Code violation 10 awg wire in 1/2?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Eddy Current

Senior Member
First it was table 2 now it is table 3



Well its both table 2 is the non conductive and table 3 is the conductive wires. What i think they are doing is separating the wires, hot wires on one table and neutral and grounds on another. There is also another table that shows what size bonding wire to use.
 

DARUSA

Senior Member
Location
New York City
Well its both table 2 is the non conductive and table 3 is the conductive wires. What i think they are doing is separating the wires, hot wires on one table and neutral and grounds on another. There is also another table that shows what size bonding wire to use.

Why 2 separate tables ? This means that you will run separate your neutral and grounds from your ungrounded wires?
Conductor fill doesn't reconize ground ,neutral or hot wires as you call it before !!!

I'm lose here!!!
 

kwired

Electron manager
Location
NE Nebraska
one of the other guys there said they have their own rules that go above and beyond the code.

I believe that

Also about 10 people that helped write the 2008 code book work at the place where this is getting inspected, so im not sure how much that has to play into it.

I'm fairly certain those 10 people have nothing to do with any of the installation at this site.

Well its both table 2 is the non conductive and table 3 is the conductive wires. What i think they are doing is separating the wires, hot wires on one table and neutral and grounds on another. There is also another table that shows what size bonding wire to use.

Table 4 actually allows all conductors in a raceway to be installed in the raceway and gives us the dimensions of the raceway. I would guess it would be used most of the time.

Table 5 gives us dimensions of the conductors to be used in raceways listed in table 4.

I have not found any dimensions anyplace for conductors to be used in tables 2 or 3. Let me know if anyone finds them.
 

roger

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Fl
Occupation
Retired Electrician
Roger,
See what you started ?
That should be "non_CONDUCTING" wire, maybe.
Of course, you know that. :)
Wonder how many extra posts that will elicit? {^,^}

Imagine Dave going back to his Class, and repeating this discussion, HA!


:grin:

Roger
 

Eddy Current

Senior Member
Also about 10 people that helped write the 2008 code book work at the place where this is getting inspected, so im not sure how much that has to play into it.
I'm fairly certain those 10 people have nothing to do with any of the installation at this site.

They might have had something to do with the paper that has these tables though. I don't have a scanner or anything so im going to try to take a picture of these tables they gave us and post them here.
 
Last edited:

kwired

Electron manager
Location
NE Nebraska
They might have had something to do with the paper that has these tables though. I don't have a scanner or anything so im going to try to take a picture of these tables they gave us and post them here.

They probably authored the tables 2 and 3 you mentioned that do not exist in the NEC.

Looking in the front matter of the 2008 NEC CMP#8 is responsible for chapter 9 tables 1-4.

Although there are more than 10 members plus alternates listed as CMP#8 members there certainly is not 10 members represented by the same organization. I don't think there are even 2 of them represented by the same organizantion, was not going to take the time to verify this but seems very likely.
 

Eddy Current

Senior Member
Although there are more than 10 members plus alternates listed as CMP#8 members there certainly is not 10 members represented by the same organization. I don't think there are even 2 of them represented by the same organizantion, was not going to take the time to verify this but seems very likely.

I may have exaggerated with 10 but there is definitely more than 2.
 

Eddy Current

Senior Member
The picture came out to blurry because of my cheap camera.


The table goes like this i just listed the 3 basic conduit sizes but it goes up to 4 inch

Table 2

Number of Control Circuit Conductors in Conduit (Essentially non current carrying)

Size AWG----1/2----3/4----1
16 ------------12-----22-----36
14 ------------9------16------27
12 ------------6------12------19
 
Last edited:

Eddy Current

Senior Member
I think that is the key, this is addressing "Control Conductors" and #10 is not normally used for controls

Roger


Thats a good point, but we weren't doing any wiring for controls we were running power to the saw. It was in the same box as the control wiring if that makes a difference.
 

kwired

Electron manager
Location
NE Nebraska
I think that is the key, this is addressing "Control Conductors" and #10 is not normally used for controls

Roger

Since we don't have a copy of the original we don't know what is there for certain.

The information provided says 'control conductors' but does not mention actual conductor type such as THHN, THWN, TW, THW, XHHW, TFN, TFFN. 'Control conductors' is more of a description of the use of the conductor than it is a description of the type of insulation used.

From what I can see I am guessing it is someone's own chart for their own use and is not part of the NEC or even published by NFPA. I have seen some charts published by other parties designed for in the field use that are titled something like 'maximum number of conductors installed in a raceway - for reasonable pulling'.
These charts are not NEC rules but take NEC plus other considerations in making the chart.

I recall working with a piece of 8 TW recently and noticing that the overall diameter looked a little more like #4 THWN. Ch 9 table 5 says it should have been smaller than a 6 THWN but it sure looked bigger than that.
 

roger

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Fl
Occupation
Retired Electrician
From what I can see I am guessing it is someone's own chart for their own use and is not part of the NEC or even published by NFPA.

That was pretty much established earlier in the thread.

Roger
 
Last edited:

kwired

Electron manager
Location
NE Nebraska
That was pretty much established earlier in the thread.

Roger

I did not go back and read through the thread, I do remember the OP suggesting that there were several code making members working where he does, or is working at and find that hard to believe. I do recall him suggesting conduit fill based on a table that does not exist and has not for at least 25 years in the NEC.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top