Run SER cable to junction box, the installation correct?

[infinity]

Code violations side I see nothing in the photo that would make the installation unsafe. Overfilled raceway which may damage the conductors, ah no. Home made transition fitting, ah no. Stripped jacket and unmarked conductors, ah no. I would question as to whether or not the short length of raceway even is a raceway as opposed to a sleeve.

 

[jim dungar]

I sse a chade not a complete raceway connected between 2 items, such as boxes.
What code sections does a chase need to comply with? Why cant a 2 screw connector be used on the end of a chase? Of course a chase needs to have the vomplete cable assrmbly in it not just the individusl cables.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

I sse a chade not a complete raceway connected between 2 items, such as boxes.
What code sections does a chase need to comply with? Why cant a 2 screw connector be used on the end of a chase? Of course a chase needs to have the vomplete cable assrmbly in it not just the individusl cables.

My guess is that there would be more heat buildup with the connector then if it were left open as in a sleeve.

 

[Little Bill]

I sse a chade not a complete raceway connected between 2 items, such as boxes.
What code sections does a chase need to comply with? Why cant a 2 screw connector be used on the end of a chase? Of course a chase needs to have the vomplete cable assrmbly in it not just the individusl cables.

Jim, are you PWI?

 

[EngineeredElectric]

Is it code compliant? Ummm strictly speaking no but what I am way more interested in is what in the world is going on over there XD.
What situation has lead to this cobbled together SER nipple contraption into a not big enough junction box and a forum post from the apparently customer asking if this guy's $40 conduit experiment is code compliant?

First impression to me is that there is probably a better way to do whatever it is you guys are trying to do. But I'm not there so... Honestly if you need to make a forum post asking if this is code compliant you should probably just let your electrician do his thing. If you can't do that because he is so bad that you need to make forum posts checking his work then you should get a new electrician. But it's probably the former not the latter.

 

[Eddie702]

I wonder why the pipe is there anyway? Just mount the cable fitting on the box.

Maybe for protection?

The next thing to argue about is the pipe with no strap on it.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

So if you remove the se connector then it is a sleeve and therte is no issue but with the connector, some are saying it is non-compliant. How ridiculous is that.
I realize that we all have no real problem with it but if that got rejected I would shot the inspector. lol

 

[infinity]

So if you remove the se connector then it is a sleeve and therte is no issue but with the connector, some are saying it is non-compliant. How ridiculous is that.
I realize that we all have no real problem with it but if that got rejected I would shot the inspector. lol

IMO the connector doesn't change anything if the short section of raceway is being used as a protective sleeve. As a sleeve, fill ratios do not apply.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

IMO the connector doesn't change anything if the short section of raceway is being used as a protective sleeve. As a sleeve, fill ratios do not apply.

I agree but some of the argument was whether the connector setup with the coupling etc was compliant. I am saying there is nothing wrong with it, imo, esp. because it would be compliant without the connector contraption.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

Fill is not a question imo, however, I can see an inspector saying that since the conduit is closed on one end with the connector that it would trap heat so fill should be considered.

 

[NEC Inspector]

What makes a section of conduit as a protective sleeve or raceway/wiring method? I can not find a definition in NEC. I am not clear about this.

I believe that if it has a complete wiring method inside of the pipe, and the pipe is not a required part of the listed wiring method, the pipe is only a sleeve, not a raceway. So, a complete SE cable in a pipe, the pipe is just a sleeve. Even though the pipe is labeled as a "conduit" by the manufacturer and sold as a conduit - it's still just a pipe until you pull individual conductors in it that are not a listed wiring method in their own right.

The usual issue with stripping off the jacket is that the conductors within the raceway are not marked. If the conductors are individually marked then I don't see an issue with stripping off the outer jacket.

Exactly.

The photo shows a SE cable connector threading into a rigid coupling which not permitted. It also shows RMC with EMT connectors which won't work on 1.5 RMC.

If it is just a sleeve, I don't think 110.3(B) really applies to either the cable connector or the EMT fittings. I would see the cable connector as merely a means of support and securement, which is not required to be listed at all except in certain circumstances. If the EMT fittings are secure, I would not worry about them either.

If the RMC is used as a raceway, I would agree with all of the above.

 

[zemingduan]

Is it code compliant? Ummm strictly speaking no but what I am way more interested in is what in the world is going on over there XD.
What situation has lead to this cobbled together SER nipple contraption into a not big enough junction box and a forum post from the apparently customer asking if this guy's $40 conduit experiment is code compliant?

I am an electrical engineer entering into the field for a not very long time yet (8 years). I am not very proficient in practical/actual installations and sometimes had a hard time to understand the code language regarding installations. I just want to get some education and understand code better for the real installation. I received the picture from the client and the installation looks wired to me based on my limited knowledge.

First impression to me is that there is probably a better way to do whatever it is you guys are trying to do. But I'm not there so... Honestly if you need to make a forum post asking if this is code compliant you should probably just let your electrician do his thing. If you can't do that because he is so bad that you need to make forum posts checking his work then you should get a new electrician. But it's probably the former not the latter.

I am glad and would be appreciated if you can provide your suggestions for the better way. Explain the situation in more details. They already bought 500+ 10 x 10 x 6 boxes (more than 20k) and want to work with them if possible. I can not reject them if it can pass code but just not preferred or good. But I definitely want to make sure the installation will be no issue even with the strict inspector.

