Conductor definition

Status
Not open for further replies.

Pharon

Senior Member
Location
MA
Anyone else find it odd that the word "conductor" is not defined anywhere in the Code?

Bare Conductor, Covered Conductor, and Insulated Conductor are defined, but only by using the word "conductor" to describe them (which seems a bit circular to me).

Maybe it's nitpicking and obvious, but I would think that a word this important, and used so often, should have its own description. No? Or maybe it does and I just can't seem to locate it.
 
Maybe the dictionary definition of the word was deemed sufficient enough that no additional definition was necessary.

Same goes for other words that are used frequently but already have a sufficient definition in other common sources like volts or amps.
 
Between the title and requirements of 310 it kind of tells us the general definition of the word conductor as well as how it is used throughout the rest of the code. Many times when referring to a conductor in other areas the text refers us back to conductors as covered in 310.

Otherwise the dictionary definition of conductor would include any thing that conducts electricity, where most NEC use of the word goes a little beyond that and is somewhat limited to intentional current paths by a conductor made for the purpose, but there kind of is exceptions to that as well.
 
My thought process on this started when looking at 215.10, where ground fault protection is required for feeders immediately downstream of a SDS, over 1000A on 480V. And then I wanted confirmation that a feeder included both insulated conductors as well as switchgear bussing... which is obvious, but I was hoping it was spelled out clearly somewhere.

But for the definition of a feeder, all it says is: "All circuit conductors between the service equipment, the source of a separately derived system, or other power supply source and the final branch-circuit overcurrent device."

Which begs the question, what's a conductor?

Like I said -- probably nitpicking. If volts and amps aren't defined, then conductors probably don't need to be, either.
 
Anyone else find it odd that the word "conductor" is not defined anywhere in the Code?

Bare Conductor, Covered Conductor, and Insulated Conductor are defined, but only by using the word "conductor" to describe them (which seems a bit circular to me).

Maybe it's nitpicking and obvious, but I would think that a word this important, and used so often, should have its own description. No? Or maybe it does and I just can't seem to locate it.

I agree. I have wondered the same also. It may be to broad of a definition to nail down though. There are so many elements on this planet that are conductors. Then there is water...the earth...and air given the right conditions.

I'll take a shot at a definition as related to our industry though...

CONDUCTOR: A substance that allows charged particles to move through it freely as a direct response to an electric field.
 
Definition of the word conductor is still a general term that is defined by a dictionary.

Then there is this:

310.10 Uses Permitted. The conductors described in
310.104 shall be permitted for use in any of the wiring
methods covered in Chapter 3 and as specified in their
respective tables or as permitted elsewhere in this Code.


Which tells us the conductors used for chapter 3 wiring methods need to be a type mentioned in 310.104.


There is also this:

368.2 Definition.


Busway. A grounded metal enclosure containing factory
mounted, bare or insulated conductors, which are usually
copper or aluminum bars, rods, or tubes.

It is also describing a conductor, but is not typically a field installed conductor in this case.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top