"'Homerun'" definition

[Elecestim123]

Hello all,

New to the forum. I'm also new to being an estimator. Working on a bigger project so I need to make sure I'm taking this off correctly. Engineer is allowing MC cable for branch circuits, but not for Homeruns. 'Homerun' isn't defined in the specs, and I know the NEC doesn't define it.

Typically I would think the 'Homerun' is the conduit and wire from the breaker to the very first device in the circuit. However, if I have several (Let's say 3 for this example) circuits in (1) conduit from the panel, is only the conduit and wire from the panel to the first device in the first circuit the 'Homerun'? Or is the 'Homerun' the conduit and wire from the panel ALL THE WAY down to the very first device in the LAST (3rd) circuit after also hitting the first device in the 1st and 2nd circuit?

Hopefully that question makes sense

 

[infinity]

You're correct, definitions of a home run will vary depending on who you ask. The only person that can answer your question is the guy who wrote the spec. but having said that I can give you the definition that we would use. It's the part of the branch circuit that goes from the OCPD to the first junction point, that could be at a receptacle box, a switch, or a junction box. We typically run EMT homeruns from the panel to a point in the ceiling where there would be a junction box. The tubing would have several circuits and they would branch out from the home run box in the ceiling.

Welcome to the Forum.

 

[LarryFine]

Yes, welcome. Your question made perfect sense.

I agree that it apples to the first J-box. It sounds like they don't want MC coming out of the panel(s).

 

[Elecestim123]

Thank you. So essentially you're saying you personally define a 'Homerun' as a conduit from the panel (With 3 circuits in this example) to the first device in the first circuit ONLY. Then you would run MC cable from from there to the other 2 circuits, and that would be your "branch", correct?

 

[LarryFine]

Thank you. So essentially you're saying you personally define a 'Homerun' as a conduit from the panel (With 3 circuits in this example) to the first device in the first circuit ONLY. Then you would run MC cable from from there to the other 2 circuits, and that would be your "branch", correct?

Yes. And, I would even consider the MC cables terminating in a trough and piped or nippled to the panel as complying.

 

[Rock86]

I would say if you have 3 circuits originating from the panel traveling through 1 conduit... you have 3 homeruns in 1 conduit. IMO your homeruns would end at their first respective device. if you hit a junction box along the way, your homeruns may split into their own conduits from there.

 

[Terminator5047]

Yes. And, I would even consider the MC cables terminating in a trough and piped or nippled to the panel as complying.

You have to be careful doing this with cross sectional box fill

 

[ActionDave]

I would say if you have 3 circuits originating from the panel traveling through 1 conduit... you have 3 homeruns in 1 conduit. IMO your homeruns would end at their first respective device. if you hit a junction box along the way, your homeruns may split into their own conduits from there.

I would agree with that.

 

[synchro]

I would say if you have 3 circuits originating from the panel traveling through 1 conduit... you have 3 homeruns in 1 conduit. IMO your homeruns would end at their first respective device. if you hit a junction box along the way, your homeruns may split into their own conduits from there.

I would agree with that.

I think that makes sense, because otherwise you'd be avoiding a run of conduit to the first device of a branch circuit just because that branch circuit shared a conduit with another branch circuit further upstream.
I think it would be good, however, to clarify this with the engineer, using specific examples if necessary to understand his intent.

 

[petersonra]

Thank you. So essentially you're saying you personally define a 'Homerun' as a conduit from the panel (With 3 circuits in this example) to the first device in the first circuit ONLY. Then you would run MC cable from from there to the other 2 circuits, and that would be your "branch", correct?

This is nuts. What's the problem with just running MC the whole way? I don't get why people spec stuff like this.

 

[Little Bill]

This is nuts. What's the problem with just running MC the whole way? I don't get why people spec stuff like this.

Some people don't like the looks of MC cable coming down into the panel. It's hard to keep it straight and look good. So they just want EMT (or other conduit) for the Homerun to a junction box, then branch off to the loads. I know you could just sleeve the MC down into the panel but that' not what they want. This also saves on conduit runs, you run a larger EMT with multiple circuits to a JB, then MC from there. This is most common with dropped ceilings. Run EMT to the area above the loads in the ceiling, then MC down. It saves having to make a ton of bends in the conduit to run down walls and such.

 

[electrofelon]

This is nuts. What's the problem with just running MC the whole way? I don't get why people spec stuff like this.

I agree. IF the engineer or whoever spec'ed it likes it done that way, he should become en electrical contractor and he can do it that way on his jobs. If not, let me decide how I want to do it on MY job. That said, most of my commercial work is done with piped home runs, but I will also run some MC for stuff that is close by - or when it suits me for some other reason, and I shouldnt have to explain it to anybody.

 

[Rock86]

This is nuts. What's the problem with just running MC the whole way? I don't get why people spec stuff like this.

 

[petersonra]

I have never understood why people think MC looks sloppy. It just looks like wiring to me. What I don't like is banks of EMT that have dozens of little bends in them so they will all fit around each other. I think that looks really strange because I wonder why they didn't use MC so they didn't have to make all the miserable bends.

 

[electrofelon]

I have never understood why people think MC looks sloppy. It just looks like wiring to me. What I don't like is banks of EMT that have dozens of little bends in them so they will all fit around each other. I think that looks really strange because I wonder why they didn't use MC so they didn't have to make all the miserable bends.

I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Once I had to do a nice EMT drop to a switch in an apartment entry. The owner said it "looked like a factory" and wanted me to change it to wiremold

 

[bwat]

The the OP, for what it's worth, the homeruns that we're talking about here are still branch circuits using NEC definitions. They're technically a part of the branch circuit.

 

[jap]

I personally have always appreciated an engineer who spec'd MC for "branching off only", and not for the home runs.

I don't consider the home run as a conduit from the panel to the first J-box, I consider the home run the entire trunk line prior to any branching off to fixtures or receptacle drops, which is what we do almost religiously anyway.

Generally, the fill on the home runs when engineered very light to begin with. It helps in the future to be able to pull additional circuits through the conduit in the future if need be. Cant do that if MC is pulled all the way to the panel.

Most times 3/4" minimum conduit with only 3 circuits for smaller amperage circuits.

It makes life much easier if you need to add a circuit some distance away from the panel, by pulling the circuits through an existing pipe, instead of having to start from the beginning with a whole new run of MC every time.

I erk every time I pop a ceiling tile where there's pipes stubbed up out of a pane to a large j-box above the ceiling, then, MC spider webbed in every direction from there. You guys cut that crap out,,, you're better than that...

JAP>