Regarding the box size, this will be an angle pull. According to the 314.28 (2) Angle or U Pulls, or Splices, transposing the 4#2/0 & #1GND AL SER cable to conduit, you can make it with 1-1/2" IMC with 39.93% conduit fill (see the attached conduit fill Calc). And the 6 times rule, 6 x 1.5" = 9". Applying the table 321.6(A) to this cable, the 6" depth is also good. The 10 x 10 x 6 box can pass the code. I know the conduit fill almost reach to 40% and the box is kind of small to me too. But it passes the code. However to work with this box, they have to use 1.5 " conduit since using larger conduit require larger box.

To be more specific, if you need to attach the 4#2/0 & #1GND AL SER cable to the 10 x 10 x6 box with sleeve passing through the wall, is there a 100% no problem way to do this based on the situation? Can you route the SER cable through the wall attach to the box directly without the protective sleeve?

Other fellows, please also provide your valuable inputs! I appreciate it!

 

[Sberry]

Its usually plumbers that come up with the Suess like creations.

 

[jim dungar]

Jim, are you PWI?

Just fat finger typing without my glasses on.

 

[zemingduan]

Thank you all you input! I am thinking really hard the 100% no problem way (even to the most strict inspector) to attach this SER cable to the 10 x 10 x 6 box on the opposite side of the wall with a sleeve passing through the wall. Let me know your 100% no problem way Please

 

[Dennis Alwon]

Thank you all you input! I am thinking really hard the 100% no problem way (even to the most strict inspector) to attach this SER cable to the 10 x 10 x 6 box on the opposite side of the wall with a sleeve passing through the wall. Let me know your 100% no problem way Please

Answer me this. Why is there a sleeve? What type of wall are you passing thru

 

[zemingduan]

Answer me this. Why is there a sleeve? What type of wall are you passing thru

I guess it's 1hr or 2hr rated dry wall, definitely not brick or concrete wall. This is also what I want to figure out. Do you have to use the sleeve? What is the clean way to pass the SER cable through that wall to the box that is attached to the opposite of the wall?

 

[NEC Inspector]

I guess it's 1hr or 2hr rated dry wall, definitely not brick or concrete wall. This is also what I want to figure out. Do you have to use the sleeve? What is the clean way to pass the SER cable through that wall to the box that is attached to the opposite of the wall?

You will need a through penetration firestop system, and you will not need the sleeve. You can have a sleeve if you want one, but you do not need one.

A through penetration firestop system is a spec sheet from a firestopping manufacturer that shows exactly what kind of cable is going through what kind of wall that is very specific to the particular installation. Each manufacturer has a selector on their website that shows how to do this. Example here:https://www.3m.com.hk/3M/en_HK/faci...es/firestop-system-selector-submittal-wizard/

Probably a system like this attached pdf is what you are looking for.

Firestopping is much more complex than buying 4 hr rated caulk and slinging red stuff around whatever hole you want to fill until the inspector goes away. I can give you a lot of info and resources on how to correctly go about it if you DM me.

 

[tortuga]

I am an electrical engineer entering into the field for a not very long time yet (8 years). I am not very proficient in practical/actual installations and sometimes had a hard time to understand the code language regarding installations. I just want to get some education and understand code better for the real installation. .../....

A piece of advise since your a professional engineer, and you asked, one thing to ask first is the 'Type' of construction and occupancy classification, as this limits the wiring methods you have available.
For example under the code rules for SE cable it points back to part II of the rules for NM cable which I believe is limited to Type III construction or higher.
The last time someone was asking me about a metal sleeve for SE cable thru a fire wall it turned out SER not an approved wiring method to begin with as they were in Type II-B Noncombustible (or limited-combustible) construction, and also another common gotcha for non-metallic wiring methods on commercial is in the chapter 5 articles like details in Articles 518 or 517.
Also I don't know about Philly but I have gleaned on here a few large cities like NYC and Chicago do not permit NM or SE cable in general not sure if thats the case still in 2026? but you might check what local rules Philly has?, as it says your in Philly.

They already bought 500+ 10 x 10 x 6 boxes (more than 20k) and want to work with them if possible.

Thats quite a few boxes.

 

[EngineeredElectric]

I am glad and would be appreciated if you can provide your suggestions for the better way. Explain the situation in more details. They already bought 500+ 10 x 10 x 6 boxes (more than 20k) and want to work with them if possible. I can not reject them if it can pass code but just not preferred or good. But I definitely want to make sure the installation will be no issue even with the strict inspector.

I guess it's 1hr or 2hr rated dry wall, definitely not brick or concrete wall. This is also what I want to figure out. Do you have to use the sleeve? What is the clean way to pass the SER cable through that wall to the box that is attached to the opposite of the wall?

So sending 500 sets of 2/0 SER through a fire wall into a junction box on the other side isn't exactly commonplace. From a box fill standpoint I don't think that there is a problem with that specific part.

First, where do these conduits go when they leave that junction box? That is a significant part of the equation.

You will need a through penetration firestop system, and you will not need the sleeve. You can have a sleeve if you want one, but you do not need one.

A through penetration firestop system is a spec sheet from a firestopping manufacturer that shows exactly what kind of cable is going through what kind of wall that is very specific to the particular installation. Each manufacturer has a selector on their website that shows how to do this. Example here:https://www.3m.com.hk/3M/en_HK/faci...es/firestop-system-selector-submittal-wizard/

Probably a system like this attached pdf is what you are looking for.

Firestopping is much more complex than buying 4 hr rated caulk and slinging red stuff around whatever hole you want to fill until the inspector goes away. I can give you a lot of info and resources on how to correctly go about it if you DM me.

The more significant part of this equation is the whole fire wall thing. Inspector man is likely not going to be happy about the 500 2" OD holes in his fire wall. You'd better make sure that there is a plan as NEC Inspector pointed out for firestopping all those holes in a way that the inspector will like.

What are y'all building that requires 500 sets of 2/0 4C SER to be sent through a fire wall?