Conduit VS sleeve

[acrwc10]

Dude, I'd be good at it.


I'd not only ALLOW NM to be protected in emt I would require ANY cable to be protected unless it was in the wall/attic. It cracks me up that cable can be strung outside a house but protecting NM with emt is considered unsafe. You can try ro defend it by saying "it's the law" but that don't make it right.

I would also ban underground IMC. In my illustrious career I have seen COUNTLESS failures of undergound RMC/IMC and ZERO failures of NM in conduit.

I would also ban the phrase "refer to section...." in the book and translate it to English.

I second that.
Although the book would be about 25 times thicker if they repeated all the sections that were related to each other. Maybe 250 times thicker. IMHO:smile:

 

[220/221]

I second that.
Although the book would be about 25 times thicker if they repeated all the sections that were related to each other. Maybe 250 times thicker. IMHO:smile:

If they put all the applicable info at the header of said sections it may be 25 time thinner.

I would organize that book like I do my truck and Stevie Wonder himself could find what he was looking for.

 

[iwire]

Dude, I'd be good at it.


I'd not only ALLOW NM to be protected in emt I would require ANY cable to be protected unless it was in the wall/attic. It cracks me up that cable can be strung outside a house but protecting NM with emt is considered unsafe. You can try ro defend it by saying "it's the law" but that don't make it right.

I would also ban underground IMC. In my illustrious career I have seen COUNTLESS failures of undergound RMC/IMC and ZERO failures of NM in conduit.

I would also ban the phrase "refer to section...." in the book and translate it to English.

You must be quite the electrician then.

You know more in your time in the trade then 100+ years of previous tradespeople?

Loosen up don't be offended I am trying to joke around and point out that the NEC was not written 800 years ago in some remote place.

It's not as easy as you think. You mentioned all the RMC / IMC failures you have seen and I believe you. But it is not the same all over the country in some areas the soil is not as tough on steel as it is in others. So your 'ban on RMC' would seem absurd to areas of the country that do not have the failure issue you see. Maybe your area should have a local amendment for this issue?

In my area EMT used outside rots out quickly....EMT outside in Arizona will last well past all our deaths. Should there be a National ban on EMT outdoors?

The code is tweaked every three years, if you have ideas submit them to the NFPA....not busting your chops I am dead serious.

We have quite a few members here that have made code proposals for the 2008 NEC and many of them have been accepted.

The 'average Joe' out in the field can propose a code change that does get accepted...it happens every three years.

I believe it was Don (a moderator here) that put in a proposal to make it clear that raceways outside are still wet locations. You could ask him directly why he felt the need for that.

I happen to agree with him, it has been a code violation for a while it just was not entirely clear...now it is and we may have to change how we work.

 

[George Stolz]

as to where it states metal raceways must be grounded. 250 96 a for one250 .90 for another.

But 250.86 exception 2 says I don't have to (aside from what 334.15(C) steals back from it in unfinished basements in dwelling units.)

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Bob,

I believe it was Don (a moderator here) that put in a proposal to make it clear that raceways outside are still wet locations. You could ask him directly why he felt the need for that.

Actually the main point of my proposal was to clarify this issue. There is a difference of opinion as to the question of the inside of the conduit being a wet location or not. By making a proposal, we get the panel's opinion on the issue. In this case they agreed and section was accepted. If they had rejected the proposal, then the panel would have been on record as saying that the inside of the conduit was not a wet location. Either way, there is a definitive answer to the question.
Don

 

[220/221]

You know more in your time in the trade then 100+ years of previous tradespeople?

I never claimed to know more than their collective knowledge but I obviously know more about some things. There are many cases where NM in conduit is prefectly safe and actually more a reliable installation with less splices.

in some areas the soil is not as tough on steel as it is in others.

I'ts not JUST the soil as the inside of the pipe starts to deteriorate and build up crap especially at the vertical 90's. It is next to impossible to pull new wiring after 5 years.

But...I will also break the code into regions to make sure my ban on UG IMC wasn't unilateral.




