SkillsUSA preliminary contest Industral Motors Controls Written test Q4

Learn the NEC with Mike Holt now!

SkillsUSA preliminary contest Industral Motors Controls Written test Q4


  • Total voters
    4
Status
Not open for further replies.

fmtjfw

Senior Member
A conduit contains three 3-ph, 3-wire motor circuits, a grounding wire, and 9 #14 125V control wires carrying no more than 1 amp each. How many CCCs?

Also code references? GIFT: 725.51
 

fmtjfw

Senior Member
My Answer

My Answer

B

(4) A conduit contains three 3-ph, 3-wire motor circuits, a grounding wire, and 9 #14 125V control wires carrying no more than 1 amp each. How many CCCs?

The control wires are class 1 circuits under 725.48 since they are in the same conduit as the power wires. Since the ampacity of a #14 wire is 15A according to 240.4(D)(3), and the current is 1A or less, it meets the 10% rule in 725.51(B)(2). Thus the control wires are not counted as CCCs. Grounding wires are never counted as CCCs. This means that the three 3-wire circuits are the only CCCs ? so the answer in 9.

Code Ref:
310.15(B)(16) ** note
240.4(D)
725.48(B)(1)
[725.51](B)(2)
Index:

nothing
 

don_resqcapt19

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Illinois
Occupation
retired electrician
Do we really have to go to 725 to find out that we don't have to count the control wires as current carrying conductors? It looks to me like 310.15(B)(2)(a) tells us we don't have to count the control wires.
 

kwired

Electron manager
Location
NE Nebraska
A conduit contains three 3-ph, 3-wire motor circuits, a grounding wire, and 9 #14 125V control wires carrying no more than 1 amp each. How many CCCs?

Also code references? GIFT: 725.51

I don't like the question. Maybe should be reworded to something like:A raceway contains three 3-phase, 3-wire motor circuits, an equipment grounding conductor, and 9 #14 125V control wires carrying no more than 1 amp each. How many Current carrying conductors are in this raceway for the purpose of ampacity adjustments?
 

fmtjfw

Senior Member
Do we really have to go to 725 to find out that we don't have to count the control wires as current carrying conductors? It looks to me like 310.15(B)(2)(a) tells us we don't have to count the control wires.

That is a good question. Here is my logic:

For the control wires to be allowed within the conduit with the power conductors, the control wires must be class 1.
Class 1 conductors are covered in 725.

90.3 Code Arrangement . ... Chapters 1 through 4 apply except as
amended by Chapters 5, 6, and 7
for the particular conditions. ...

725.51 Amends 310.15(B)(2)(a) by adding two additional conditions:

725.51 Number of Conductors in Cable Trays and Raceway,
and Ampacity Adjustment.


(B) Power-Supply Conductors and Class 1 Circuit Conductors.
Where power-supply conductors and Class 1 circuit
conductors are permitted in a raceway in accordance
with 725.48, the number of conductors shall be determined
in accordance with 300.17. The ampacity adjustment factors
given in 310.15(B)(3)(a) shall apply as follows:

(1) To all conductors where the Class 1 circuit conductors
carry continuous loads in excess of 10 percent of the
ampacity of each conductor and where the total number
of conductors is more than three
(2) To the power-supply conductors only, where the Class
1 circuit conductors do not carry continuous loads in
excess of 10 percent of the ampacity of each conductor
and where the number of power-supply conductors is
more than three



You guys have been suggesting that I read the code carefully, in this case I tried to catch the additional conditions hidden in 725.

If there has been only three power conductors, then I would have needed to count the control wires.

If the control wires carried 2 amps, then I would have needed to count the control wires.

None of these rules are in 310.15(B)(2)(a).
 
Last edited:

don_resqcapt19

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Illinois
Occupation
retired electrician
The rule in 310.15(B)(2)(a) is poorly worded...the way it reads, it doesn't even apply to the motor conductors if there are other conductors in the raceway.
 

