Installation of Old Work boxes in New Construction

Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Rampart Partitions

Member
Greetings everyone!

I'm looking for information about using old work device boxes (like Steel City LXWOWC-25 or CDOWTG-25) in new construction.

Here's the kicker, the wall is demountable.

We design and manufacture demountable walls for offices and industries. The wall is made up of (specially designed) steel studs and instead of using gypsum board, we use 5/8" melamine boards. The melamine panels can be removed and the steel studs can be removed so that the office can be re-arranged as required by the customer. Of course this is not something that a person who is not instructed in this procedure can do. It does take someone in construction.

Now we're considering how to attach electrical boxes on the panels. In California, we did a job where the inspector required the boxes be attached to the steel studs. We'd prefer to be able to just attach the boxes to the melamine panels. It is quicker, easier and a better fit.

Being from Canada, we don't know all the "ins and outs" of the NEC. So any assistance here would be useful.

Thanks for your help.


Mark :cool:
 
Interesting.

I use the LXWOW and CDOW in new wiring in new cabinetry. . . I use #4 screws to mount the plaster ears to the wood. One might even use EZE-ins.

I'd ask the inspector for the NEC citation that either requires the stud attachment or does not permit the supporting of the box to the wall finish.

Bet the inspector can't supply it.
 
As long as the device box is UL approved for the purpose of mounting to other than on studs ie: cut in box and madison hanger, I don't see that he has any cause for alarm besides his personal preference that they be mounted to studs. I wonder if he makes people remove drywall from floor to ceiling in order to add a receptacle in an existing wall instead of just cutting it in. :rolleyes:
 
As The World Turns.

As The World Turns.

Bet the inspector cannot find the NEC article to backup his personal preference. Show him a copy of the manufacturer's cat cut that explicilty states the boxes are mounted to the wall.
 
Mark,

In continuing to think about your opening post (OP), I pause to wonder about the wiring method you are using. The wiring method, itself (metal conduit, armored cable, etc.) will have some requirements, depending upon which one you chose.

The boxes are understood, . . . What is the wiring?
 
al hildenbrand said:
Mark,

In continuing to think about your opening post (OP), I pause to wonder about the wiring method you are using. The wiring method, itself (metal conduit, armored cable, etc.) will have some requirements, depending upon which one you chose.

The boxes are understood, . . . What is the wiring?
Click to expand...

The wiring is handled by the electrician. We supply the box and if the client needs it we'll even install the box on the wall. But all connections are left to the electrician. The panels can be removed to allow easy (relatively) access to the box and interior of the wall. Once we actually close the wall, it should stay that way until the customer decides to re-organize their offices.

When our installers are putting up the wall, the client's electrician should be present for the electrical hookup.

Most of the time I have seen MC cable used. But again, we don't do it.

Thanks for everyone's comments. I apprecaite it. It'll make it easier for us to explain to the inspectors on the job sites.



Mark :grin:
 
btharmy said:
As long as the device box is UL approved for the purpose of mounting to other than on studs ie: cut in box and madison hanger, I don't see that he has any cause for alarm besides his personal preference that they be mounted to studs.
Click to expand...


Just a heads up, if the wall is fire rated the box must be secured to the stud regardless of the box listing. This is a building code issue not a electrical code issue.

I have no idea if the opening posters wall is fire rated.
 
The title caught my eye - since I am doing an entire project in metal cut-ins right now.... Waiting for base-boards....

Anyway - took a look at your site through a simple search of the user name...

ken_03.jpg


IMPO - this is not ANY "type" of construction. I feel this falls under what is typicaly called modular office furnature and partitions. Typicaly wiring in them is UL listed and equally modular in nature.

Like your competitor.... Here

I would tend to agree with the Inspector in the OP that you are using a fixed "premise" wiring method in what apparently is a consumer removable panel and stud work. Which I do not think 314 allows???? And article 605 of the CEC does not. See page 6

If you were to use listed components of a modular wiring system for the application - there would be less for the Inspector to say about it. He would then be reffered to UL 1286
 
how is mounting cut in boxes in a sheet of 5/8 melamine any different than mounting a 4" box to the surface of a sheet of plywood ? if neither are attached directly to a stud, would this inspector fail them both, or does he just not "like" cut in boxes?
 
e57 said:
IMPO - this is not ANY "type" of construction. I feel this falls under what is typicaly called modular office furnature and partitions. Typicaly wiring in them is UL listed and equally modular in nature.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the comments. This type of "construction" is actually considered construction (at least here in Canada). Whenever the partitions are permanently attached to the building structure (the frame is screwed to existing wall, floors, ceilings, etc) it falls under construction and not furntiture. That's why the product is called "De-mountable Walls" and not office partitions.

We manufacture office partitions as well and the electrical assemblies for these products are CSA/UL approved and are modular. But for the "De-mountable Walls" it takes an electrician to do the wiring. We don't take modular assemblies for this setup.

"De-mountable walls" (DMW) are more permant than the partitions and are a direct replacement for wood/steel stud and gyprock assemblies. The advantage of the DMW is that a company can re-use the parts and not scrap it if a change is necessary. It also has the aestetic (?) advantage as it can come in Laminate, Veneer, Melamine, Glass, etc. Not just painted or plastered.

