Washington State prohibits the use of EMT for service conductors. .
I wonder what the reason is? Do they allow PVC?
EMT can not be used for service entrace conductors (one exception for existing installed prior to 1960 or so) due to the high level of fault current.
Had a service call on one earlier this year, brand new store, overhead service, store manager said water was running out of the panel inside. The contractor that installed it failed to tighten the compression connector in the top of the meter base. Rainwater filled up the meter base high enough to flow into the pipe that entered the bottom, then filled up the LB, then into the bottom of the panel!
Washington State prohibits the use of EMT for service conductors. I don't know if or when it WAS legal.
I wonder what the reason is? Do they allow PVC?
This is a ridiculous rule they have, the fault current is also above the ability of RMC to handle.
I find that very hard to belive. 1. In many places you will see more water inside the raceway because of condensation on a near daily basis than may ever leak through a set screw fitting if one were installed. 2. Unless the meter can was something other than type 3R enclosure (I have never seen one that was not), there are drain holes in the bottom corners of the can and it will never fill up with water to any level unless it is really coming in fast, and I don't think a loose compression nut is going to leak that fast even if in a similar condition to being submerged.
I don't know why anyone would want to use EMT as a service conductor, and PVC makes a horrible conductor period.:
Fault current is going to be different on every service. Ability to handle it - I agree even RMC may not handle it in some cases. Yet they allow SE cable to be run (with no overcurrent protection on supply side) through combustible building materials to get to the service disconnecting means. I would still prefer EMT over SE cable.
I was there when it was leaking, a stream of water about half the size of a pencil was flowing out of the bottom of the panel. Opened the LB outside and let it drain out there.
Fault current is going to be different on every service.
I don't question that it was leaking, but there had to be more than just a loose compression nut allowing that kind of volume in, and why did it accumulate in a 3R enclosure is another really good question?
It sounds like the rule applies generally so I was speaking generally.
Below 4" RMC with 600 kcmil copper service conductors.
The locations specific characteristics may increase the likelihood of various results.
Exactly why service conductors are supposed to hit the service disconnecting means pretty much ASAP when entering a building.
Now just how much more damage may have been done if the wall were combustible material?
Though it was code compliant installation, if that were a new installation today those service conductors would likely be routed into the ground as quickly as possible instead of having so much exposure on the building surfaces.
I know you know this, but some readers may not.
I suppose it can be somewhat a regional thing, and if building in an older developed area changes things at times. But almost all the new stuff around here on previously undeveloped land gets service buried right to point where it enters the building or only has vertical exposure before entering. But where you are, there is likely not nearly the previously undeveloped property as there is here either.That was installed around 2004, blew up shortly after. There is a pad mount transformer supplying these conduits, from there they run underground, up and across the wall and directly into the rear of the switchgear on the second floor.
In this area we are still doing the same installations today.