GoldDigger

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Placerville, CA, USA
Occupation
Retired PV System Designer
What I see as a problem, at least as stated, is that it presents two alternatives which do not, logically, cover all the possibilities.

Sent from my Droid Maxx
 

don_resqcapt19

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Illinois
Occupation
retired electrician
That is a good question. Here is my logic:

For the control wires to be allowed within the conduit with the power conductors, the control wires must be class 1.
Class 1 conductors are covered in 725.

90.3 Code Arrangement . ... Chapters 1 through 4 apply except as
amended by Chapters 5, 6, and 7
for the particular conditions. ...

725.51 Amends 310.15(B)(2)(a) by adding two additional conditions:

725.51 Number of Conductors in Cable Trays and Raceway,
and Ampacity Adjustment.


(B) Power-Supply Conductors and Class 1 Circuit Conductors.
Where power-supply conductors and Class 1 circuit
conductors are permitted in a raceway in accordance
with 725.48, the number of conductors shall be determined
in accordance with 300.17. The ampacity adjustment factors
given in 310.15(B)(3)(a) shall apply as follows:

(1) To all conductors where the Class 1 circuit conductors
carry continuous loads in excess of 10 percent of the
ampacity of each conductor and where the total number
of conductors is more than three
(2) To the power-supply conductors only, where the Class
1 circuit conductors do not carry continuous loads in
excess of 10 percent of the ampacity of each conductor
and where the number of power-supply conductors is
more than three



You guys have been suggesting that I read the code carefully, in this case I tried to catch the additional conditions hidden in 725.
You have a valid point.

If there has been only three power conductors, then I would have needed to count the control wires.
I don't understand this one.

If the control wires carried 2 amps, then I would have needed to count the control wires.

None of these rules are in 310.15(B)(2)(a).
Since this is a derating question can we use the 90?C ampacity if the control conductors are THWN-2?
 

fmtjfw

Senior Member
You have a valid point.

I don't understand this one.


Since this is a derating question can we use the 90?C ampacity if the control conductors are THWN-2?

I don't understand the requirement for more than 3 power conductors either, but that is what 725.51(B)(2) says. It may be redundant information from the fact that 1--3 conductors are not derated.

It doesn't appear to me that we are derating the control conductors, since 725.51(B)(2) says that derating applies to power conductors only.

I chose THWN-2 (which appears in the 90? column) to get around having to specify dry or wet. We can use the 90? ampacity if the resultant current is no higher than the current listed under the proper temperature for the connectors or terminations. That would allow up to 2.5Amps.

[You know all this is harder than the Masters Test I took:happyyes:.]
 

GoldDigger

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Placerville, CA, USA
Occupation
Retired PV System Designer
Which still leaves open the question of whether derating the power conductors only means that you only count them or only apply the derating factor to them or both.:)

Sent from my Droid Maxx
 

fmtjfw

Senior Member
Which still leaves open the question of whether derating the power conductors only means that you only count them or only apply the derating factor to them or both.:)

Sent from my Droid Maxx

The code language is not completely precise. As a specification for software to do the derating calculation it is incomplete. Whenever I am presented with imprecise language, and the specifier is not available, I fall back on "common sense".

In this case I presume that conductors loaded at 1/10th their capacity are not going to be a significant contribution to the total heating.

Now there is an Idea, I should try to implement the NEC rules in software and note whenever the specification is incomplete. You think I was crazy with approx 500 submissions the last time? This would probably generate thousands.
 

don_resqcapt19

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Illinois
Occupation
retired electrician
(2) To the power-supply conductors only, where the Class
1 circuit conductors do not carry continuous loads in
excess of 10 percent of the ampacity of each conductor
and where the number of power-supply conductors is
more than three
I don't see it as saying the control conductors count. I just see it saying that you only derate when there are more than 3 power conductors.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top