Burrito Q: Fastening of EMT

Learn the NEC with Mike Holt now!

Burrito Q: Fastening of EMT

  • Total voters
    72
Status
Not open for further replies.
jusme123 said:
polls wrong roger!:cool:
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter what any individual thinks, the numbers are what they are. If the poll was not meant to play a part in this it wouldn't/shouldn't have been started

Roger
 
Again, I'll assert that something is wrong with the text of 358.30. The only way it can be "(A)" AND "(B)" is if the EMT is secured as required by "(A)" and is supported by passing through framing members as required by "(B)". "(B)" doesn't say any other type of support is "permitted". Does that seem reasonable? Is EMT only allowed to be used when supported by passing through framing members (ignoring the exception in "(C)")?
 
Can anyone who is on the must do both side explain the purpose of B since A requires more? If you have to do both, what is the purpose of B?

Anyone?

What is the purpose of B (since A more than covers it)?

Anyone?
 
SAC said:
Again, I'll assert that something is wrong with the text of 358.30. The only way it can be "(A)" AND "(B)" is if the EMT is secured as required by "(A)" and is supported by passing through framing members as required by "(B)". "(B)" doesn't say any other type of support is "permitted". Does that seem reasonable? Is EMT only allowed to be used when supported by passing through framing members (ignoring the exception in "(C)")?
Click to expand...

Excellent point. If you have to do both, then you can only use EMT when running through framing members. We all know that is not true, therefore, it cannot be both A&B are required.
 
Once again i will point out that doing A does not always result in supporting. Many conduits are very heavy after filled with copper wire. A simple 1 hole strap might be enough to keep it from moving put alone can not support the weight. That is why we have both A and B.
B alone does not do what was required in A and doing only A may not support the weight.
KEY WORD that 60 % have missed here is the word AND.

A only covers securing
B only covers supporting
We need both not just one
Nothing in B even suggests we can ignore B
All B said is that framing can be the support, it does not say it is a means of securing.
A and B are not one section they are 2
B is not an acception it is in addition to A
It is in black and white with normal words
The word AND will never mean EITHER
 
Jim W in Tampa said:
Once again i will point out that doing A does not always result in supporting.
Click to expand...

Once again I will point out that if in performing A you are not supporting, then you indeed are not doing A.

Jim, it's poorly written, we all agree.

We also can look in the handbook and see where a reference to the section covering IMC is mentioned and that section has a drawing showing exactly what the majority is saying is allowed. B also says if you support through the framing members and securely fasten within 3' (of a box), that's all you need to do.

I'm not trying to be insulting when I say this, but you are just being hard headed.

I'm done with this thread.
 
Jim W in Tampa said:
Once again i will point out that doing A does not always result in supporting.
Click to expand...

Jim, I am asking you nicely, no kidding around, read the posts below carefully and consider you statement that both A AND B must be complied with.

Do you really believe that EMT can only be run horizontally in framing members?


SAC said:
Again, I'll assert that something is wrong with the text of 358.30. The only way it can be "(A)" AND "(B)" is if the EMT is secured as required by "(A)" and is supported by passing through framing members as required by "(B)". "(B)" doesn't say any other type of support is "permitted". Does that seem reasonable? Is EMT only allowed to be used when supported by passing through framing members (ignoring the exception in "(C)")?
Click to expand...

hardworkingstiff said:
Excellent point. If you have to do both, then you can only use EMT when running through framing members. We all know that is not true, therefore, it cannot be both A&B are required.
Click to expand...

Jim if you refuse to see the problem as outlined above I will simply chock it up to not being able to admit you have been wrong in this thread. It is not a big deal, as we both agree, anyone can be wrong.
 
iwire said:
. . . I will simply chock it up to not being able to admit you have been wrong in this thread
Click to expand...

? Person 1 says, ?The sky is blue.?
? Person 2 says, ?The grass is green.?
? Question: Which person is wrong?

Or how about this?
? Person 1 (Jim or Charlie, perhaps) says, ?The book tells us to do A and B.?
? Person 2 (Bob or Roger, perhaps) says, ?That does not make sense (for all these good reasons), and therefore cannot possibly be what the CMP intended.
? Question: Which person is wrong?

Or how about this?
? The book says what the book says, and what the book says is "do A and B."
? If you do not like what the book says, or if you think the book cannot be followed as written, then there is a process you can follow to get the book changed.
? In the mean time, it is perhaps not appropriate to say "Person 1 is wrong," since the book has not yet been changed.
 
charlie b said:
? Person 1 says, ?The sky is blue.?
? Person 2 says, ?The grass is green.?
? Question: Which person is wrong?

Or how about this?
? Person 1 (Jim or Charlie, perhaps) says, ?The book tells us to do A and B.?
? Person 2 (Bob or Roger, perhaps) says, ?That does not make sense (for all these good reasons), and therefore cannot possibly be what the CMP intended.
? Question: Which person is wrong?

Or how about this?
? The book says what the book says, and what the book says is "do A and B."
? If you do not like what the book says, or if you think the book cannot be followed as written, then there is a process you can follow to get the book changed.
? In the mean time, it is perhaps not appropriate to say "Person 1 is wrong," since the book has not yet been changed.
Click to expand...

Or how about this, the poll is what it is, there are winners and there are loosers. :grin:

Roger
 
Bob, hard headed fits both of us.
I never said anything about conduit only being ran horizontal.
We can not use the hanbook period and you know why so get over it.
All we have is what is writen and we must follow that and only that.
As i been saying my issue is over that one little word AND . I know your smart enough to read english and know what the word AND means.
Now just as soon as we get them to change that AND to OR i will change my mind.
Highlite the part of B that you believe says we do not need A.

B is only talking about SUPPORT and it says framing can be permited as SUPPORT it never sait it was support and securing because it is not secured if just laying there.
I can't see any way to read into what was not said.
We will just have to agree to disagree.
 
This has been informative, but I don't think we should view poll results as "I'm right and you're wrong". I voted compliant because I believe that is the intent(my interpretation). I also believe the use of the "AND" word is incorrect in this case. Since there are many sharp people out there who voted "No", could there be room for interpretation? Was anyone here on the panel that wrote those sections? I am more curious to know whether anyone has been cited for such an installation. I do see this done regularly, but always with additional tie wire. You guys/gals are great. Early Happy Father's Day to all you dads....
 
Jim W in Tampa said:
As i been saying my issue is over that one little word AND.
Click to expand...
This has been said before but I think it bears repeating. 358.30 can be paraphrased as follows:

358.30 Install EMT in accordance with 358.30(A) and 358.30(B) or [. . .]
358.30(A) Do X, Y, and Z.
358.30(B) In some situations, doing A and B "shall be permitted."

This language "shall be permitted" certainly imposes no additional requirements. You never have to do something that "shall be permitted." It just offers an alternative way of doing something, in this case an alternative to 358.30(A).

So my point is that "AND" does not imply an additional requirement, just an additional rule to read. That rule might provide more leeway, not less.

Cheers, Wayne
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top