Bundling??

Status
Not open for further replies.
Although the NEC doesn't make any exception given the load diversity on those conductors in a dwelling, from a practical standpoint derating is almost never needed.
 
Dang! They've got a little bit of something for everyone there, don't they?
 
ActionDave said:
I agree. The home runs in my house are not exposed but if you could see them they would look a lot like the picture. I don't worry about it at all.
Click to expand...

back when, it was common for a 2x6 chase to be framed to the front of the house, and all the cables bundled
with strapping made from romex jacket, and everything bundled nice and tight. the inspector would shoot
down a house that wasn't tightly bundled. then it was shear paneled over, and that was that.... the
entire house in a 2 1/2" bundle in a wooden soffit.

there has never been an issue with the several hundred thousand houses build that way during the 1980's.
 
Fulthrotl said:
back when, it was common for a 2x6 chase to be framed to the front of the house, and all the cables bundled
with strapping made from romex jacket, and everything bundled nice and tight. the inspector would shoot
down a house that wasn't tightly bundled. then it was shear paneled over, and that was that.... the
entire house in a 2 1/2" bundle in a wooden soffit.

there has never been an issue with the several hundred thousand houses build that way during the 1980's.
Click to expand...
Several hundred thousand houses?? How 'bout millions of 'em....I don't have data but I'll bet a smoked brisket there are at least that many houses across the nation that have "bundling issues".

But if you stick a bunch of romexes together and run some current through them and make a video of it the CMP's will believe it is true, people are about to die if they don't do something, and make a new rule for a problem that never showed itself...."Practical Safeguarding" seems to take second place to somebody getting bragging rights about having a proposal accepted.
 
tonype said:
This is one area I have trouble with.
Click to expand...
We can't account for an inspectors thoughts or how they may or may not incorrectly apply 90.4. However, there are multiple issues in this installation from the issue of corrections (310.15(B)(2) needed (which they might have done) as well as in 300.11(C) depending on how you look at the method of support.

Then again.....as someone mentioned- the local AHJ might not have even seen the installation at all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top