Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19

Thread: several EGC in a box

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Easton, Maryland NEC: 2011
    Posts
    7,857
    What if all 4 circuits were faulted (unlikely but possible)?

    You would want all the available EGCs to help them clear.
    "Electricity is really just organized lightning." George Carlin


    Derék

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    San Francisco Southbay
    Posts
    1,842
    Quote Originally Posted by Smart $ View Post
    Besides, if you didn't connect them together, what would you do with them in your case
    Just leave them in the box.

    I know it doesn't take anymore time to connect them all together, but i was just wondering if there is any other issues besides the code.
    Edward
    Education is a progressive discovery of our ignorance.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Easton, Maryland NEC: 2011
    Posts
    7,857
    Er,faults. Post#11
    "Electricity is really just organized lightning." George Carlin


    Derék

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    3,100
    Quote Originally Posted by edward View Post
    all NM cable originate from the panel and end up in the J box, of course in the panel the EGC are terminated on the grounding bar.
    Quote Originally Posted by hillbilly1 View Post
    So the nm is pulled in the emt? Must be a pretty deep box for all of that!
    That quote is where I misunderstood where you said "all NM cable originate from the panel and end up in the J box" as to the answer to your question I would say yes, they all would terminate together to the bond jumper if your using the emt as the EGC, or if a separate EGC is pulled in the conduit (you need only one, sized for the largest ocp) all tied to it.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    13,070
    Quote Originally Posted by edward View Post
    Just leave them in the box...
    I understand that "can" be done, but it has to be out of sheer ignorance? Sorry, to be blunt about it... but this is a very serious matter? How does one justify the wires' existence? Any chance you could just leave the other wires in the box and have the equipment function properly? Is there not equipment on both ends of that circuit? Why do you think the wires are there to begin with? How can you know the EMT can be used as the EGC, yet think to just leave the NM grounds in the box???
    I'll never get there. No matter where I go, I'm always here.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    San Francisco Southbay
    Posts
    1,842
    Quote Originally Posted by Smart $ View Post
    I understand that "can" be done, but it has to be out of sheer ignorance? Sorry, to be blunt about it... but this is a very serious matter? I agree this is serious How does one justify the wires' existence? Any chance you could just leave the other wires in the box and have the equipment function properly? Is there not equipment on both ends of that circuit? One end if the panel the other end if the appliance, Why do you think the wires are there to begin with? For safety How can you know the EMT can be used as the EGC, I don't know because it is existing and buried in the attic yet think to just leave the NM grounds in the box??? the NM cables do not go in the conduit, connecting all of NM grounds together is not going to make a bit of difference if in the attic the EMT conduit is broken because the NM cables do not go in the EMT conduit
    I agree sometimes one has to be blunt but I know what the purpose of the EGC and why wires are installed and furthermore agree that the EMT may not be relied on as an EGC.

    maybe i didn't explain the situation clearly. The existing conduit with single conductors was from the panel to the loads that i had mention in my OP without an EGC. So when the panel was upgraded the existing conduit couldn't be bent in the wall to enter the new panel, so it was cut and a junction box installed, then that box was fed with NM cable (the NM cable originates from the panel).

    So theoretically instead of the NM cables i could have installed EMT to the Jbox without any EGC. So between the panel and the J box, what is the difference between the EMT acting as my EGC vs only one of the EGC from the NM cable?

    I hope this is clear.
    Edward
    Education is a progressive discovery of our ignorance.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    NE Nebraska
    Posts
    19,141
    Quote Originally Posted by jumper View Post
    What if all 4 circuits were faulted (unlikely but possible)?

    You would want all the available EGCs to help them clear.
    If he had 4 circuits all in same raceway there only needs to be one EGC and it only needs sized to largest overcurrent device protecting conductors in that raceway. Now he has replaced the raceway with 4 separate cables - each with its own EGC. Similar yet different - does each EGC need to be connected even though effectively one would work? I think that is the question the OP is asking. I have not always connected all of them myself when they go to same point on each end, doesn't mean that it was right though.

    Quote Originally Posted by edward View Post
    I agree sometimes one has to be blunt but I know what the purpose of the EGC and why wires are installed and furthermore agree that the EMT may not be relied on as an EGC.

    maybe i didn't explain the situation clearly. The existing conduit with single conductors was from the panel to the loads that i had mention in my OP without an EGC. So when the panel was upgraded the existing conduit couldn't be bent in the wall to enter the new panel, so it was cut and a junction box installed, then that box was fed with NM cable (the NM cable originates from the panel).

    So theoretically instead of the NM cables i could have installed EMT to the Jbox without any EGC. So between the panel and the J box, what is the difference between the EMT acting as my EGC vs only one of the EGC from the NM cable?

    I hope this is clear.
    I was wondering why you had multiple NM cables and then transition to a raceway - usually it is raceway transitioning to cable methods.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    700
    I think as long as the #10 is connected in the j-box, the continuity between the emt and the #10 to the panel meets the requirement of 250.148 is meant.
    gusco

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    13,070
    Quote Originally Posted by edward View Post
    I agree sometimes one has to be blunt...
    I commend you for not taking insult by it (or at least not appearing to), and persuing the issue diligently.

    Quote Originally Posted by edward View Post
    maybe i didn't explain the situation clearly. ...

    So theoretically instead of the NM cables i could have installed EMT to the Jbox without any EGC. So between the panel and the J box, what is the difference between the EMT acting as my EGC vs only one of the EGC from the NM cable?

    I hope this is clear.
    Clearer... but for the purpose, it was clear to me before.

    Actually, I've heard from other posts on using conduits as an EGC, EMT (properly installed and maintained) is a better EGC than a single #10 copper wire. Because it is in essence redundant grounding, the code allows a single EGC run in a conduit with multiple circuits. Nevertheless, a single #10 in a non-metallic wiring method is not equivalent to just EMT, and definitely not equivalent to EMT with an EGC.

    On the code side of the issue, 330.3(B) general applies. Subsections (1) through (4) do not alleviate the general requirement in your case.

    Quote Originally Posted by 330.3
    (B) Conductors of the Same Circuit. All conductors of
    the same circuit and, where used, the grounded conductor
    and all equipment grounding conductors and bonding conductors
    shall be contained within the same raceway, auxiliary
    gutter, cable tray, cablebus assembly, trench, cable, or
    cord, unless otherwise permitted in accordance with
    300.3(B)(1) through (B)(4).
    I believe the requirement assumes the conductors to be properly terminated at each end
    I'll never get there. No matter where I go, I'm always here.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •