EMT coupling

[perturbed]

the house I'm in was renovated in 2018 before i bought it. There's a short vertical piece of EMT mounted to a block wall that ends in a switch box. There's a combination coupling at the top of the EMT, which leaves about 2 inches of romex exposed between the coupling and drywall ceiling. I'm assuming the EMT is to protect the romex. Shouldn't the EMT have gone all the way through the ceiling or does the coupling have to be visible?

 

[infinity]

We'll allow this since it is not a DIY question. The question is will the 2" of NM cable be subject to damage all the way up near the top of the wall? IMO it will not be subject to damage so it can be exposed. I don't see a code section that would require the transition to be exposed.

 

[petersonra]

the house I'm in was renovated in 2018 before i bought it. There's a short vertical piece of EMT mounted to a block wall that ends in a switch box. There's a combination coupling at the top of the EMT, which leaves about 2 inches of romex exposed between the coupling and drywall ceiling. I'm assuming the EMT is to protect the romex. Shouldn't the EMT have gone all the way through the ceiling or does the coupling have to be visible?

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.

 

[LarryFine]

It sounds like a sleeve with a connector on the end to protect the cable. The end may be exposed or hidden.

 

[perturbed]

thanks for allowing the post and the replies. i agree there is little chance of damage to the romex up near the ceiling, although without clear rules i guess there is room for interpretation. running the EMT through the ceiling would have been a cleaner look, so maybe the electrician left the clamp exposed so you wouldn't have to poke a hole in the ceiling to get to it

 

[electrofelon]

Some jurisdictions are ridiculous with Romex and physical damage. For example the city of Seattle does not allow exposed Romex. They won't even allow it like for under cabinet lights when strapped up neatly and in the corner. Apparently zero critical thinking goes on about how it would actually get damaged in these situations.

 

[infinity]

Apparently zero critical thinking goes on about how it would actually get damaged in these situations.

Yup, that kind of thinking is evident in a lot of places.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

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.

 

[letgomywago]

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?