Conduit VS sleeve

[220/221]

Help me out here. 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 with a short piece of emt, adapted to sealtite then to the disco.

I also have done it countless times running a new residential circuit from the exterior service a few feet into the attic.

I understand the outside is a wet/damp location and requires something like thhwn but I am assuming that there HAS to be an exception to allow this sleeving to protect the NM from damage.

I HAVE spent an hour looking myself but to no avail.

Point me in the right direction and I'll look it up. I have a 2005 book.

Thanks

 

[Jim W in Tampa]

As sleeving yes however if its now in emt that is outside then you have violation because romex is not rated for wet.You could use UF cable

 

[220/221]

As sleeving yes however if its now in emt that is outside then you have violation because romex is not rated for wet.

Code section for a definition of "sleeve"?

It's GOTTA be somewhere because there are appx a MILLION rooftop AC's in my area alone that use this method.

You could use UF cable

Heh heh...I'd rather rub sand in my eyes.

 

[raider1]

Code section for a definition of "sleeve"?

It's GOTTA be somewhere because there are appx a MILLION rooftop AC's in my area alone that use this method.





Heh heh...I'd rather rub sand in my eyes.

Just because it is done in a million places does not mean that it is code compliant.

Installing NM cable in a raceway that is in a wet location is a violation. The interior of a raceway is not a separate location, therfore if the raceway is in a wet location the interior of the raceway is in a wet location and you must install conductors that are listed for use in a wet location.

Here is a quote from the 2005 NEC Handbook:

It is intended that the inside of a raceway in a wet location or a raceway installed underground be considered a wet location. Therefore, any conductors contained therein would be required to be suitable for wet locations.

I understand that the Handbook comentary is not code.

Also a new section has been added to Article 300 in the 2008 NEC that addresses this:

300.9 Raceways in Wet Locations Above Grade. Where raceways are installed in wet locations abovegrade, the interior of these raceways shall be considered to be a wet location. Insulated conductors and cables installed in raceways in wet locations above grade shall comply with 310.8(C)

Chris

 

[220/221]

It is intended that the inside of a raceway in a wet location or a raceway installed underground be considered a wet location. Therefore, any conductors contained therein would be required to be suitable for wet locations.

N/A...underground

Just because it is done in a million places does not mean that it is code compliant.

No but it strongly SUGGESTS that it is.

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.



Can anyone define "multi conductor cable" for me. I am tring to decipher 225.10

 

[iwire]

I still can't believe that it's a violation.

Believe it.

Can anyone define "multi conductor cable" for me. I am trying to decipher 225.10

Perhaps UF cable.

 

[Jim W in Tampa]

Believe it.



Perhaps UF cable.

I already suggested UF ,seems he dont wanta takle that tuff stuff LOL

 

[220/221]

Believe it..

Has this question ever been brought up ? Is it one of those ground pin up/down things ?


Somebody HAS to have questioned this. AZ can't be the only place in the nation with resi RTU's.

Perhaps UF cable.

Then Perhaps NM?:wink:

 

[acrwc10]

Has this question ever been brought up ? Is it one of those ground pin up/down things ?


Somebody HAS to have questioned this. AZ can't be the only place in the nation with resi RTU's.




Then Perhaps NM?:wink:

Just cause a bunch of guys don't know its not code doesn't make it right.
No matter if the inspector catches it or not , It doesn't make it right.
No matter how much you wish it were allowed, it isn't.
Just because it works doesn't make it correct.
I'll stop now, I hope you get the point

 

[electricmanscott]

Has this question ever been brought up ? Is it one of those ground pin up/down things ?

It is not one of those things it is code and yes it has been brought up and yes the NEC has adressed it. It seems that for some reason you don't want to accept it.

 

[220/221]

Just cause a bunch of guys don't know its not code doesn't make it right.
No matter if the inspector catches it or not , It doesn't make it right.

A bunch of guys?

How about everybody?

I would feel better about it if someone told be "We do so and so here to insure a legal installation" or "We have been doing that forever and it's just accepted".

I'd feel better if someone said "I have never done it" or "I always do it".

I'm gonna keep bumping this thread till someone fesses up.:smile:

Or should I shut up and not make waves?

It is not one of those things it is code and yes it has been brought up and yes the NEC has adressed it. It seems that for some reason you don't want to accept it.

Help me accept it. Tell me what YOU do to keep compliant. Tell me what the contractors in YOUR area do to keep compliant.


Also....define "multi conductor cable". You keep skipping that one.

 

[infinity]

N/A...underground

You didn't read the quote, it says raceways in wet locations or underground. Either condition will make the inside of the raceway a wet location.

It is intended that the inside of a raceway in a wet location or a raceway installed underground be considered a wet location. Therefore, any conductors contained therein would be required to be suitable for wet locations.

 

[electricmanscott]

I'm not saying I have never done it but I am not saying that makes it right or legal. It is neither. Deal with it.

You'll never find me claiming to have never knowingly have violated a code rule. I work in the real world, the NEC does not always take that into account.

 

[220/221]

You didn't read the quote, it says raceways in wet locations or underground. Either condition will make the inside of the raceway a wet location.

I understand and I am not disputing that.


So far the answer seems to be "not allowed".


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

There is also the "multi cable conductor" question.

Yeah. I'm stubborn

 

[220/221]

Deal with it

No need to be snippy. I am just looking for opinions and answers. You can move on if you like.


I am the kind of guy that like to know "why".

 

[electricmanscott]

So far the answer seems to be "not allowed".


Yeah. I'm stubborn

Come on now you're just playing with us.

The answer does not "seem to be" not allowed, The answer is just plain "not allowed"

 

[electricmanscott]

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

Why do people speed everyday?
Why do people kill everyday?
Why do people steal everyday?
Why do people cheat everyday?

 

[andinator]

I bet there are a jillion AC units in Atlanta that have #12,10,8,or 6 NM jammed thru the sealtite from the disonnect to the unit. I know that I did every home I ever wired this way...I'll fess up. Often I'd "strip the whip" to make it easier to get thru there... but thats a violation of 310.11 ain't it. I'm going straight to ****.

 

[electricmanscott]

Taking a cue from the New England Patriots, I am running up the score! :grin:

 

[220/221]

"Type NM cable shall be permitted as follows: For both exposed and concealed work in normally dry locations..."

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