110.14(A), rule for conductors on a terminal

[Steve Spiecker]

Hey Mike Holt Enterprises, should 110.14(A) read …one conductor ‘end’ or terminal, instead of one conductor or terminal? When someone strips at mid-wire, and wraps a screw, and has what looks like two wires coming out from the screw and no ends, is this permitted by 110.14? In my mind I’m struggling with the power source coming TO this screw may be one conductor, and even though the wire isn’t cut, would the part coming FROM the screw be considered a second conductor, as it’s purpose is feeding out, once it leaves the screw connection?

 

[Little Bill]

This is done everyday, especially in multigang switch boxes. It cuts down on box crowding from wire connectors for splices.
As for the conductor being counted as two conductors, it wouldn't add to box fill as the conductor doesn't leave the box in the above scenario.
Also, for it being two conductors if it feeds something outside the box, it wouldn't be any more conductors than a spliced cable leaving the box.

I see nothing in 110.14(A) preventing this if the conductor has a good connection and isn't damaged from stripping the insulation. Stranded wire could be a problem if some of the strands are cut when stripping.
Other than that, I see no problem.

 

[Elect117]

Wrapping a screw is a work man ship issue. It is one of the don'ts in the handbook version of NEC or if you have link, just use the expanded content. No different than going the wrong direction. That being said, it is the least of concern for issues involving screws & conductors, in my opinion. Especially if we are talking EGCs. You just can't make good contact if it wraps. I am sure there is some NEMA or UL issue or something.



They should be using pressure connector terminals and not a screw if they want to do that. Below photo as an example.

vs

 

[don_resqcapt19]

There is no reason not to loop the conductor around the screw of a wiring device. The picture in post 3 just shows poor workmanship when the conductor was looped. I worked on two different jobs where the project specifications required that the conductor be looped around the receptacle screws for specific circuits.

 

[jim dungar]

No different than going the wrong direction.

How is a wrapped conductor any different than a fork terminal? Both of the have one portion being pulled under the binding screw while the other side is being pushed out. Many binding screws are designed and listed to make contact with a straight conductor.

There is no doubt your picture is a poor connection because the conductors are laid over themselves rather than being flat not because they are looped, regardless what the handbook authors opinion is.

 

[augie47]

The first time I saw a contractor do this on every receptacle he pointed out that on his circuits were basically one continuous run with no "connections". Fewer connections = fewer loose connections.
He was skilled at it...looping his Romex at each box and stripping not cutting.

 

[Steve Spiecker]

This is done everyday, especially in multigang switch boxes. It cuts down on box crowding from wire connectors for splices.
As for the conductor being counted as two conductors, it wouldn't add to box fill as the conductor doesn't leave the box in the above scenario.
Also, for it being two conductors if it feeds something outside the box, it wouldn't be any more conductors than a spliced cable leaving the box.

I see nothing in 110.14(A) preventing this if the conductor has a good connection and isn't damaged from stripping the insulation. Stranded wire could be a problem if some of the strands are cut when stripping.
Other than that, I see no problem.