Inspector says not listed together, Code violation

[brother]

Had a friend of mine that ran some emt pipe outdoors and had to transition to liquidtight metal flex. Traditionally and what has been accepted in practice, he would just use a rain tight emt connector into a rigid coupling to liquid tight flex metal connector. Now he's being told these are not listed and legal for the wet location/outside to be used/connected together, therefore it's a Code violation.

I do not know what the UL book has to say about this, but I do know this has been a practice and accepted by inspectors and others for a long time. But is this particular inspector correct on this?

 

[iwire]

The inspector is correct as far as the listing issues

That said I still do it.

 

[mwm1752]

What is his opinion on a transition from PVC to EMT on a riser? Here is the opening statement in DWTT which IMO indictes there are transitions allowed per UL listing. Further investigation may be needed for the particulars. You may need a EGC along the way but it seems all fittings used are approved for the location.
CONDUIT FITTINGS (DWTT) USE 2013 UL Whitebook
This category covers metallic and nonmetallic conduit fittings, such as connectors, couplings, conduit bodies, short-radius conduit bodies, expansion fittings, locknuts and sealing (liquid-tight) locknuts for use in the assembly of nonmetallic and metallic wiring systems. Also covered are fittings used to provide a transition between metallic and nonmetallic wiring systems.

 

[K8MHZ]

The inspector is correct as far as the listing issues

That said I still do it.

I can't say I haven't done it, either.

However, the EMT connector is designed to go into a box or go into a panel and be secured with a lock nut. It is not meant to be screwed into a coupling. (What good is the gasket on a coupling?) I would think it's the same with the other connector as well.

Here is a 60 post thread about the issue from 2008

http://forums.mikeholt.com/showthread.php?t=101355

Another from 2006

http://forums.mikeholt.com/showthread.php?t=82476

 

[K8MHZ]

What is his opinion on a transition from PVC to EMT on a riser? Here is the opening statement in DWTT which IMO indictes there are transitions allowed per UL listing. Further investigation may be needed for the particulars. You may need a EGC along the way but it seems all fittings used are approved for the location.
CONDUIT FITTINGS (DWTT) USE 2013 UL Whitebook
This category covers metallic and nonmetallic conduit fittings, such as connectors, couplings, conduit bodies, short-radius conduit bodies, expansion fittings, locknuts and sealing (liquid-tight) locknuts for use in the assembly of nonmetallic and metallic wiring systems. Also covered are fittings used to provide a transition between metallic and nonmetallic wiring systems.

In this case, both are metallic wiring systems.

 

[mwm1752]

I can't say I haven't done it, either.

However, the EMT connector is designed to go into a box or go into a panel and be secured with a lock nut. It is not meant to be screwed into a coupling. (What good is the gasket on a coupling?) I would think it's the same with the other connector as well.


Can be screwed into a threaded hub though.

 

[mwm1752]

also LB fittings used for excessive bends.

 

[K8MHZ]

I can't say I haven't done it, either.

However, the EMT connector is designed to go into a box or go into a panel and be secured with a lock nut. It is not meant to be screwed into a coupling. (What good is the gasket on a coupling?) I would think it's the same with the other connector as well.


Can be screwed into a threaded hub though.

You are correct and using a weatherproof box is probably cheaper than a listed adapter.

Still, to install the connectors properly, the exterior gasket must seal against the flat surface of the box. That's not really possible with a coupling.

 

[tom baker]

I can't say I haven't done it, either.

However, the EMT connector is designed to go into a box or go into a panel and be secured with a lock nut. It is not meant to be screwed into a coupling. (What good is the gasket on a coupling?) I would think it's the same with the other connector as well.


Can be screwed into a threaded hub though.

Threaded hubs (meyers) are listed for threaded metallic conduit. An emt fitting does not have a taper on the male threads.

 

[brother]

Threaded hubs (meyers) are listed for threaded metallic conduit. An emt fitting does not have a taper on the male threads.

So are you saying that when we install emt rain tight connectors to connect to the hubs that it is a code violation??? I have seen it done many of times. And are you agreeing that the installation I described is also a code violation??

 

[GoldDigger]

So are you saying that when we install emt rain tight connectors to connect to the hubs that it is a code violation??? I have seen it done many of times. And are you agreeing that the installation I described is also a code violation??

A hub is different from a coupling. Re-read the original posts carefully.

 

[renosteinke]

1) Inspector can cite a UL statement to support his position;
2) As discussed here several times, the UL statement is incomplete, misleading, and in conflict with a number of other UL releases;
3) If that's the worst the inspector found, you did pretty good;
4) The inspector is a ninny;
5) Use-specific transition fittings aren't always available at the parts house. (Heck, I can't get a white receptacle at mine!); and;
6) Using a box or a conduit body is a perfectly legal work-around- no matter that those have the same exact threads as the coupling.

 

[Volta]

1) Inspector can cite a UL statement to support his position;
2) As discussed here several times, the UL statement is incomplete, misleading, and in conflict with a number of other UL releases;
3) If that's the worst the inspector found, you did pretty good;
4) The inspector is a ninny;
5) Use-specific transition fittings aren't always available at the parts house. (Heck, I can't get a white receptacle at mine!); and;
6) Using a box or a conduit body is a perfectly legal work-around- no matter that those have the same exact threads as the coupling.

But they don't. Couplings have running / straight threads, and IMO that is the problem. Not just for water entry, but for grounding continuity too. We have three wiring methods in those few inches, and the RMC coupling is subject to Article 344. Now I will say that the text below refers to running threads on conduit, rather than a connector, so I am not saying this section is necessarily being violated, but the intent may be.

...
(B) Running Threads. Running threads shall not be used
on conduit for connection at couplings.

 

[kwired]

So are you saying that when we install emt rain tight connectors to connect to the hubs that it is a code violation??? I have seen it done many of times. And are you agreeing that the installation I described is also a code violation??

That topic also has had much debate on this forum in the past. Many out there are doing that practice though, others have inspectors that do know the listings and will not let you violate them. Other inspectors do know the listings, but choose to be lenient on enforcement.