Is this a "Flexible Cord"?

[charlie b]

I have an overseas application. British standards apply for the most part, but the NEC is sometimes a player. The following appears on a cable at an existing facility: ?3/25mm2 cu/xlpe/swa/pvc bs 457 national cable industry.?

So this is a three conductor, equivalent to #4 AWG, copper, with cross-linked polyethylene insulation, and is steel wire armoured (British spelling of that word). I am not sure how PVC comes into the picture, a search for BS 457 got me nowhere, and I can?t match the description to anything in table 400.4.

The cable is connected to a large plug that serves to bring power to a 40 foot shipping container that was configured as a living unit. We are relocating a number of these units, and are supposed to retain their existing power feed configuration. But I wonder if the cable falls under article 400. If it does, then I think this installation would run afoul of one or more of the ?uses not allowed? per 400.8.

So my question is, does article 400 apply to this type of cable?

In the attached photo, the cable is within a protective plastic covering.

 

[eHunter]

I have an overseas application. British standards apply for the most part, but the NEC is sometimes a player. The following appears on a cable at an existing facility: “3/25mm2 cu/xlpe/swa/pvc bs 457 national cable industry.”

So this is a three conductor, equivalent to #4 AWG, copper, with cross-linked polyethylene insulation, and is steel wire armoured (British spelling of that word). I am not sure how PVC comes into the picture, a search for BS 457 got me nowhere, and I can’t match the description to anything in table 400.4.

The cable is connected to a large plug that serves to bring power to a 40 foot shipping container that was configured as a living unit. We are relocating a number of these units, and are supposed to retain their existing power feed configuration. But I wonder if the cable falls under article 400. If it does, then I think this installation would run afoul of one or more of the “uses not allowed” per 400.8.

So my question is, does article 400 apply to this type of cable?

In the attached photo, the cable is within a protective plastic covering.

View attachment 8888

Depends on where the unit will be deployed.

Take a look at BS EN 60309

The standard is available for purchase:
http://www.techstreet.com/products/18599

You might contact Comando and try to get some free info:
technical hotline +44 (0)1268 563720
www.mkelectric.co.uk

 

[Cavie]

I thinking the guy who designed it could have picked a better protected location.

 

[eHunter]

I thinking the guy who designed it could have picked a better protected location.

You would think so, But there are not a lot of options.
I have assembled a number of these containerized ofiices, crew/combatant quarters, instrument shacks, etc... and there is very little room left on the surfaces to have utilities and HVAC enter, exit and still allow top to bottom, side to side and back to back stacking.

If that image above had been pulled back to reveal the entire end of the container you would then see what I am poorly describing.
I will try to find a few pics a post them in this thread that will speak thousands of words.

 

[Smart $]

... The following appears on a cable at an existing facility: ?3/25mm2 cu/xlpe/swa/pvc bs 457 national cable industry.?

...

So my question is, does article 400 apply to this type of cable?

Your question has to be broken down into root questions...

Does Article 400 apply?
If yes, does the cable comply? No, it is not an NEC recognized flexible cable or cord.
If no, does the cable comply with the appropriate standard?

 

[petersonra]

can I plug in a vacuum cleaner?

can i plug in a mobile home?

how about an RV?

I think you have to determine what it is to determine what applies.

 

[charlie b]

The particular photo that I posted was a stand-alone Containerized Living Unit (CLU). When it gets relocated, it will be the topmost of a stack of three CLUs. If the existing power cord has to dangle all the way down to grade level, we will have to support it by securing it to the side of one or both of the lower level CLUs. That is what brings up my question, for I fear it might violate 400.8(4), if the conductor is indeed classified as a "flexible cord."

We are looking into alternatives. Here is one possibility, but I don't like it:

• Cut the existing power cord about 3 feet (or should I say one meter? :lol from the plug.
• Run a branch circuit from the distribution panel, in conduit, to a junction box just below the socket location.
• Find a way (this will be interesting) to "stuff" the power cord into the top of the junction box, strip the jacket and the insulation, and connect it to the branch circuit wires.

