Mechanical Protection Of Equipment Branch - Circuit Wiring Ar. 517.30 & 700.10

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

MEC_Electrical

Member
Location
Chelmsford
we have a project that is calling for the use of MI cabling , we are curious as to if there is another method allowed within the code. in 517.30.3 it only refers to the life safety and critical branch not the equipment branch, as there is now three seperate branches life safety critical and equipment 517.30 B . 700.10 D 1 only outlines the need for a listed 2 hour assembly. and the MA amendments cross out the use of appoved fire supression, and the installation will be in a crawl space, and wont be encased in concrete. it appears that there are no specific outlined requirements for methods used for equipment. meaning that the use of MI cable could be substituted for a less costly method as MI #500's can be costly :jawdrop: curious if anyone has run into this problem, or dealt with this kind of cycle change confusion
 
L

LIM

Member
Location
NC
MEC_Electrical said:
we have a project that is calling for the use of MI cabling , we are curious as to if there is another method allowed within the code. in 517.30.3 it only refers to the life safety and critical branch not the equipment branch, as there is now three seperate branches life safety critical and equipment 517.30 B . 700.10 D 1 only outlines the need for a listed 2 hour assembly. and the MA amendments cross out the use of appoved fire supression, and the installation will be in a crawl space, and wont be encased in concrete. it appears that there are no specific outlined requirements for methods used for equipment. meaning that the use of MI cable could be substituted for a less costly method as MI #500's can be costly :jawdrop: curious if anyone has run into this problem, or dealt with this kind of cycle change confusion
Click to expand...

Im not sure I fully understand your question but I will try to help.

-The mechanical branch is not required to be mechanically protected under 517.30.
-since you referenced 517.30, I am assuming you are working in a hospital with an Institutional occupancy? If that is the case 700.10 (D)(1) would not apply
-Lastly, the equipment branch would not fall under article 700 as it is not essential for safety to human life.
 
M

MEC_Electrical

Member
Location
Chelmsford
LIM said:
Im not sure I fully understand your question but I will try to help.

-The mechanical branch is not required to be mechanically protected under 517.30.
-since you referenced 517.30, I am assuming you are working in a hospital with an Institutional occupancy? If that is the case 700.10 (D)(1) would not apply
-Lastly, the equipment branch would not fall under article 700 as it is not essential for safety to human life.
Click to expand...


overall, we are trying to see if there is a way we can use a method other than MI cable for the equipment branch circuit.

it doesnt seem that there is any specific language governing the use of pipe,Mc type, or flexible armor sheathing for use with feeder circuit wiring for the equipment branch.

yes this is in a hospital setting

i brought up article 700 due to that 517 is only used in the 2014 cycle as amendments to the requirements of 700.10

a 2 hour rating is only needed for life and critical branch wiring? if this is were to include the equipment branch that would then make MI cable the only option ?

would that then make the 2 hour rating not needed for equipment branch feeders?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top