emt codes

Status
Not open for further replies.

normbac

Senior Member
was on a job site today and I noticed in stock room that the 1x4 fluorescent fixtures were hanging by jack chain and the rows were joined by emt from fixtures end to end. approx 4 ft between fixtures. Is it permissable to do this since there is no straping of the emt within 3 ft of connectors.
 

Smart $

Esteemed Member
Location
Ohio
was on a job site today and I noticed in stock room that the 1x4 fluorescent fixtures were hanging by jack chain and the rows were joined by emt from fixtures end to end. approx 4 ft between fixtures. Is it permissable to do this since there is no straping of the emt within 3 ft of connectors.
IMO, no.

Some view 358.30(A), or Exception No. 1 thereto as permitting a section 3' or 5', respectively, or less to be unsecured. But that's not actually what it says... because it uses the word "within". On the other hand, if you had a section no longer than enough to fit in the connectors, why should it need securing, and how would you secure it???

Another section which applies is 300.11...
(A) Secured in Place. Raceways, cable assemblies, boxes,
cabinets, and fittings shall be securely fastened in place.
Support wires that do not provide secure support shall not
be permitted as the sole support. Support wires and associated
fittings that provide secure support and that are installed
in addition to the ceiling grid support wires shall be
permitted as the sole support. Where independent support
wires are used, they shall be secured at both ends. Cables
and raceways shall not be supported by ceiling grids.

I seem to recall something about not having to secure short sections of raceway, but can't locate anything at present...
 

Smart $

Esteemed Member
Location
Ohio
How about hanging a threaded rod with a may-west in the middle of each EMT section ?

I think that would cover support but not securing.

Bob, are you saying that you cannot hang EMT with rod and Mae West style hangers?
Hanging is not the issue. While being secured is not the same as being supported, note 300.11(A) is titled "Secured in Place". To be "secured" requires a discretionary interpretation in common language usage, and the textual elaboration of Code provides very little additional clarity.
 

petersonra

Senior Member
Location
Northern illinois
Occupation
engineer
Bob, are you saying that you cannot hang EMT with rod and Mae West style hangers?

I am saying that would constitute support, but not securing.

I don't see how you can claim it is secured in place when it can move. If the fixtures were locked in place somehow, then I would accept the idea that the EMT is both supported and secured. but hanging from a chain as the OP indicates was done, they are not "securely fastened in place" IMO as clearly required by 300.11(A).
 
Last edited:

Smart $

Esteemed Member
Location
Ohio
I am saying that would constitute support, but not securing.

I don't see how you can claim it is secured in place when it can move. If the fixtures were locked in place somehow, then I would accept the idea that the EMT is both supported and secured. but hanging from a chain as the OP indicates was done, they are not "securely fastened in place" IMO as clearly required by 300.11(A).

If we go with 'not secured' that eliminates pretty much all trapeze style strut racks.
I tend to look at securing as relative to run termination (i.e. at the connector). Using the OP as an example, if the fixtures were stabilized with respect to each other, such as attached to strut running end to end of the string, and the emt clamped to the strut, I would consider that secured in place... even though the whole string could sway. The questionable area would then be the transition between the string's supply and the supporting structure...
 

iwire

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Massachusetts
I tend to look at securing as relative to run termination (i.e. at the connector). Using the OP as an example, if the fixtures were stabilized with respect to each other, such as attached to strut running end to end of the string, and the emt clamped to the strut, I would consider that secured in place... even though the whole string could sway. The questionable area would then be the transition between the string's supply and the supporting structure...

That's great, we can all just make up our own definitions of secured. :lol:
 

Smart $

Esteemed Member
Location
Ohio
That's great, we can all just make up our own definitions of secured. :lol:
Disregarding the smiley in your post... I don't feel I'm making up my own definition.

The example I used is no different than say an emt wiring method used on a skid mounted piece of machinery. The whole skid can move... but the emt will move with it. If the emt were secured in place, that would be a major problem when the skid was moved. :D
 

iwire

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Massachusetts
Disregarding the smiley in your post... I don't feel I'm making up my own definition.

The example I used is no different than say an emt wiring method used on a skid mounted piece of machinery. The whole skid can move... but the emt will move with it. If the emt were secured in place, that would be a major problem when the skid was moved. :D

You are pulling it out of your ... err thin air. :D

Where is anything in the NEC to support your view?
 

infinity

Moderator
Staff member
Location
New Jersey
Occupation
Journeyman Electrician
If we can't use a Mae West to support EMT then we should tell Caddy and Minerlac to stop making them. :)
 

Smart $

Esteemed Member
Location
Ohio
These are a prime example of conduit being "secured" to what they connect to.. and not the structure which supports what they connect to.
 

petersonra

Senior Member
Location
Northern illinois
Occupation
engineer
I tend to think of securing in place meaning the conduit cannot move in a way that might cause some kind of damage.

A skid mounted piece of equipment that has EMT on it where the skid itself moves seems to fit the bill as long as the EMT does not move WRT to its termination points.

To me, trapeze style supports are acceptable for the most part since they adequately keep the EMT in place so whatever movement there is does not create any damage to the equipment or the conduit.

Running EMT between light fixtures that are hanging from chains does not IMO prevent damage to the light fixtures in case of movement, and thus the EMT is not properly secured.

I know the word damage is not used anywhere in the code WRT this issue, but it seems like the only reasonable way to look at it especially given common practices out there.
 

GoldDigger

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Placerville, CA, USA
Occupation
Retired PV System Designer
I tend to think of securing in place meaning the conduit cannot move in a way that might cause some kind of damage.
...

I know the word damage is not used anywhere in the code WRT this issue, but it seems like the only reasonable way to look at it especially given common practices out there.
+1
When you have a term that is poorly defined, sometimes the best way to approach the problem is to reason why the requirement is there, in order to deduce the meaning of the term. May or may not be acceptable as a matter of law, but very good common sense.
When there is no formal definition, common sense is all we have to rely on.
 

Strathead

Senior Member
Location
Ocala, Florida, USA
Occupation
Electrician/Estimator/Project Manager/Superintendent
If we go with 'not secured' that eliminates pretty much all trapeze style strut racks.

And J hangers and tons of other methods. IMO an inspector would be petty if he wrote up the original installation. I'd get Caddy 812 brackets cut them in half and zip screw them to the fixtures, but I'd be PO'd
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top