Is EMT a conduit?

[iwire]

So what? It doesn't define "conduit"

Always a persuasive argument.

but the dictionary does,

As someone said 'so what'.

The only definition that really maters is the definition of the one running the project.

 

[Strathead]

Always a persuasive argument.


That wasn't intended to be in your face, just to the point. That point actually being what you wrote below, or more accurately, what you can convince the person who pays the bill, either with logic or lawyers.





As someone said 'so what'.

The only definition that really maters is the definition of the one running the project.

That wasn't intended to be in your face, just to the point. That point actually being what you wrote below, or more accurately, what you can convince the person who pays the bill, either with logic or lawyers.

 

[roger]

So what? It doesn't define "conduit" but the dictionary does, and EMT is conduit per the dictionary definition. Also, the term conduit is used for EMT by Engineer's often. This situation is one where you would need to take all of the info and see what sticks.

Like Bob, I fail to see your point or your argument. By the simple fact that the NEC uses the two terms separatly means they recognize a difference between "Conduit" and "Tubing". Trade slang may be that installers see them as one and the same, but the fact is they are not, that's the "So what"


Roger

 

[zbang]

The only definition that really maters is the definition of the one running the project.

Well, no, not exactly. If the planner/engineer/etc stray from the common meanings of trade language, they can't get upset when the trade doesn't do what they want. "Strut" was mentioned earlier. How many people don't assume that it means Unistrut/Kindorf/similar? Ever seen "tubing" on a plan? I've seen EMT (on the "conduit" plan, wasn't the "tubing" plan), but not "all wires must be in tubing".

 

[Strathead]

Like Bob, I fail to see your point or your argument. By the simple fact that the NEC uses the two terms separatly means they recognize a difference between "Conduit" and "Tubing". Trade slang may be that installers see them as one and the same, but the fact is they are not, that's the "So what"


Roger

This is the point of my argument.

But also like Bob said, the Engineer's use and intent of the term is what really matters. Since the code doesn't offer a definition, then I am pretty sure that makes it fall under the AHJ clause. That is "so what" and again I didn't and don't mean it flippantly, just succinctly.

I think that others have shown that the interchangeability of the terms is far more reaching than "installers" including Electrical Engineers, manufacturers, inspectors, Master Electricians, and dictionaries. What we have here from the beginning is either a failure of an Engineer to clearly specify his job, or a failure of tha Contractor to properly review his construction documents. The code has nothing to do with it.

 

[220/221]

Rigid Metal Conduit

Intermediate Metal Conduit

Electrical Metallic Tubing


In my personal opinion EMT is not 'conduit' unless the specifications state it is.

Then, in your opinion, what is it? I know, it's tubing but it's tubing used to contain/protect wire, therefore, it's conduit.

I suppose PVC isn't conduit because it's not called PVCC?



Conduit is pipe or tubing used to protect wiring. It doesn't have to have conduit in it's name.

EMT isn't normally used for anything other than conduit. Every electrical supply house in the county stocks EMT that is installed to be used as conduit.

EMT = conduit

 

[roger]

I know, it's tubing but it's tubing used to contain/protect wire, therefore, it's conduit.

No it's a raceway. Conduit, tubing, ducts, gutters are all raceways but they are definitely not the same thing.

Gutters contain wire, do you call them conduits?


Roger

 

[kwired]

Then, in your opinion, what is it? I know, it's tubing but it's tubing used to contain/protect wire, therefore, it's conduit.

I suppose PVC isn't conduit because it's not called PVCC?



Conduit is pipe or tubing used to protect wiring. It doesn't have to have conduit in it's name.

EMT isn't normally used for anything other than conduit. Every electrical supply house in the county stocks EMT that is installed to be used as conduit.

EMT = conduit

No it's a raceway. Conduit, tubing, ducts, gutters are all raceways but they are definitely not the same thing.

Gutters contain wire, do you call them conduits?


Roger

According to Merriam - Webster gutters could be called conduits. Their definition of conduit also includes the word "tube".

I still stand by the fact that both conduit and tubing are too general of terms to use and expect someone to know exactly what you are talking about. In combination with other words they become more specific such as Electrical Metallic Tubing or Rigid Metal Conduit.

 

[normbac]

Then all of a sudden you are pulling out EMT and putting in RMC.

I have found that discussing the issue without attitude will usually result for the better. My point was that he was more concerned with cash than the install so try to argue your case befor giving up the refund.

 

[iwire]

I suppose PVC isn't conduit because it's not called PVCC?

Rigid Polyvinyl Chloride Conduit
Type PVC

352.2 Definition.
Rigid Polyvinyl Chloride Conduit (PVC). A rigid nonmetallic
conduit (RNC) of circular cross section, with integral
or associated couplings, connectors, and fittings for the installation
of electrical conductors and cables.

EMT isn't normally used for anything other than conduit. Every electrical supply house in the county stocks EMT that is installed to be used as conduit.

EMT = conduit

In trade slang sure, in documents no.

 

[iwire]

I have found that discussing the issue without attitude will usually result for the better. My point was that he was more concerned with cash than the install so try to argue your case befor giving up the refund.

I hear ya.

And if anyone cares, notice I never went into if the specs were poor or not to me that was not what the OP asked.

