Can an angle flex connector be used to enter the rear of surface mounted box?

J2H

Member
Location
Wisconsin
Occupation
Broadcast Engineer/Licensed Electrician
Just wondering if it is a violation to use an angle flex connector for something that is surface mounted and can be easily removed, specifically thinking of a Tesla wall connector. It seems to come down to the definition of concealed and is the connector truly concealed.
 
It seems to come down to the definition of concealed and is the connector truly concealed.
I agree, so is it concealed or isn't it? The purpose of this code section is to allow conductors to be pulled into the raceway without removing the equipment.
 
I agree, so is it concealed or isn't it? The purpose of this code section is to allow conductors to be pulled into the raceway without removing the equipment.
That makes sense, if that is the intent of the code section, it would be concealed and would be a violation.
 
I come to this problem with surface mounted automatic transfer switches on a stud wall, frequently.

I don't know the best solution.

I have used an oversized angle flex and connector and easily fished in the wires I needed, despite what the code says.
 
I come to this problem with surface mounted automatic transfer switches on a stud wall, frequently.

I don't know the best solution.

I have used an oversized angle flex and connector and easily fished in the wires I needed, despite what the code says.
did inspector(s) approve it or did they not know about it? or was it not inspected?

Access means from back side would be code acceptable, most probably won't want that though.
 
Were the conductors fished after it was installed or was this installed like a piece of cable? Would it really be defined as a "raceway"? Whoops,,, see "fished". Whoops again,,, wires pulled might be more accurate. If the whole thing could be pulled like an assembly then it could be fished?
 
Last edited:
did inspector(s) approve it or did they not know about it? or was it not inspected?

Access means from back side would be code acceptable, most probably won't want that though.
It was inspected but they just do not look at that level of detail and I doubt they would know that obscure snippet anyway. This problem generally only happens on resi installs and the inspectors often pass other hacks running exposed THHN in the wall, in situations like this.
Were the conductors fished after it was installed or was this installed like a piece of cable? Would it really be defined as a "raceway"? Whoops,,, see "fished". Whoops again,,, wires pulled might be more accurate. If the whole thing could be pulled like an assembly then it could be fished?
I think I used 1.25" or 1.5", and the FMC run less than a foot, just poke the wires in one end and they come right out the other.

I wonder if there would be some creative way to use gutter but this is the best I can think of for now. As it is, fresh generator installations have reached saturation so not at the top of my list of things to worry about.
 
Were the conductors fished after it was installed or was this installed like a piece of cable? Would it really be defined as a "raceway"? Whoops,,, see "fished". Whoops again,,, wires pulled might be more accurate. If the whole thing could be pulled like an assembly then it could be fished?
Nothing in the code supports that idea. The system is a raceway, not a cable. If you think a change is needed, you have until April 9th to submit a public input to make a change for 2029 NEC.
 
Where did I imply a change was needed? I actually asked a question. I never had an iea good enuf for a change and dont look to have any in the near future. I like to hear the experts pontificate about it and if no one asks anything (sometimes stuff we even know the answers too) it goes dead quickly.
 
Top