- Location
- Chapel Hill, NC
- Occupation
- Retired Electrical Contractor
I just realized the OP is from Canada....
I just realized the OP is from Canada....
You could connect the MI fitting to a plate inside the enclosure. I would not see why you would want to put MI in conduit, but I don't know of a code rule that says you can't.That's my point. How can it be installed in a raceway. In a sleeve I can see , but not in a raceway and not into a panel unless there is a special connector to transition at the end of the raceway.
I assume it is possible in some scenarios but not very likely.
Copper covered MI cable is copper, the inside of conduit may have exposed zinc coating (it's supposed to be enameled .) Copper and Zinc make a good battery. That is the potentiial for eltrogalanic corrosion exist, especially in a wet/damp location.
Hi guys,
I have a client who wants to run mineral insulated cable in steel pipe so they can easily fire stop. I have a concern with the copper and steel being in contact and corrosion issues. I cannot find anything in the code regarding the subject. Can anyone shed some extra light on the subject?
If that is really a problem why does the code allow bare neutral service conductors, any EGC and GECs in conduit?
When I first saw the title of this thread, I flashed back to a project many years ago where a large engineering company spec'ed out that all air lines had to be run inside rigid conduit, and then spec'ed copper tubing for the air lines.
They eventually relented and deleted the requrement to run the air lines inside rigid conduit (at least for our equipment), but it took nearly an act of God to get them to.
Would that be the only thing the Code ever got wrong?![]()
It will take more than your personal opinion to convince me this is a problem and that this is a case where the NEC is wrong.
Engineers (and electricians) often think the NEC is wrong when actually the only problem is the NEC does not match what the engineer wants to do.
Couple of problem with this reply. You presume that I care if you're convinced or not.I did not say it is wrong, I offered no opinion. I said that this WOULD not be the only thing that the NEC got wrong, ever. It continoues to undergo revisions where previous errors are corrected. Errors do not have to be malicious, but it is undeniable that many of the Code provisions represents special interests that is reflective of the Code panels composition and whom they represent.
I am willingly conforming to the Code EVEN when I can technically substantiate the alternative to be an equally safe and often better installation.(See above.) I also would appreciate if you stop bashing engineers, but I guess you only have yourself to be the basis of accusations.
You sure do make me laugh. :grin:
It's easy to do with no spine....:roll:
You know what is really cool is how well you shoot yourself in the foot when you start slinging insults.
Nah, that's my secret nickname for you chump.
Obviously they are not familair with the saying: "Crow best eaten while still warm..."![]()