So this is my first time using this site and first question and not sure I'm in the right forum or not, but here goes. 392.60A states that cabletrays supporting nonpower conductors shall be electrically continuous through approved connections or bonding jumpers. So then it shall be bonded in accordance with 250 and more specifically 250.96A for determining size of bonding jumper and 250.102E3 which sends us to 250.64B which states that bonding jumpers smaller than 6awg shall be protected by RMC, IMC, PVC, RTRC, EMT, or cable armor. So if I'm interpreting this correctly than any bonding jumper smaller than 6awg must be protected eventhough code allows a 14awg bonding jumper in certain installations. If I'm correct this far than eventhough communications circuits are installed and can span over transitional sections without protection if not exposed to physical damage than my 14awg bonding jumper technically must be installed in according to 250.102E3 which requires it to be protected according to 250.64B. Do you think a proposal should be made to allow cabletrays that require bonding jumpers to not have to be protected in accordance with 250.102? Sure using the products approved bonding means would be a easy remedy for not going through all that, but if a metallic cabletray transitions then seems like if the communication circuits can span unprotected a 14awg bonding conductor could too.
cabletrays
- Thread starter stephena
- Start date
- Status
- Location
- Massachusetts
Putting the question of a code change aside I would simply run 4 AWG bonding jumpers. It seems to be what other folks do as well.
What kind of cable tray are you running? Metal cable tray is typically continuous through proper use of splice plates and only needs bonding at one point... unless you want to carry that bond to other equipment, such as GES bonding at one end then bonding equipment enclosures at the other end or along the cable tray's route.
Even so, I'm in agreement with Bob (iwire). Most just run a #4 bonding jumper and be done with it.
Even so, I'm in agreement with Bob (iwire). Most just run a #4 bonding jumper and be done with it.
cabletray bonding
cabletray bonding
It is a metallic cabletray and I agree on using a #4 to just be done with it, but if a have a transitional separation and need to bond and can run say CATV without protection why would I have to protect my #14 bonding conductor? Seems like overkill. Especially for cabletrays used exclusively for nonpower conductors.
cabletray bonding
It is a metallic cabletray and I agree on using a #4 to just be done with it, but if a have a transitional separation and need to bond and can run say CATV without protection why would I have to protect my #14 bonding conductor? Seems like overkill. Especially for cabletrays used exclusively for nonpower conductors.
I cannot answer your question, and it's a valid point. Perhaps you should propose a change for 2017 and see what the CMP says.
- Status