Please note, I am not trying to sell our product here! I'm just comparing. Don't take this as a sales pitch. There are other DMW manufacturers out there and they'll be glad to offer you sales info and comparisons. Don't take my comments above as a sales pitch (I'm not in the sales dept.).

Just want to keep it honest here. :grin:

Thanks again for the comments.


Mark :cool:
 
BTW e57,

The information was very good. I'm considering the idea of offering modular wiring on our wall systems. In fact, I'm calling Tyco/Amp today to follow up on your suggestions.


Mark :)
 
e57 said:
The title caught my eye - since I am doing an entire project in metal cut-ins right now.... Waiting for base-boards....

Anyway - took a look at your site through a simple search of the user name...

ken_03.jpg


IMPO - this is not ANY "type" of construction. I feel this falls under what is typicaly called modular office furnature and partitions. Typicaly wiring in them is UL listed and equally modular in nature.

Like your competitor.... Here

I would tend to agree with the Inspector in the OP that you are using a fixed "premise" wiring method in what apparently is a consumer removable panel and stud work. Which I do not think 314 allows???? And article 605 of the CEC does not. See page 6

If you were to use listed components of a modular wiring system for the application - there would be less for the Inspector to say about it. He would then be reffered to UL 1286
Click to expand...

I agree. The ugly head that is being reared here is the grey area that's created when what is considered "construction" and what is considered "modular furniture" butt heads. What is happening is that in the manufacturer's zeal to be all things and all solutions to the customer (to avoid actual "construction" and benifit from the ability to have a depreciatable asset) cannot meet the inevitable custom-constructed, or "build in place" or "location varies, or, to be determined in field" [/i] needs of a client without resorting to old-fashioned custom construction methods.

The costs to modularize, or standardize an approvable UL listed solution for non-standard incidentals sure to crop up when a modular office furniture (and now apparently, office wall) manufacturer supercedes the cost benifit of providing for non-typical, non standard, or custom situations, so, the manufacturer wants the best of both worlds. The ability to use standard construction (in this case, electrical) codes to outfit what is proclaimed to be, in every other respect, modular furniture.

A modular system is either modular or it is not.
I'm looking for information about using old work device boxes (like Steel City LXWOWC-25 or CDOWTG-25) in new construction.

Here's the kicker, the wall is demountable
Click to expand...

Then it is not "new construction" it is "new assembly."

Case closed.
 
The issue your Inspector is having is over permanence of the structure. If you have panels and stud work that is removable by non-construction professionals, it falls under article 605 and likewise needs to also be demountable sans an Electrician. As to do so otherwise puts the user at risk in moving or damaging any permanent wiring inside. And likewise, the Inspector in the liability circle.

But if you want to call it semi-permanent construction, or permanent construction it would then fall under 314 - the inspector is correct in saying that the box would either need to be attached to the stud work, OR the panel the box is in would need to be permanently attached to the stud work. Which them makes that panel no-longer "demountable". And many places do not allow exposed chapter 3 cable type wiring methods below 8' - like SF, CA, and other portions of the Bay Area. (Just a local interpretation, and amendment thing...) Where as anything UL listed - the Inspectors will take little responsibility for past its connection to premise wiring.
 
Last edited:
e57,

I wasn't present at the job site in LA when the inspector required the boxes to be attached to the studs so I can't say for certain what he was basing his decision on (too bad, 'cause I'd like to know now!).

You've got me thinking about modular connections and I'm looking into this option. But the costs for modular wiring systems is significantly higher than if the customer was to use an electrician. In today's economy, cost is always a factor.

In Canada we can use old work boxes in our walls. But, in the U.S. I think we'll just use products like Steel City's CXLE-SSX (which, btw, is my design and patent when I use to work at T&B 15 years ago!). This way it is attached to the stud and it will pass either under NEC or a building code. Better to be safe than sorry.

But I am still looking at modular wiring systems. I think there is a company called Electri-Cable Assy's (ECA) who does things like that. I'll see what I can find.

Thanks for everyone's comments! Much appreciated.


Mark :cool:
 
Rampart Partitions said:
e57,

I wasn't present at the job site in LA when the inspector required the boxes to be attached to the studs so I can't say for certain what he was basing his decision on (too bad, 'cause I'd like to know now!).

You've got me thinking about modular connections and I'm looking into this option. But the costs for modular wiring systems is significantly higher than if the customer was to use an electrician. In today's economy, cost is always a factor.

In Canada we can use old work boxes in our walls. But, in the U.S. I think we'll just use products like Steel City's CXLE-SSX (which, btw, is my design and patent when I use to work at T&B 15 years ago!). This way it is attached to the stud and it will pass either under NEC or a building code. Better to be safe than sorry.

But I am still looking at modular wiring systems. I think there is a company called Electri-Cable Assy's (ECA) who does things like that. I'll see what I can find.

Thanks for everyone's comments! Much appreciated.


Mark :cool:
Click to expand...

You could also be running in to local amendments, or just the City of LA PIA factor.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top