4 Sq Box Mounting

Status
Not open for further replies.
Little Bill

Little Bill

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Tennessee NEC:2017
Occupation
Semi-Retired Electrician
Is it permissible to mount 4 sq boxes using the holes in the side to run a screw through?

I have an install to do in a shed/barn (no animals or agriculture) that the support posts and slating for the outside metal is going to be left exposed. IOW, it will be open inside.

I use the boxes with the brackets sometimes and they are fine for lights or junction boxes.
However I don't like to use them for receptacles. They seem to flex/give too much when plugging/unplugging things.
 
Little Bill said:
Is it permissible to mount 4 sq boxes using the holes in the side to run a screw through?

I have an install to do in a shed/barn (no animals or agriculture) that the support posts and slating for the outside metal is going to be left exposed. IOW, it will be open inside.

I use the boxes with the brackets sometimes and they are fine for lights or junction boxes.
However I don't like to use them for receptacles. They seem to flex/give too much when plugging/unplugging things.
Click to expand...


I have done that in a pinch
 
why not make your own holes about half way in between the side KOs. I have done that many times.

If you use 4s with bracket and mount it with pan head sheet metal screws with an additional fender washer, it tends to hold the box nice and firm and the flexibility is almost zero.
 
Little Bill said:
Is it permissible to mount 4 sq boxes using the holes in the side to run a screw through?

I have an install to do in a shed/barn (no animals or agriculture) that the support posts and slating for the outside metal is going to be left exposed. IOW, it will be open inside.

I use the boxes with the brackets sometimes and they are fine for lights or junction boxes.
However I don't like to use them for receptacles. They seem to flex/give too much when plugging/unplugging things.
Click to expand...
4 sq boxes, aka 1900 boxes, must be as different in name as they are in style across the the continent; I use bracket boxes for the exact same reason you want to avoid them. Plain boxes w/o a bracket flop around too much for my taste.

How big are the arms on the bracket boxes where you live. Here, out west they are massive; lots of guys use them for boat anchors.
 
You can do it, but the cover probably won't fit right. Like Dennis and others, I've done it in a pinch but I wouldn't want to do a whole building that way. I'd be looking for a different product.
 
ActionDave said:
4 sq boxes, aka 1900 boxes, must be as different in name as they are in style across the the continent; I use bracket boxes for the exact same reason you want to avoid them. Plain boxes w/o a bracket flop around too much for my taste.

How big are the arms on the bracket boxes where you live. Here, out west they are massive; lots of guys use them for boat anchors.
Click to expand...

Been my experience as well, and you must either have some really big box brackets or really small boats. How many bodies of water does western CO have that are navigable with a boat? I'm sure there are some but people in Minnesota probably know a lot more about boats in general:happyyes:

I have used those side of box holes for mounting for around 25 years and only about a year or two ago was the first time I ever had that method rejected by an EI. I never used them in a application like the OP though, was always a box with a mud ring that would be flush after wall covering is added, the wall covering would keep the box from flopping around as it would usually pull out but not push in before wall covering was installed.
 
What I have done if I want to mount a plain 1900 box on the side is knock out one or two of the KO's and use fender washers with the screws. I haven't used the little holes in years.

Most of the lakes here are small, so you don't need much of an anchor.
 
ActionDave said:
What I have done if I want to mount a plain 1900 box on the side is knock out one or two of the KO's and use fender washers with the screws. I haven't used the little holes in years.

Most of the lakes here are small, so you don't need much of an anchor.
Click to expand...
Probably small enough you don't, or should I say can't have much of a boat either:)

I think that mounting method would be rejected as well, though I disagree with the EI on this issue. It is in code but you have to really push hard to call it a violation IMO. Mounting methods penetrating the sides of the box need to be near the back of the box or box needs to be listed for such mounting methods:( I can try to find it but I think you know about as much where to start looking as I do.
 
kwired said:
Probably small enough you don't, or should I say can't have much of a boat either:)

I think that mounting method would be rejected as well, though I disagree with the EI on this issue. It is in code but you have to really push hard to call it a violation IMO. Mounting methods penetrating the sides of the box need to be near the back of the box or box needs to be listed for such mounting methods:( I can try to find it but I think you know about as much where to start looking as I do.
Click to expand...
314.23 Supports
(1) Nails and Screws. Nails and screws, where used as a
fastening means, shall be attached by using brackets on the
outside of the enclosure, or they shall pass through the inte-
rior within 6 mm (1?4 in.) of the back or ends of the enclosure.
Screws shall not be permitted to pass through the box unless
exposed threads in the box are protected using approved
means to avoid abrasion of conductor insulation.