ONE problem is trying to cover every situation with one rule.

There is no way that everything outside should be consided a wet location. That in my opinion was short sighted and a mistake.

Another problem is the way the code keeps getting ammended not unlike a remodel. You think you are doing something good/right but it causes issues down the line that you didn't expect.

My advice on the code would be the same as I'd give to a person who wants to restote an old house. Take some pictures, knock the thing down and start from scratch. It will look the same but everything will be fully functioning and supportive.

Either way, there is a definitive answer to the question

.

That bothers me too. Either way, ((right or wrong)), at least there is an answer. Seems dumb.


I won't be around for the next few code changes. I'm goin fishin or something.

 

[1793]

...I won't be around for the next few code changes. I'm goin fishin or something.

Good for you. So, when are you leaving?

 

[220/221]

Good for you. So, when are you leaving?

The first time I get red tagged for sleeving NM

 

[tallguy]

I never claimed to know more than their collective knowledge but I obviously know more about some things. There are many cases where NM in conduit is prefectly safe and actually more a reliable installation with less splices.

The number of splices should be immaterial. If splices are so unreliable as to need to be considered in this fashion, we have way bigger fish to fry than whether or not NM can be inside a raceway in a wet location.

But...I will also break the code into regions to make sure my ban on UG IMC wasn't unilateral.

Can I get a variance if I live near the border?

My advice on the code would be the same as I'd give to a person who wants to restote an old house. Take some pictures, knock the thing down and start from scratch. It will look the same but everything will be fully functioning and supportive.

Details?

That bothers me too. Either way, ((right or wrong)), at least there is an answer. Seems dumb.

It clarifies the code. Another strategy is to make multiple proposals with alternative language in order to see which gets adopted (or none). It's the best methodology to get clarity. It's not possible for each CMP to hang around and kibbitz about every single line of the code.

I won't be around for the next few code changes. I'm goin fishin or something.

What?!? Come on.... there's a world to save here :smile: :roll:

 

[220/221]

The number of splices should be immaterial.

Not really. By reducing the number of splices you reduce the number of failures. That is why j boxes are to be accessible.

 

[Pierre C Belarge]

You actually can help to write the code. Maybe you should try to do some for the next code cycle. If you should decide to try, one thing you may experience is how difficult it actually is to write good code.


Your location, in regards to the outside of a building being a wet location is pretty interesting. You are probably in an area where you could honestly say it is technically not a wet location. Hence so many in your area install NM cable in raceways outdoors as an ordinary installation. I can understand your frustration.
In the northeast, the outside of buildings does cause issues you may not be aware of.


You probably do not see this:

or this

Maybe something like this

 

[220/221]

In the northeast, the outside of buildings does cause issues you may not be aware of.

I am aware that conditions are different. That is the basis of my arguement.

Simply because it is outside does not, sorry...should not, make it a wet location. If it gets wet under an eve or covered patio then you have some serious problems elsewhere.:smile:

I DO think however that being underground in all cases makes it a wet location. I don't believe I have EVER pulled any dry wire out of UG conduit unless it was freshly installed. Maybe sandy soil is different???

 

[don_resqcapt19]

That bothers me too. Either way, ((right or wrong)), at least there is an answer. Seems dumb.

Where there is a question that needs clarification there are only two ways to get a definitive answer as the the intended meaning of a code section. One is to request a formal interpretation (FI), the second is to get the panel to accept or reject a code change proposal. In either case the code making panel issues a panel statement that gives the reasons for their action. The panel statement has to be approved by 2/3 of the panel members just like what is required when the a panel issues a FI.
Don

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Simply because it is outside does not, sorry...should not, make it a wet location.If it gets wet under an eve or covered patio then you have some serious problems elsewhere.

And the code does not say if it is outside it is in a wet location. The examples you have given are often not wet locations. Those areas would be damp locations.

