Conduit Securing

[bphgravity]

My question concerns the specific language of the Article 3XX.30 sections of the 2002 NEC. For all the conduit and raceway systems, the code states; "shall be securely fastened within X mm (x ft) of each outlet box, junction box, device box, cabinet, conduit body, or other tubing termination."

Under the cabling methods, the same section specfically mentions "fitting." (334.30)

With that in mind, suppose you have a run of EMT conduit that is installed parallel to a large cabinet of panelboard. The conduit terminates near the bottom of the panel, but is run along the length of the side of the equipment. According to the language, I could secure the conduit 3 feet above the panel and would be compliant, even though there may be another 2'11" of remaining conduit to the actual termination.

I am not trying to beat the code or actually get away with this, but I think it is interesting that the word fitting is not used in these sections. I know the codes intent is a linear length from termination and not proximity location from any raceway point to the enclosure point, but there is the potential of this being abused. Any thoughts?

 

[stamcon]

Re: Conduit Securing

Bryan, with cable, a fitting will be used at a termination. With a conduit, a coupling is a fitting. The wording "other tubing termination" says the strap is to be within 3' of the termination(connection to box, etc.).

 

[iwire]

Re: Conduit Securing

Bryan, After getting the responses on this topic.

Other Tubing Terminations and 358.30(A)

I was thinking and realized I could put five two foot (or even ten one foot) sections of EMT together and still only need a support every ten feet.

That is not likely but what about when using premade bends like back to back 45 degree sweeps for making an offset, than into a 90 degree sweep, no requirement to support this if it is all in ten feet.

I think the word fitting should have remained, part of the support requirement.

[ May 06, 2003, 05:10 AM: Message edited by: iwire ]

 

[bphgravity]

Re: Conduit Securing

Thanks Bob!

I forgot about that post.

stamcon, I read "other tubing terminations" as being the enclosure or object that the conduit is terminating to that was not specificaly stated before it, and not necessarily the actual part (fitting) that does the terminating.

 

[bonding jumper]

Re: Conduit Securing

Does anybody see anything wrong with this picture?

These wires are feeders to apartments in a 3 story townhouse building. The large conduit on the right is the feeder supplying the main disconnect panel for the townhouse, the smaller conduits go to apartment panels, should they have been attached to the main panel with proper fittings and a bonding jumper? The main disconnect panel looks like this:

THanks a lot.

 

[bennie]

Re: Conduit Securing

Are the conduits only sleeves through the concrete floor? If so, the only thing that hurts me is my eyes get sore looking at the mess

 

[bonding jumper]

Re: Conduit Securing

I think they are only sleeves, are u suggesting that if they are only sleeves, that there would be a ground in the cloth NM cable to ground the apartment panels? if there is, then no problems, but if there is no ground in the NM then the conduits need to be fastened to the panel and properly bonded?
Note: just fits that my Username applys to this

 

[bennie]

Re: Conduit Securing

The feeders may be service entrance conductors to each apartment. This was the wiring method in the past. Each panel will have one or more mains up to six.

The cable will likely have 3 conductors. The neutral will be connected to the conductive surfaces in the panel. This is a safe technique.

 

[bonding jumper]

Re: Conduit Securing

Ok, thanks Bennie, Much apreciated
Sorry about the big pictures

[ May 06, 2003, 04:32 PM: Message edited by: bonding jumper ]