The way I read it a screw needs to be in the back of the box if it passes through, like a train passes through a tunnel. If it goes through one side of the box there is no chance there will be any exposed threads to possibly abrade any conductor insulation.

Now as far as lakes here, they are small. Reservoirs on the other hand, ones that are created by a dam, are big.
 
ActionDave said:
314.23 Supports
(1) Nails and Screws. Nails and screws, where used as a
fastening means, shall be attached by using brackets on the
outside of the enclosure, or they shall pass through the inte-
rior within 6 mm (1?4 in.) of the back or ends of the enclosure.
Screws shall not be permitted to pass through the box unless
exposed threads in the box are protected using approved
means to avoid abrasion of conductor insulation.

The way I read it a screw needs to be in the back of the box if it passes through, like a train passes through a tunnel. If it goes through one side of the box there is no chance there will be any exposed threads to possibly abrade any conductor insulation.

Now as far as lakes here, they are small. Reservoirs on the other hand, ones that are created by a dam, are big.
Click to expand...

My argument is the screws do not pass "through" the box, but inspector insisted they discussed this at a staff meeting and my using those two small holes (which I believe are for attaching "plaster ears") was determined to not be acceptable. He did not make me change that particular installation but informed me that would not be allowed in the future.
 
kwired said:
My argument is the screws do not pass "through" the box, but inspector insisted they discussed this at a staff meeting and my using those two small holes (which I believe are for attaching "plaster ears") was determined to not be acceptable. He did not make me change that particular installation but informed me that would not be allowed in the future.
Click to expand...
Was that the staff meeting where they discussed how to flag installations where there is no real safety issue? I wonder if a copy of the minutes are available.
 
I don't complain too much about our state inspectors, when they have such staff meetings they don't generally try to make things a PITA for the contractor, they are spending time as a group learning things that puts them all on the same page, which helps put them all on the same level. Sure some seemingly little things such as this come up but they are just trying to figure out what is right and present it to all of the inspectors so there will be more uniformity in enforcement and have less of the - "but Bob lets me do that" situations. I don't know they have recorded minutes from the meetings. They are not public meetings that I am aware of they are just safety and procedures training meetings as far as I know like any other employer would have with it's employees. No official laws or changes to public documents are made at these meetings that would not be legal. Any such code interpretations are just informational and not by any means amendments to the code or anything like that. But if they talked about such a topic and came to a general consensus - good luck changing any individual inspectors mind on interpretation of that section of code, but by all means give it a try if you want to. The guy let me go on the installation he was inspecting, but indicated that would not fly in the future. Because of this I didn't push any more at that time. If pressed hard enough he maybe does a better job of citing a code section instead of just repeating what he remembered hearing at a meeting.
 
kwired said:
I don't complain too much about our state inspectors, when they have such staff meetings they don't generally try to make things a PITA for the contractor, they are spending time as a group learning things that puts them all on the same page, which helps put them all on the same level. Sure some seemingly little things such as this come up but they are just trying to figure out what is right and present it to all of the inspectors so there will be more uniformity in enforcement and have less of the - "but Bob lets me do that" situations. I don't know they have recorded minutes from the meetings. They are not public meetings that I am aware of they are just safety and procedures training meetings as far as I know like any other employer would have with it's employees. No official laws or changes to public documents are made at these meetings that would not be legal. Any such code interpretations are just informational and not by any means amendments to the code or anything like that. But if they talked about such a topic and came to a general consensus - good luck changing any individual inspectors mind on interpretation of that section of code, but by all means give it a try if you want to. The guy let me go on the installation he was inspecting, but indicated that would not fly in the future. Because of this I didn't push any more at that time. If pressed hard enough he maybe does a better job of citing a code section instead of just repeating what he remembered hearing at a meeting.
Click to expand...

Take your "serious face" off for a minute.
I think he was just :dunce::roll::dunce::slaphead::lol:!
 
I have an issue with the screws, while there may not be any threads exposed, if a drywall screw is used it can't sit flat and you have the edge there still. A pan head might work better, but again they are usually screwed in at an angle.
 
cowboyjwc said:
I have an issue with the screws, while there may not be any threads exposed, if a drywall screw is used it can't sit flat and you have the edge there still. A pan head might work better, but again they are usually screwed in at an angle.
Click to expand...

And how is that screw head going to impact anything any more than the #6 device mounting screw threads?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top