Conduits must be installed complete before conductors are pulled but 90° liquidtight connectors are not allowed to be concealed (wink wink).

[yesterlectric]

Conduits are supposed to be completely installed before conductors are pulled but 90° liquid tight connectors are not allowed to be concealed (wink wink). I’m seeing an application where someone used 90° liquid tight connectors for feeders on panelboards probably 200-400 A. I don’t like it, but I see nothing against it. Is there anything against it?

 

[infinity]

If they used LFMC with a listed 90° connector it is code compliant.

 

[electrofelon]

Does there need to be an exception to the "raceways to be installed complete" rule for 45 and 90 degree LFMC connectors?

 

[ptonsparky]

Does there need to be an exception to the "raceways to be installed complete" rule for 45 and 90 degree LFMC connectors?

O geez, please don't suggest that. Who knows what that will lead to..

 

[Fred B]

Does there need to be an exception to the "raceways to be installed complete" rule for 45 and 90 degree LFMC connectors?

There already is an exception in 300.18 that would apply to the fitting of the LFMC. And if you are to think about it the practicality of being able to "pull" wire through the LFMC 90 would be near impossible.

Also the additional requirement in 350.42 would prohibit the concealed use of such fittings.
350.42 Couplings and Connectors.
Only fittings listed for use with LFMC shall be used. Angle connectors shall not be concealed. Straight LFMC fittings shall be permitted for direct burial where marked.

 

[infinity]

Does there need to be an exception to the "raceways to be installed complete" rule for 45 and 90 degree LFMC connectors?

There should be some wording that states that angle connectors are permitted to be installed after the conductors are pulled into the raceway.

 

[Fred B]

There should be some wording that states that angle connectors are permitted to be installed after the conductors are pulled into the raceway.

300.18(A) ..... Where required to facilitate the installation of utilization equipment, the raceway shall be permitted to be initially installed without a terminating connection at the equipment. .....

350 has nothing implicant within to prohibit a non-complete raceway, only found in 300 that also includes the allowance reference above.

 

[infinity]

300.18(A) ..... Where required to facilitate the installation of utilization equipment, the raceway shall be permitted to be initially installed without a terminating connection at the equipment. .....

That section states that the raceway may be installed prior to the install the utilization equipment typically when the equipment isn't on-site and will be installed at a later date. I'm not seeing that applying directly to using an angle connector on a complete raceway system into a panel which is why I agree with electrofelon about some wording being needed.

 

[electrofelon]

There already is an exception in 300.18 that would apply to the fitting of the LFMC. And if you are to think about it the practicality of being able to "pull" wire through the LFMC 90 would be near impossible.

I pull thru 90s pretty frequently. 45s arnt bad at all.

 

[infinity]

I pull thru 90s pretty frequently. 45s arnt bad at all.

For small stranded conductors that works.

 

[wwhitney]

I'm not seeing that applying directly to using an angle connector on a complete raceway system into a panel which is why I agree with electrofelon about some wording being needed.

Fred's post is missing some key context. From the start of 300.18(A):

300.18 Raceway Installations.
(A) Complete Runs. Raceways, other than busways or exposed raceways having hinged or removable covers, shall be installed complete between outlet, junction, or splicing points prior to the installation of conductors. Where required to facilitate the installation of utilization equipment, the raceway shall be permitted to be initially installed without a terminating connection at the equipment.

So seeing as how the second sentence immediately follows the requirement to install complete raceways systems prior to installation of conductors, it implies that when installing the raceway without a terminating connection, you may pull the conductors in before the installing the terminating connection. Which is the permission you want when using angle connectors.

One issue I see is that the second sentence only refers to utilization equipment, which wouldn't cover the use of angle connectors at a panelboard, say.

Cheers, Wayne

 

[don_resqcapt19]

That section states that the raceway may be installed prior to the install the utilization equipment typically when the equipment isn't on-site and will be installed at a later date. I'm not seeing that applying directly to using an angle connector on a complete raceway system into a panel which is why I agree with electrofelon about some wording being needed.

I agree.

(A) Complete Runs.
Raceways other than busways, listed manufactured assemblies in accordance with 604.100, or exposed raceways having hinged or removable covers shall be installed complete between outlet, junction, or splicing points prior to the installation of conductors or cables. Where required to facilitate the installation of utilization equipment, the raceway shall be permitted to be initially installed without a terminating connection at the equipment. Prewired raceway assemblies shall be permitted only where specifically permitted in this Code for the applicable wiring method.

The second sentence acts as an exception to the first, but the exception is only to the termination of the raceway at the equipment, not to the installation of the angle connection to the raceway.

Note: not a real world issue, as I have never seen a LFMC angle connector installed prior to pulling the conductors. On most of my industrial work, the conductors are pulled and left hanging at conduit bodies, and the LFMC and associated connectors installed after the instrumentation or equipment has been installed.

 

[wwhitney]

The second sentence acts as an exception to the first, but the exception is only to the termination of the raceway at the equipment, not to the installation of the angle connection to the raceway.

You can make it a violation by interpreting "terminating connection" narrowly to not include the actually terminating fitting. I prefer to interpret it a bit more broadly as including the terminating fitting, so that the existing text covers standard practice.

Cheers, Wayne

 

[wwhitney]

P.S. Looking at the definition of the term "raceway" it is arguable that the box connector itself is not part of the raceway (although I haven't contemplated the further implications of such an interpretation), and that installing the box connector on the raceway is the "terminating connection."

Cheers, Wayne

 

[don_resqcapt19]

You can make it a violation by interpreting "terminating connection" narrowly to not include the actually terminating fitting. I prefer to interpret it a bit more broadly as including the terminating fitting, so that the existing text covers standard practice.

Cheers, Wayne

Why would we ever want to read the code the way it is used in the real world?

 

[infinity]

The raceway cannot be complete without the fittings so the argument is weak at best .

 

[wwhitney]

The raceway cannot be complete without the fittings so the argument is weak at best .

But sentence two of 300.18(A) gives you permission to install the conductors (in some cases) when the raceway is only "almost complete.". So all is good.

Cheers, Wayne