300 mcm how many in conduit per nec code

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, that was the most convoluted method of getting the right answer that I have ever done. First I used the wrong table. Then I used the wrong wire then I started to use Table 5A till I saw your post, then I final did something correctly..... Geez:grin:
 
Dennis Alwon said:
Well, that was the most convoluted method of getting the right answer that I have ever done. First I used the wrong table. Then I used the wrong wire then I started to use Table 5A till I saw your post, then I final did something correctly..... Geez:grin:
Click to expand...


Meethinks that was the purpose of the thread. :cool:
 
480sparky said:
It's XHHW-2 in the OP, not XHHW. That's why I used a manufacturer's spec.
Click to expand...
Yup, works for me.
So I'm not smarter than a 5th grader. 1.878 / 0.3904 = 4.48.
Click to expand...
Are too!! :grin:
480sparky said:
Not let's let the other shoe hit the floor.:roll:



I gotta learn to push the right buttons on my calculator.
Click to expand...

Dennis Alwon said:
Got it..... but it is still 4 wires. and its 4.8
Click to expand...

Pick up those shoes! Check out Note 7, Ch. 9.

5 wires! :grin:
 
Ken--Did you notice the asterisk at the end of Annex C first page.

*Where this table is used in conjunction with Tables C.1 through C.12, the conductors installed must be of the compact type.
Click to expand...

Interesting...
 
Dennis Alwon said:
Ken--Did you notice the asterisk at the end of Annex C first page.



Interesting...
Click to expand...


No, I stopped when I saw they were for information only and not part of the NEC.

Volta said:
.............Pick up those shoes! Check out Note 7, Ch. 9.

5 wires! :grin:
Click to expand...

So do I get to wager my $1,000,000 for the Final Test, and multiply it by 10 if I get it right?

(Man, I could really use $10mil right now!)
 
Well here is another issue. Unless you use the manufacturer that Ken looked up you better make sure what their dimensions are. Everywhere in Table 5 xhhw and xhhw-2 are given as the same dimension so if you go back to Table 5A then you would neec to use .4015

1.878/.04015 = 4.7 rounded up.

You are right on the edge of this so I don't know what I would do.
 
Dennis Alwon said:
Well here is another issue. Unless you use the manufacturer that Ken looked up you better make sure what their dimensions are. Everywhere in Table 5 xhhw and xhhw-2 are given as the same dimension so if you go back to Table 5A then you would neec to use .4015

1.878/.04015 = 4.7 rounded up.

You are right on the edge of this so I don't know what I would do.
Click to expand...

Regular stranding in Table 5, compact is 5A. But XHHW-2 is not listed, thus 480 bringing in manufacturer's info.
 
My point was that all the other tables use xhhw and xhhw-2 as the same. Why would it change for compact conductors. The insulation appears to be the same. Just a thought. Why is it not listed-- I don't know.

Give the money to Ken-- he apparently needs it. :grin:
 
Well i also say pvc sch 40 as 4 total with no ground if you had 3 hots and a neutral and a ground wire .
With xhhw -2 they dont show the - 2 in the table 5 - A compact i think because its just a rating of insulation temp wise and is not changing anything diameter wise .

Most compact wire is smaller in diameter alu compact wire then just regular conductors . But we had a new job and we looked at this issue of diameter to different type of wire .

If we just pull in Simpull wire for all our feds with no soap its colored and less time to pull thats great .

But the biggest thing about Simpull that we found its diameter is smaller then any other wire in the nec tables so now we can install 4 conductors with a ground in a 2 1/2 inch conduit and where going with Thwn -2 Simpull aluma flex its smaller in size then Xhhw-2 or any of the compact conductors shown in table 5 -a just thought we pass that on to all the folks here . Simpull 300 mcm is only .706 mil in diameter
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top