Davebones
Senior Member
- Location
- North Of Tampa Fl
Can Anaconda type EF flexible conduit be used in a class 1 div 2 location with listed fittings ?
Anaconda Type EF flexible conduit
- Thread starter Davebones
- Start date
- Status
- Location
- Mission Viejo, CA
- Occupation
- Professional Electrical Engineer
Yes, within the limitations of Section 501.10(B)(2) and 501.30 and Article 350. (It's just brand named LFMC)
- Location
- Illinois
- Occupation
- retired electrician
Type EF cannot be used for any NEC application. It does not comply with the requirements of 350.6.
- Location
- Mission Viejo, CA
- Occupation
- Professional Electrical Engineer
Thanks for the catch Don, apparently Anaconda "Sealtight" is unlisted but the common data sheet claims Type EF is LFMC which is technically false advertising.
- Location
- Illinois
- Occupation
- retired electrician
I believe it still is LFMC, but just not of the listed type. Around here, when you order LFMC from the supply houses, you will get the non-listed version unless you specify otherwise. I believe Anaconda has at least 3 versions of "sealtight". Type EF, Type UA (listed) and Type ZHUA (high temperature, listed).
- Location
- Mission Viejo, CA
- Occupation
- Professional Electrical Engineer
Then it is strongly misleading at best. Very similar to various C-H claims of UL "compliance" for non-listed fittings. To me, "LFMC" means it is compliant with Article 350. Of course, there was a time that Section 350.6 didn't exist and then it might have been considered LFMC - but it isn't now. This is one reason I specifically mentioned Article 350 in my original response.
kwired
Electron manager
- Location
- NE Nebraska
- Occupation
- EC
I agree and will say about all I ever see is type EF.
- Location
- Mission Viejo, CA
- Occupation
- Professional Electrical Engineer
If it isn’t listed it can’t be LFMC. Listing is a requirement. Doesn’t mean it can’t be sold or used but it isn’t LFMC per Code.
- Location
- Illinois
- Occupation
- retired electrician
The listing requirement is not part of the definition in 350.2. Type EF meets that definition.
- Location
- Mission Viejo, CA
- Occupation
- Professional Electrical Engineer
No it’s just part of the Article requirements - you pointed that out yourself.
- Status