Category 5e in conduit?

[hbiss]

For NEC 2011.
I guess it depends on the AHJ and Engineer in charge... beyond the 725 and 800 debate...

There is no debate and it's not up to the AHJ or an engineer. The code is quite clear.

For NEC 2011.
From what I see the data in 800 refers to Shielded Twisted Pair for WAN and LAN Ethernet communication within a building.

I wonder if you are reading the same book as I am. Please quote that data.

For NEC 2011.
Under 800.2 a communications raceway is defined as nonmetallic, and a circular raceway is a conduit, so to me there is no confusion that this type of wiring method (sch 40 and 80 PVC) is approved if I choose to use it.

"Communications Raceway
An enclosed channel of nonmetallic
materials designed for holding communications
wires and cables in plenum, riser, and general-purpose applications."

Sounds to me like they are describing a cable tray. I see nothing about circular, do you? At any rate you will not get away with installing PVC in a plenum or air handling space.

For NEC 2011.
It may be more productive to focus on addressing the routing of data (Cat5e) and signal (Class 2), in the same vicinity as AC power and electrical noise sources. Because once wiring method is selected we then have to decide how to route it.

No, not here because that is a design issue, not an NEC issue.

I suggest that instead of being argumentative you make an effort to understand what we are trying to tell you.

-Hal

 

[MarineTech]

Thanks to all, especially to hbiss and hurk27 in the use of 725.

My install is running telephone in the same tray(s) and conduits as Computer Ethernet (CAT5e) . For computer ethernet, from what I see, is NEC 2011 725 Class 2 covered under part III. So I am trying to resolve the mixup.

I think my misunderstanding in drawing reference to 800 cable listing was due to 725.139(D)(1).

 

[hbiss]

Although the NEC puts data cabling under Art 725, it doesn't define it as a CL2 or CL3 circuit. So for all intents and purposes you can treat it as a communications circuit and run it with CL2 and CL3 where allowed by 725.

-Hal

 

[MarineTech]

Hi,

Just to follow up.

The 725 or 800 debate that I mentioned seems to revolve around systems that integrate phone (or telephone derived connections) with computer data (Ethernet to computers, or a computer terminal (dedicated computer like a cash register)).

Perhaps more importantly to me and the original poster, was the routing (NEC, AHJ, and Engineer specified) that gave routing methods per HVAC return air (no plenum feeds in my case), and the separation distance, how to handle parallel runs per kVA, tray sharing, conduit crossing at 90 degrees and CAT cable distance from noise sources like Fluorescent lights, Motors and Motor controllers.

I would like to add, that the routing of the CAT5e or CAT6, can be rather generic (from a drawing standpoint) in feeds from a low voltage panel (Patch panel), through conduit, to a data outlet receptacle(destination) in final function as per NEC Article. The Engineer and Architect may use the term data when it really refers to phone + data.

 

[hbiss]

The 725 or 800 debate that I mentioned seems to revolve around systems that integrate phone (or telephone derived connections) with computer data (Ethernet to computers, or a computer terminal (dedicated computer like a cash register)).

If it makes you feel any better I have always disagreed with the NEC's decision to include data wiring in Art 725 rather than 800. Ethernet (Art 725) is no different than analog or digital voice wiring (Art 800) that originates from a PBX or phone system. It's only, I believe, in the 2011 code that they actually stated that data is covered by 725. So even if they settled the debate there is still disagreement.

-Hal