- Location
- New Jersey
- Occupation
- Journeyman Electrician
Does the 2" hole, if filled up. not tie them together in the same way a tie wrap would?
I can see your point but I like my interpretation better. :grin:
Does the 2" hole, if filled up. not tie them together in the same way a tie wrap would?
OK........I have a dwelling with 2 X 10's as floor joists. I bore 2 1/2" holes through the joists for the length of the dwelling and place my homeruns through these holes. There may be 10 to 15 homeruns passing through some of these holes. They are not fire blocked. The joists are 2' on center. Is this bundling?
Check your local amendments, we have one here that only allows 2 cables per bored hole, period.
Check your local amendments, we have one here that only allows 2 cables per bored hole, period.
Check your local amendments, we have one here that only allows 2 cables per bored hole, period.
That is a foolish rule ....... period.
I agree. Sounds like a simpleton's approach to inspection.
I bet the inspection department didn't know how to figure derating so they simplified it.:grin:Guaranteed it was one guys 'bright idea' and he pushed it through in the name of safety.
Hey guys relax a bit. Yes, I agree, it is a stupid rule. However, it is a legally adopted amendment in the state of Tennessee. I didn't make the rule, and most installers don't follow it. There is one local inspector that will hold you to two NM cables per bored hole though.
I'd hate to see the top and/or bottom wall plates in a residential installation. You'd just about need a hole in the wood for each KO.Check your local amendments, we have one here that only allows 2 cables per bored hole, period.
I think the guys on the code panels probably never had their hands on a single piece of romex in their lives, unless it was a short section cut for display at whatever meetings and seminars these guys get to go to. My bets is they are all dyed in the wool solid conduit guys (if they actually do any electrical work, vs the engineer's on the team), who worked in high rises in downtown Manhattan. And conduits getting really hot are not that uncommon to find, whereas romex overloaded to the point of combustion is fairly rare in modern houses if they are wired by real electricians instead of Craigslist coyboys. De-rating and number of conductors in conduits in the code book led to the addition of "bundling" for non metallic cables. It isn't a real problem and probably never caused a fire. (By the way, I have read the full story on the two wires in top plates with fire caulking testing.) Harumph. :roll:
The first photo is the top plate and the second one is the bottom plate and in between they are still loosely together. So Where does this fall in this discussion.
I just got called for this by inspector. He will not allow more than 2 romex cables in a wood bored hole. He states Article 334.80. After reading and being referred back to 310.15(B)(2)(a) to derate cables as per 334.80. It allows you to derate 7-9 current carrying conductors at 70%. Derating 12/2 70% starting with it's 90 degree ampacity of 30amps as shown in Table 310.16, 30amps X 70% = 21amps derated. It's still a 20amp circuit. The same holds true for 14/2. 90 degree ampacity of 25amps for 14/2 derated 70% is 17amps. Still a 15amp circuit. The 70% derating holds true for up to 9 current carrying conductors as per Table 310.15(B)(2)(a).
So as long as you are bundling only #12 and #14 wire and have no more than 9 current carrying conductors, including neutrals, in a wood bored hole there shouldn't be a code problem after derating.
For those who have or can get there hands on a 2008 HandBook, it explains this in detail after 334.80. Now I need to enlighten the assistant chief inspector to this and I'm not so sure he will be open minded. Wish me luck.
Thanks,
Fred Jones
The penetration would have to be draft stopped, and then it would be subject to derating.
I agree Code speaking