Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Can 14 AWG copper conductors be used to supply a light fixture on a 20 amp circuit?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    Originally posted by david luchini View Post
    \

    The 18" limitation does figure in anywhere...in the proposed installation, the tap conductors do not extend beyond the individual luminaire at all
    Ahh..but you agree they are "TAP" conductors supplying this luminaire right. So the whole intent of 210.19(A)(4) Ex.1(a) is dealing with tap conductors and they would in my opinion(it is ok to be contrary) be extending beyond the luminaire and thus based on the question proposed in my view a violation. Unless of course they follow my original advice...

    Just sayin......and be nice as I am new
    *All code responses are based on the 2017 National Electrical Code®[NEC®]

    Comment


      #17
      Its so much easier to just run full size conductors.


      Just saying,,,,

      Comment


        #18
        Originally posted by david luchini View Post
        I don't read it like that. Compare the wording to 210.19(A)(4) Ex No 1(c)..."Individual outlets, other than receptacle outlets, [COLOR=#ff0000]with taps not over 18" long[/COLOR]."

        Ex 1(c) limits the tap length supplying an individual outlet.

        Ex 1(a) has no length limit on the tap supplying the individual luminaire, but allows the tap conductors to extend beyond the luminaire, presumably to a control device.

        If Ex 1(a) had the intent to limit to tap conductors to 18" in length, then there would be no need for Ex 1(a), as Ex 1(c) says the same thing.
        IMHO (c) covers a tap running to an outlet, which is what the OP is talking about, and it explicitly includes the 18" limit on tap length.
        While (a) covers the wires running from the outlet to the luminaire (fixture whip, surface mount wires, etc) and also explicitly includes not an 18" overall limit but an 18" beyond the fixture limit. Think of an 8' fluorescent luminaire that is installed with the ballast and wiring compartment at the opposite end from the power source. You can run the tap conductor the full 8' length of the fixture plus an additional 18" past the end of the fixture to the outlet without having to use fixture wire type. (separate exception elsewhere.)

        Comment


          #19
          Originally posted by MasterTheNEC View Post
          Ahh..but you agree they are "TAP" conductors supplying this luminaire right. So the whole intent of 210.19(A)(4) Ex.1(a) is dealing with tap conductors and they would in my opinion(it is ok to be contrary) be extending beyond the luminaire and thus based on the question proposed in my view a violation. Unless of course they follow my original advice...

          Just sayin......and be nice as I am new
          Yes, they are "tap" conductors. I pointed that out in post 5.

          They MEET the requirements of 210.19(A)(4) Ex 1(a), how would that be a violation? 210.19(A)(4) Ex 1(a) permits #14 awg tap conductors to supply an individual luminaire on a 20A or 30A branch circuit. That is what is described in the OP.

          Comment


            #20
            Originally posted by david luchini View Post
            Yes, they are "tap" conductors. I pointed that out in post 5.

            They MEET the requirements of 210.19(A)(4) Ex 1(a), how would that be a violation? 210.19(A)(4) Ex 1(a) permits #14 awg tap conductors to supply an individual luminaire on a 20A or 30A branch circuit. That is what is described in the OP.
            I agree...as long as it is not over 18" (in my opinion).

            No worries my friend, we can agree to disagree. We will let his AHJ be the final arbitrator in the deal as I wish the OP good luck with that interpretation and I would just suggest he have a 15A OCPD handy so that my solution sets him free.
            *All code responses are based on the 2017 National Electrical Code®[NEC®]

            Comment


              #21
              Originally posted by GoldDigger View Post
              While (a) covers the wires running from the outlet to the luminaire )
              I don't think this makes sense...210.19(A)(4) Ex 1 deals with [COLOR=#ff0000]branch circuit taps[/COLOR].

              The branch circuit is all conductors from the final overcurrent protective device protect the circuit and the outlet(s). Beyond the "outlet" is no longer "branch circuit."

              Comment


                #22
                Originally posted by david luchini View Post
                I don't think this makes sense...210.19(A)(4) Ex 1 deals with [COLOR=#ff0000]branch circuit taps[/COLOR].

                The branch circuit is all conductors from the final overcurrent protective device protect the circuit and the outlet(s). Beyond the "outlet" is no longer "branch circuit."
                There are several areas where the building wiring system terminates at an "outlet" box in a wall but the NEC still concerns itself with the hard wiring from that outlet to the device that is being powered.
                Or else you fall back on the interpretation that the only "outlet" for a hard wired garbage disposal is located at the junction box on the disposal itself.
                Lots of room for interpretation there.

                Getting back to your original point, can you explain to me just why (a) would be concerned about running an unlimited length branch tap and then going 18" past the boundary of the luminaire? No mention is made of the location of any "outlet" in this exception.
                Last edited by GoldDigger; 05-30-14, 03:26 PM.

                Comment


                  #23
                  Originally posted by david luchini View Post
                  I don't think this makes sense...210.19(A)(4) Ex 1 deals with [COLOR=#ff0000]branch circuit taps[/COLOR].

