Multiple conductor of the same circuit.

[erock1]

So I have multiple hots of the same circuit going through one 3/4 pipe. I some instances I have 3 ways and four ways with 8 and 9 ungrounded wires in it. Does debating apply if it's the same circuit?

 

[Dennis Alwon]

For the most part yes

1Number of conductors is the total number of conductors in the raceway
or cable, including spare conductors. The count shall be adjusted
in accordance with 310.15(B)(5) and (6). The count shall not include
conductors that are connected to electrical components but that cannot
be simultaneously energized.

 

[JFletcher]

So I have multiple hots of the same circuit going through one 3/4 pipe. I some instances I have 3 ways and four ways with 8 and 9 ungrounded wires in it. Does debating apply if it's the same circuit?

Derating, maybe. Debating, yes. I'd argue that traveler wires cannot be simultaneously energized by design of 3/4 way switches, and even some bizzaro failure would send ~1/2 A_max thru each (and wiring that way intentionally is a violation of paralleling small wires).

 

[Dennis Alwon]

Derating, maybe. Debating, yes. I'd argue that traveler wires cannot be simultaneously energized by design of 3/4 way switches, and even some bizzaro failure would send ~1/2 A_max thru each (and wiring that way intentionally is a violation of paralleling small wires).

I believe the intent of the note is that one traveller as part of a 3 way do not need to be counted. Switch legs do need to be counted

 

[iwire]

I believe the intent of the note is that one traveller as part of a 3 way do not need to be counted. Switch legs do need to be counted

I agree with that.

 

[fmtjfw]

I believe the intent of the note is that one traveller as part of a 3 way do not need to be counted. Switch legs do need to be counted

You are correct, that is one of my submittals and the justification was that one traveller of a pair need be counted. The wording was apparently extended to include a case like the wiring of a traffic beacon (only one of red-yellow-green energized at a time).

 

[Carultch]

Derating, maybe. Debating, yes. I'd argue that traveler wires cannot be simultaneously energized by design of 3/4 way switches, and even some bizzaro failure would send ~1/2 A_max thru each (and wiring that way intentionally is a violation of paralleling small wires).

I agree that traveller legs should only need to be counted for the number that will carry current simultaneously, and when the switching state excludes wires from carrying current, there is no reason to count them all as current-carrying. This is a good rule.


However, using the word "energized" introduces another unintended issue. A wire can be connected on one side to full line voltage and still be energized, even if the other end is open. Such a wire will not carry current, but will be energized.