electrical system.  Mostly gone are the houses with 60-amp mains and eight Edison fuses where circuit overload was more the norm than the exception.

4. 
   DaveRicheson | Apr 05, 2011 05:50am | #26

   All of the above.

   You are right about all the changes. But as much as anything I think the coming of age of thermoplastic insulations and electronics.

   I'm hopeing the new AFCI recepticals (when they get here next year) actually work as well as current GFCI's do. That would sure help with the remodelers delima, and simplify trouble shooting.

   There is a current thread going about AFCI tripping in  a new addition. A nightmare for the HO or any electrician trying solve the problem. If they make a device like the GFCI "pig tail"cords, you could check each appliance or device on a circuit  seperately untill you isolate the item that is causing the trip. As it is now you need to unplug everything on a circuit and then, one at a time, check everything in the circuit. I can't think of any short cuts to help when these continuouse trip things occur.

5. 
   calvin | Apr 05, 2011 06:10am | #27

   I'm thinking that after a couple of these false faults.....

   that remodelers will add a couple hours of inconvenience to their bid to cover the phone calls after the job from the now not as excited customers.

6. 
   Dreamcatcher | Apr 05, 2011 07:07am | #28

   " ...remodelers will add a

   " ...remodelers will add a couple hours of inconvenience to their bid... "

   Bidding hours on a remodel is often a gamble no matter what.

   DC

8. 
   Amish Electrician | Apr 04, 2011 08:33pm | #25

   It always amazes me how some folks can  go off on the wildest tangents.

   How many circuits? What amperage? Well, a lot depends on what the customer really wants. GIGO - lie to me, and you'll get useless advice. That's another reason to ask the pro who is on site already.

   I'm reminded when I was with my vet, and a gent came in and asked 'how much to declaw a cat?'  My vet -who was well past retirement age and loves animals - broke into an enthusiastic smile. What kind of cat? He clearly expected an answer along the lines of "tabby" ot "Persian" .... instead, the man answered 'Florida Panther."  He was serious. Guess what- the price for one of those is a wee bit more than for the everyday 'fluffy.'

   We tend to forget that codes are, for the most part, developed by well-intentioned folks attempting to address real-world issues. It's too bad that folks who know just enough to get into trouble also have the hubris to think codes are but a 'game' they need to 'outfox.'

   "Close enough" doesn't count - or we'd milk bulls too.