                  The branch circuit is all conductors from the final overcurrent protective device protect the circuit and the outlet(s). Beyond the "outlet" is no longer "branch circuit."
                  The Branch Circuit is extending to the outlet box, which in the example has the switch device. In order for you to make the "TAP" rules apply in your favor you are choosing to call that entire circuit from the switch to the lighting outlet a "TAP"...in my opinion by doing so you limit it to only being 18" in length. The basic rule of the NEC is to protect a conductor in accordance with it's ampacity. However, you are saying that it is permitted to fun a 14 AWG at no defined length and protect it with a 20 A OCPD. That's what I am reading into it...sorry but I just say what I see.

                  In my view you are "tapping" a branch circuit if you are attempting to use the "TAP" allowances from the switch to the outlet in question. I don't see where (A) or (C) complies.
                  *All code responses are based on the 2017 National Electrical Code®[NEC®]

                  Comment


                    #24
                    Originally posted by GoldDigger View Post
                    There are several areas where the building wiring system terminates at an "outlet" box in a wall but the NEC still concerns itself with the hard wiring from that outlet to the device that is being powered.
                    Ex 1(c) doesn't say anything about an "outlet box." I don't think anything in the NEC says that the "outlet" must be at a "box." The "outlet box" that you describe here is NOT the "outlet" at all as far as the code is concerned, if the premises wiring system continues on past that box.

                    Originally posted by GoldDigger View Post
                    Getting back to your original point, can you explain to me just why (a) would be concerned about running an unlimited length branch tap and then going 18" past the boundary of the luminaire?
                    I have no idea why the Code is written the way it is. As I said earlier, I suspect they allow you to extend beyond the individual luminaire to connect to a control device for that individual luminaire.

                    Originally posted by GoldDigger View Post
                    No mention is made of the location of any "outlet" in this exception.
                    Nor is there any mention mad of any "outlet" at Exs 1(b), 1(d) or 1(e), but they all connect to the premises wiring system via an "outlet."

                    Comment


                      #25
                      Just being a devils advocate....Your argument should be to NOT use any of the exception and use the general statement in 210.19(A)(4) and say the load is considered and the conductors are not smaller than 14 AWG and...hope the inspector agrees.
                      *All code responses are based on the 2017 National Electrical Code®[NEC®]

                      Comment


                        #26
                        Originally posted by MasterTheNEC View Post
                        The Branch Circuit is extending to the [COLOR=#ff0000]outlet box, which in the example has the switch device[/COLOR]. In order for you to make the "TAP" rules apply in your favor you are choosing to call that entire circuit from the switch to the lighting outlet a "TAP"...in my opinion by doing so you limit it to only being 18" in length.
                        A switch box is not an "outlet."

                        Yes, the entire circuit from the switch to the lighting outlet is a "tap." I don't see any tap length limit in Ex 1(a). There is a tap length limit in Ex 1(b) and Ex 1(c). But again, there is no length limit in Ex 1(d) or Ex 1(e).

                        Originally posted by MasterTheNEC View Post
                        The basic rule of the NEC is to protect a conductor in accordance with it's ampacity. However, you are saying that it is permitted to fun a 14 AWG at no defined length and protect it with a 20 A OCPD. That's what I am reading into it...sorry but I just say what I see.

                        In my view you are "tapping" a branch circuit if you are attempting to use the "TAP" allowances from the switch to the outlet in question. I don't see where (A) or (C) complies.
                        Yes, the basic rule is to protect the conductor in accordance with its ampacity...but these are EXCEPTIONS to those rules.
                        Tap conductors shall have an ampacity sufficient for the load to be served. In addition, they shall have an ampacity of not less than 15 for circuits rated less than 40 amperes...
                        The whole point of the tap rule exceptions are to permit conductors to be protected at higher than their ampacity.

                        Comment


                          #27
                          Originally posted by david luchini View Post
                          A switch box is not an "outlet."

                          Yes, the entire circuit from the switch to the lighting outlet is a "tap." I don't see any tap length limit in Ex 1(a). There is a tap length limit in Ex 1(b) and Ex 1(c). But again, there is no length limit in Ex 1(d) or Ex 1(e).



                          Yes, the basic rule is to protect the conductor in accordance with its ampacity...but these are EXCEPTIONS to those rules.

                          The whole point of the tap rule exceptions are to permit conductors to be protected at higher than their ampacity.
                          Ok...I can see this is futile so we can agree to disagree, I agree the device box in question is not an outlet per the NEC but you know what I meant. I wish the OP good luck on his inspection
                          *All code responses are based on the 2017 National Electrical Code®[NEC®]

                          Comment


                            #28
                            Originally posted by david luchini View Post
                            Yes, the entire circuit from the switch to the lighting outlet is a "tap." I don't see any tap length limit in Ex 1(a).
                            And there is where we differ.
                            For (a) I see the limitation in length for the entire tap to be 18" plus whatever may be inside the footprint of the luminaire.
                            Not 18" plus however long the portion of the tap conductor in the wall may be.
                            That seems transparently clear to me, so it will definitely be argued for a long time with no resolution.
                            I wonder whether the Handbook and/or the ROP going back to the adoption of that section may be of interest?
                            The Handbook does not help and I am not planning to do the ROP research any time soon.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X