5 wire overhead service

[quinn77]

ok...dumb question.
customer wants to keep existing 3 ph 240 volt 4wire overhead panel feeders to save money. I need to replace pole mounted meter loop and 100 amp fused disco. The feeders are 3 conductor #2 with messenger, however the service at pole is first point, therefore must keep grounded and grounding conductors seperate to load. Nobody makes a 4 conductor with messenger. Is there an exception in NEC that allows me to ground neutral conductor at meter loop and load. Load consists of 2 motor control panels and 1 lighting panel. I couldnt find in NEC.

thanx
Quinn

 

[Ruff-N]

So from the first point of disconnect (service on pole) to the 3 panels (2 motor control and 1 lighting) you have #2 service drop quadplex correct.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

I don't know of any exception that would help you out but perhaps you could run two triplex cables together. It would appear that that would work.

 

[Ruff-N]

What about applying NEC 2005 Art. 250.34 (D) (2)

 

[Dennis Alwon]

What about applying NEC 2005 Art. 250.34 (D) (2)

That would be hard to do. Look up that article again.:grin:

 

[quinn77]

So from the first point of disconnect (service on pole) to the 3 panels (2 motor control and 1 lighting) you have #2 service drop quadplex correct.

yes, 3 insulated conductors with bare messenger...houston wire and cable said they could manufacture the cable i think i need(4 insulated, 1 messenger), but it wouldn't be economically feasible. i could add my 5th conductor but then it would not be a listed cable assembly, and that is not my way of doing business.

 

[Ruff-N]

yes, 3 insulated conductors with bare messenger...houston wire and cable said they could manufacture the cable i think i need(4 insulated, 1 messenger), but it wouldn't be economically feasible. i could add my 5th conductor but then it would not be a listed cable assembly, and that is not my way of doing business.

VS reworking the feeds UG as to having the right cable manufct. what would be more in line with the clients costs. Or is this not an option.

 

[Ruff-N]

That would be hard to do. Look up that article again.:grin:

So I guess we both struck out DA :grin: Just trying to come up with an answer the OP could present to the AHJ, but I will admit this is a head-scrather.

 

[quinn77]

VS reworking the feeds UG as to having the right cable manufct. what would be more in line with the clients costs. Or is this not an option.

with this client....neither are an option.:grin:

 

[don_resqcapt19]

You are permitted to make your own messenger supported cable. 396.2(2). You could lash tray cable to a messenger support cable.

 

[quinn77]

You are permitted to make your own messenger supported cable. 396.2(2). You could lash tray cable to a messenger support cable.

thank you Don, this was the solution i was looking for.
brain is exausted at the moment...

 

[kwired]

yes, 3 insulated conductors with bare messenger...houston wire and cable said they could manufacture the cable i think i need(4 insulated, 1 messenger), but it wouldn't be economically feasible. i could add my 5th conductor but then it would not be a listed cable assembly, and that is not my way of doing business.

Is the cable you are looking at a listed assembly in the first place? Could be but may not be required to be. 396.2(3) and (4) says "factory assembled aerial cable" which if you add a conductor you would no longer have but I see no requirement for listed cable assembly. I have seen conductors added to a cable many times but never had thought about if that was acceptable before.

 

[Ruff-N]

You are permitted to make your own messenger supported cable. 396.2(2). You could lash tray cable to a messenger support cable.

NEC 2005 Art. 396.2 (2) What would be an approved field-installed lashing material. But then if you look at 396.10 Uses permitted I read you can't just add a conductor and lash it on to the exsisting wiring it has to meet the requirments of T-396.10 (A)

 

[don_resqcapt19]

NEC 2005 Art. 396.2 (2) What would be an approved field-installed lashing material. But then if you look at 396.10 Uses permitted I read you can't just add a conductor and lash it on to the exsisting wiring it has to meet the requirments of T-396.10 (A)

You would have to check with your AHJ as they are the approvers of items that are required to be approved. There is a equipment made to lash cable and it winds a stainless steel wire around the cable and the messenger. I have also seen stainless tie wraps used for this purpose. There are also rings that hang from the messenger and the cable is supported by the rings.

As far as the type of cable, I suggested using tray cable because it is in that list. I did not suggest that an additional conductor be added to the existing cable.