Anyone have a comment on this alternative? Are they likely to find a bushing or other means of safely getting the cable into the top of the junction box?

 

[Smart $]

The particular photo that I posted was a stand-alone Containerized Living Unit (CLU). When it gets relocated, it will be the topmost of a stack of three CLUs. If the existing power cord has to dangle all the way down to grade level, we will have to support it by securing it to the side of one or both of the lower level CLUs. That is what brings up my question, for I fear it might violate 400.8(4), if the conductor is indeed classified as a "flexible cord."

We are looking into alternatives. Here is one possibility, but I don't like it:

• Cut the existing power cord about 3 feet (or should I say one meter? :lol from the plug.
• Run a branch circuit from the distribution panel, in conduit, to a junction box just below the socket location.
• Find a way (this will be interesting) to "stuff" the power cord into the top of the junction box, strip the jacket and the insulation, and connect it to the branch circuit wires.

Anyone have a comment on this alternative? Are they likely to find a bushing or other means of safely getting the cable into the top of the junction box?

If you are looking at cutting the power cord, why not completely remove it and extend the branch circuit to where it terminates???

 

[charlie b]

If you are looking at cutting the power cord, why not completely remove it and extend the branch circuit to where it terminates???

Our contract calls upon us to reuse the existing plugs & sockets. I don't know if I can connect three single conductor #2's (my guess on required wire size, based on number of CCC's in the conduit from the distribution panel) to the existing plug. I don't know how the existing 3/C #4 cable connects to the existing plug, but I doubt I can run single conductors in open air into it, and they won't let me use flex conduit.

 

[eHunter]

Usually these are temporary structures in a temporary location most likely connected to a temporary power source.
I would think that a cord secured to the structure with tie wraps would be acceptable for any temporary installation, especially outside of the USA where the NEC is not the electrical code of the land.
Destroying a pre-made cord and connector may not make the owners of the CHUs very happy on the nxt deployment.

 

[Cavie]

K.I.S.S.:roll:

 

[al hildenbrand]

I have an overseas application. British standards apply for the most part, but the NEC is sometimes a player. The following appears on a cable at an existing facility: ?3/25mm2 cu/xlpe/swa/pvc bs 457 national cable industry.?

So my question is, does article 400 apply to this type of cable?

Charlie, do you know if this is a manufactured "cord set"? That is, was the cord and plug assembled to each other in the field or by a manufacturer?

Also, looking at the Scope of UL 62, specifically, 1.3, it states clearly that armored cords are not listed under Flexible Cord UL 62.

Scope of 62:
"1.1 These requirements cover fixture wires, hoistway cables, and flexible cords for use in accordance with
the National Electrical Code.
1.2 An elevator cable that contains one or more optical-fiber members is limited (see 8.6) to carrying
optical energy that has been ruled not hazardous to the human body.
1.3 These requirements do not cover armored cords or assemblies of flexible cords or fixture wires with
fittings or wiring devices of any sort (such as cord sets, power-supply cords, and Christmas-tree and
decorative-lighting outfits, which are covered in requirements separate from this standard) nor do these
requirements cover any type of wire or cord for use at a potential higher than 600 V."

 

[Smart $]

Our contract calls upon us to reuse the existing plugs & sockets. I don't know if I can connect three single conductor #2's (my guess on required wire size, based on number of CCC's in the conduit from the distribution panel) to the existing plug. I don't know how the existing 3/C #4 cable connects to the existing plug, but I doubt I can run single conductors in open air into it, and they won't let me use flex conduit.

I understand.

So we're back to my initial response, but in a broader sense... does the NEC apply to this supply means, either by jurisdiction or specification? If it does, cutting off the existing cord will still not bring it into full compliance. As I said in my initial response, the NEC does not recognize that cable. To be in complete compliance, you'd have to remove the cable in its entirely... and install an NEC-recognized cable, whether for the entire distance or a short section of it.

From a practical perspective, having to replace the existing cable is ludicrous...