When is a wireway defined as a pull box?

ESLLC said:
Thank you Strathead, I appreciate that. Just wish I had an angle to convince the AHJ this is correct. It's going to be an expensive fix on a gorgeous install similar to so many others we've done just like it.
Click to expand...
Not that it matters what I think or would do, but a reasonable inspector would let it go and say don't do it next time. I mean it's already installed, and the whole point of these rules is to prevent conductor damage during installation. So can't he just look and see that the conductors aren't damaged? Hell, he could have you megger it.
 
electrofelon said:
Not that it matters what I think or would do, but a reasonable inspector would let it go and say don't do it next time. I mean it's already installed, and the whole point of these rules is to prevent conductor damage during installation. So can't he just look and see that the conductors aren't damaged? Hell, he could have you megger it.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately I don't see that happening. The tenacity is pretty impressive to me on this one.
 
I guess to take my issue to the most basic level of question....at what point DOES the wireway attached to a panel with nipple(s) become a pull box?
For sake of comparison, pulling a feeder into a panel certainly does not turn that panel into a pull box.
 
It looks like I'm now being allowed to post photos.
To satisfy the inspector I believe our plan will be to remove the panels and wireway and reinstall with flex in place of the wireway.
Please see the install below:
 

Attachments

  • wireway.jpeg
    wireway.jpeg
    378.3 KB · Views: 29
ESLLC said:
I guess to take my issue to the most basic level of question....at what point DOES the wireway attached to a panel with nipple(s) become a pull box?
For sake of comparison, pulling a feeder into a panel certainly does not turn that panel into a pull box.
Click to expand...
To me, if there are conduits/nipples entering and exiting the item, for the purpose of rerouting conductors it is a pull box. If the item is connected with "panel adapters" or used to marshal conductors in a common raceway it is a wireway.

If there was several feet between the subject enclosure and the panelboards, would the OP still consider it a wireway?
 
jim dungar said:
To me, if there are conduits/nipples entering and exiting the item, for the purpose of rerouting conductors it is a pull box. If the item is connected with "panel adapters" or used to marshal conductors in a common raceway it is a wireway.

If there was several feet between the subject enclosure and the panelboards, would the OP still consider it a wireway?
Click to expand...
Great question which I've already asked myself. My initial thought is that if the raceway between the wireway and panels is 24" or less it would be a nipple and certainly then I would believe the wireway NOT to be a pull box.
Beyond 24" seems like it would likely become a pull box but it still seems crazy if the raceway to panel is say 6-feet and the conductors would pushed through without a rope or pulling means. I don't know where that line would be drawn. Unfortunately for us right now, the inspector is drawing the line at about 4-inches.
 
ESLLC said:
No, they'll stay in. Each line side panel feeder is 240-feet x 2 per panel x 3 panels and load side are mostly 100 to 150 feet so it'll be a drag for sure.
Click to expand...
Could you make some panel skirts straight down to the wire way, from each panel, instead of the short nipples?
 
ESLLC said:
No, they'll stay in. Each line side panel feeder is 240-feet x 2 per panel x 3 panels and load side are mostly 100 to 150 feet so it'll be a drag for sure.
Click to expand...
Which defeats the purpose of the 8X rule in the first place which is to protect the conductors during the installation. By removing the wireway the undamaged conductors can easily be damaged. Does you AHJ allow any type of code variances? Around here you can get a variance by special permission.
 
infinity said:
Which will more than likely damage the conductors unless you plan to pull them all out first.
Click to expand...
Right which makes this extra dumb. Again, the entire purpose of the pull box sizing rule is to try and prevent damage during installation. Thus we conclude that the inspector is concerned about conductor damage, yet he wants these cabinets and the wireway removed and all this rearrangement done. It's insane. A reasonable resolution would be for him to have the OP megger the conductors.
 
I think I would make this inspector beat me in a fist fight before I changed that. I would do everything in my power to leave it. Go over his head. Get the state involved. Go to court.
 
Looking at the letter of 314.28 and 376.23, it seems clear to me that the inspector is technically correct, unless you want to argue that the wireway is not being used as a pull box, because the conductors get pushed from the wireway into the enclosures just above. [Also, the difference between the 4" required by 376.23(A) for deflection of 3/0 conductors, and the 20" required by 376.23(B) seems oddly large.]

So I would like to understand why from a practical point of view this requirement is unreasonable. If the conduits exiting the top of the wireway were 10' long instead of a few inches (move the panelboards up a story), would the 20" requirement now seem reasonable? If so, what aspect of having the enclosures just a few inches above the wireway makes the difference?

Perhaps 314.28 needs an exception for pull boxes located sufficiently close to the equipment in which the conductors are terminated.

Cheers, Wayne
 
ESLLC said:
I guess to take my issue to the most basic level of question....at what point DOES the wireway attached to a panel with nipple(s) become a pull box?
For sake of comparison, pulling a feeder into a panel certainly does not turn that panel into a pull box.
Click to expand...
I think it does, but it would be rare where the panelboard cabinet did not comply with 314.28.
 
wwhitney said:
Looking at the letter of 314.28 and 376.23, it seems clear to me that the inspector is technically correct, unless you want to argue that the wireway is not being used as a pull box, because the conductors get pushed from the wireway into the enclosures just above. [Also, the difference between the 4" required by 376.23(A) for deflection of 3/0 conductors, and the 20" required by 376.23(B) seems oddly large.]

So I would like to understand why from a practical point of view this requirement is unreasonable. If the conduits exiting the top of the wireway were 10' long instead of a few inches (move the panelboards up a story), would the 20" requirement now seem reasonable? If so, what aspect of having the enclosures just a few inches above the wireway makes the difference?

Perhaps 314.28 needs an exception for pull boxes located sufficiently close to the equipment in which the conductors are terminated.

Cheers, Wayne
Click to expand...
I tried that in Article 376 a couple of cycles ago, and my proposal was rejected.
 
Perhaps one line of argument would be that the conductors were pulled from/into the panel board cabinet, they the wireway, so it was not used as a pull box. Seems like they are mostly in line, with the wire we're just used to shift the locations a little.
 
electrofelon said:
Perhaps one line of argument would be that the conductors were pulled from/into the panel board cabinet, they the wireway, so it was not used as a pull box. Seems like they are mostly in line, with the wire we're just used to shift the locations a little.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately even if you pull straight through a pull box it still needs to meet the 8X rule for a straight pull.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top