The EMT is there to protect the Romex from damage, not to act as a raceway. There is probably some local legend about the zone of required protection stopping at some height.
Yup, that kind of thinking is evident in a lot of places.
Given the very thin jacket on modern NM, I am sure that if I were inspecting, I would be requiring NM to be protected in a lot more locations now than I would have 30 years ago.
Even aluminum mc is soft compared to that era. I'd say new romex and new mc are comparable. How do you feel about UF or SER say in an island for stove and some outlets? Would strapped to cabinet panel then hitting box suffice for you?
along with reading, writing and arithmetic, kids should be taught the 4th "R" of reasoning
I've heard this saying in different places. It makes me wonder, what is the point of using MC at all then?
Polypropylene vs PVC, rats, redundant bonding, EM field if you care about it, protection against abrasion, and the method is a standard for many areas and environment.
I have never understood why the code thinks MC is so great. A thin layer of soft aluminum that kinks easily and then has a sharp edge. Great.
I agree. I think the biggest attribute that MC has in the electrical community is that it doesn't look like romex.
We used a lot of steel MC.
I think it is because it is allowed in places NM is not. It seems to me like it is not that much safer but it is allowed.
I suspect all these requirements were not based on any data, studies, or statistics. For example take places of assembly. No NM. Okay so I guess the implication is MC is safer than NM. Shouldnt we require MC in dwellings then? ( And then we could get into afci's, why no afci's in places of assembly then?).
It depends in the cabinet design and exactly where the cable is installed...maybe even on what the intended use of the cabinet is...I think in some cases I would want to see physical protection for within the cabinet..maybe a running board the thickness of the cable with the cable on the back side of the running board.
NM is safer than MC only in the amount of toxic gasses when the cables are involved in fire. Not sure that really makes any difference in an occupancy any more as the amount of toxic gasses from the building finishes and furnishings under fire conditions will far exceed that from the wiring methods.
I find that reasoning to be nonsense. So we can just let places of assembly burn because no one is sleeping there? There are countless examples of horrible fires with many deaths in occupancies where no one was sleeping.