Location, Damp. Locations protected from weather and not subject to saturation with water or other liquids but subject to moderate degrees of moisture. Examples of such locations include partially protected locations under canopies, marquees, roofed open porches, and like locations, and interior locations subject to moderate degrees of moisture, such as some basements, some barns, and some cold-storage warehouses.

The code does not say that the interior of a conduit installed in a damp location is a wet location. It only says that the interior of conduits installed in a wet location is also a wet location.
Don

 

[LarryFine]

I am CERTAIN that the NEC allows (or doesn't prohibit) sleeving NM in conduit outdoors. It is done on every single residential rooftop AC unit . . .

Not the compliant ones.

Code section for a definition of "sleeve"?

Yes, NM may be sleeved, but only where the NM would otherwise be allowed. Sleeving does not change the "location."

Have you ever wired a resi rooftop AC?
Does your house have a rooftop AC?
Did you ever question it's compliance?
I still can't believe that it's a violation.

Yes, no, N/A, and 'believe it.'

The next question is "why is it done every single day?"

You'd have to ask the inspectors who are allowing it.

Eh...I'm goin with, the inside of the conduit is normally dry.

Not if it's outdoors. Keep in mind that the interior of conduit is not a location; the environment of the conduit is.

Alot of people don't wash thier hands after using the restroom either, dosn't mean they shouldn't , maybe its easier and quicker, But its still not healthy.

I don't know about you, but when I'm working, I wash my hands before using the facilities.

1) What is a "multi wire conductor" as referred to in 225.10 in the 2005 NEC?

2) How would you install the circuit to a residential rooftop AC?

1) It's "multi-conductor cable", and it's a cable that contains more than one conductor. However, that does not mean that every multi-conductor cable made may be used outdoors.

2) I use a water-tight raceway with individual conductors that are wet-use-rated, meaning a W in the type.

1) why is it allowed in literally milions of applications and
2) How do YOU do it?

1) It may be used in millions of apps, but that doesn't make it lega to do.

One more time.You have you NM running thru the attic and at some point it has to exit thru the roof and go to the AC unit. How do you get it there?

If your home run is NM, you must transition to another wiring method before passing through the building envelope.

The other option is to use an exterior-compliant wiring method for the entire branch circuit.

I'd not only ALLOW NM to be protected in emt I would require ANY cable to be protected unless it was in the wall/attic. It cracks me up that cable can be strung outside a house but protecting NM with emt is considered unsafe.

Again, it is permissible to protect cables with conduit, but that does not change the permitted location of each cable type. For example, NM can be sleeved indoors and UF can be sleeved outdoors.

 

[220/221]

The code does not say that the interior of a conduit installed in a damp location is a wet location. It only says that the interior of conduits installed in a wet location is also a wet location.

So.....can I sleeve NM in a damp location?

 

[nakulak]

maybe its cause we do mostly commercial work, but I don't understand why anyone would want to run any cables in raceways (other than specialized com cables). Its almost always cheaper to run individual conductors, and putting the cable in the raceway, even if its rated for it, makes it harder to pull and in my opinion only serves as a fire hazard - trapping more heat and providing fuel for a fire (especially in the case of nm) (just my opinion)

 

[LarryFine]

So.....can I sleeve NM in a damp location?

That depends on your take on 334.12(A)(10)d.

 

[220/221]

maybe its cause we do mostly commercial work, but I don't understand why anyone would want to run any cables in raceways (other than specialized com cables). Its almost always cheaper to run individual conductors, and putting the cable in the raceway, even if its rated for it, makes it harder to pull and in my opinion only serves as a fire hazard - trapping more heat and providing fuel for a fire (especially in the case of nm) (just my opinion)

In resi work where all the wiring is NM, it makes sense to stub the cable out of the building to your AC, eve lights or new circuits from the outdoor panel.....and then sleeve them for protection.

 

[LarryFine]

In resi work where all the wiring is NM, it makes sense to stub the cable out of the building to your AC, eve lights or new circuits from the outdoor panel.....and then sleeve them for protection.

Yes, but you would not use NM inside the AC whips from the disco to the compressor unit; you'd use wet-rated conductors.