He asked "Is EMT conduit" and my answer remains, and in my opinion is indisputable that to the NEC EMT is tubing not conduit.

 

[iwire]

Well, no, not exactly. If the planner/engineer/etc stray from the common meanings of trade language, they can't get upset when the trade doesn't do what they want.

But conduit has a specific meaning at least to the NFPA / NEC / UL / Manufacturers.

In my opinion the OP should have sent an RFI before installation (or bidding) asking for clarification.

I send a lot of RFIs, I cover my ass very well.

 

[roger]

According to Merriam - Webster gutters could be called conduits. Their definition of conduit also includes the word "tube".

And I'm sure they missed a lot of words. A road , a train track, a flight path, etc... could be refered to as conduits from point A to point B, we need to forget the dictionarys of the world and focus on the NEC meaning.

I still stand by the fact that both conduit and tubing are too general of terms to use and expect someone to know exactly what you are talking about.

Unless they are being used for something in particular.

In combination with other words they become more specific such as Electrical Metallic Tubing or Rigid Metal Conduit.

Bingo, and I would think that the Engineer mentioned in the OP was working as an Electrical Engineer, which would be a strong indicator of what he/she was talking about in using either word be it Tubing or Conduit.


I will admitt that expecting a credit for using EMT is bogus, but that probably want do much for the dispute.


Roger

 

[cdslotz]

But conduit has a specific meaning at least to the NFPA / NEC / UL / Manufacturers.

In my opinion the OP should have sent an RFI before installation (or bidding) asking for clarification.

I send a lot of RFIs, I cover my ass very well.

He said he submitted EMT.
I'm curious if it was approved, rejected or ignored

 

[kwired]

And I'm sure they missed a lot of words. A road , a train track, a flight path, etc... could be refered to as conduits from point A to point B, we need to forget the dictionarys of the world and focus on the NEC meaning.

Unless they are being used for something in particular. Bingo, and I would think that the Engineer mentioned in the OP was working as an Electrical Engineer, which would be a strong indicator of what he/she was talking about in using either word be it Tubing or Conduit.


I will admitt that expecting a credit for using EMT is bogus, but that probably want do much for the dispute.


Roger

There were other defintions and examples of conduit in the dictionary, I limited my response to what applied to things electrical in nature.

NEC does not define either word. NEC does define and use "raceway" which is used as a general term that covers many types of 'conduits and tubing'. When NEC is specifically addressing a particular type of raceway they use the actual NEC defined name of that raceway.

My point from the start was that the designer (by profession) should be very familiar with the NEC and if so why don't they use words as used in the NEC when it comes to this kind of thing, or at very least define their terms if they don't correspond to the NEC or other recognized sources. Without that the dictionary is an all purpose source of definitions that is the next best thing if nothing else defines a word.

I don't get why a designer would expect cash or credit for themselves if their specifications are not met. They have done their job of designing, if specifications are not met then their design was not followed and they are not liable for something they did not design. It is the GC and or owner that should be interested in having it done as designed. The designer can insist it be changed if they are to be expected to stand behind the design but why should they expect payment? Getting the designers approval to do something different than specified is same thing as asking for a different design. Once they ok the change - there is a new design specification. Payment for services to making that decision is understandable, but not just saying you owe the difference between the cost of the specified method and what was installed.

 

[cdslotz]

They have done their job of designing, if specifications are not met then their design was not followed and they are not liable for something they did not design. It is the GC and or owner that should be interested in having it done as designed

They are liable if he let's it slide.
If the owner accepts a credit for the deficiency, the Engineer is off the hook. If the owner does not accept, the Engineer may have no choice but have them rip it out.
The owner is paying for a highly specified, safe design with a stamp on it.
I don't think that is the case here. Like I said before, piss-pour documents.
You get what you pay for.

 

[petersonra]

I don't see any way that EMT can be called conduit.

I don't associate with a whole lot of electricians but most times when I talk with them conduit means rigid, EMT is EMT, and PVC is mostly referred to as either schedule 40 or schedule 80.

 

[kwired]

They are liable if he let's it slide.
If the owner accepts a credit for the deficiency, the Engineer is off the hook. If the owner does not accept, the Engineer may have no choice but have them rip it out.
The owner is paying for a highly specified, safe design with a stamp on it.
I don't think that is the case here. Like I said before, piss-pour documents.
You get what you pay for.

Does any credit involved matter. If engineer accepts changes to what was originally then he/she effectively made changes to the specification didn't they? Why would that get them off the hook if something becomes of it later?

 

[roger]

Does any credit involved matter. If engineer accepts changes to what was originally then he/she effectively made changes to the specification didn't they? Why would that get them off the hook if something becomes of it later?

Don't take this wrong but, you don't deal with many large jobs do you. As Cd starts off with "if the owner accepts a credit" this is very common and many times part of run of the mill VEing. The engineers design is not set in stone if the owner (the engineers customer) is trying to save money or in this case, the design was not followed. The owner can accept the credit if they choose to or they can be stuborn and make the contractors give them what they wanted.

The engineer / designer really has no interest in the credit besides making sure the customer is satisfied.

Roger

 

[WirenutNH]

Its a mute point he doesnt have a problem with the emt if all he wants is money back. if he did not want emt he would ask for replacement, so i would chalenge him on it.

Good point