Oh, I see. Never mind. It's the word "knockout" that threw me. When I look at it I see an access hole, not a conduit entry. So it's a hole, and the 3/4" is a knockout. Exactly the opposite from what you've written. Doesn't matter, it's just words...
J-Box Access
- Thread starter Sam Branch
- Start date
- Status
Oh, I see. Never mind. It's the word "knockout" that threw me. When I look at it I see an access hole, not a conduit entry. So it's a hole, and the 3/4" is a knockout. Exactly the opposite from what you've written. Doesn't matter, it's just words...
RonPecinaJr
Senior Member
- Location
- Rahway, NJ
Just words...
access to boxes
access to boxes
I am involved in energy efficient lighting upgrade projects.
So I am dealing with existing wiring- extending the wiring into the fixture is usually not an option- and also undesirable because it is old wiring and probably is not the correct temp rating to be next to a ballast.
What do you think of the following situations:
1. Taking down an existing surface mounted 8ft fluorscent and replacing with same- the existing fixture is supported at one end by a hickey thru the ceneter of the outlet box- making a 4" hole in this situation would require breaking open the ceiling to provide an new support. Does the supported solely by the box cover this- it is supported at one end by the box.
2. 2ft fluorescent fixture (W44) about 4" wide barely covers the outlet box. A 4" hole would be the full width of the fixture and surely weaken it. Can I get away with the supported solely by the box rule if I want to add extra supports directly to the wall at each side to make secure. Fixtures are installed in schools where vandalism is a problem.
3. Highhats. Existing recessed high hat can- we remove the can and install a surface wrap fixture over the opening and connect the lamp whip directly into the back of the fixture. The highhat slice box is above the ceiling as it always was.
I can understand the reasons for the code change but should there be an exception for existing wiring conditions. Rewiring the building is not an option in these projects.
access to boxes
I am involved in energy efficient lighting upgrade projects.
So I am dealing with existing wiring- extending the wiring into the fixture is usually not an option- and also undesirable because it is old wiring and probably is not the correct temp rating to be next to a ballast.
What do you think of the following situations:
1. Taking down an existing surface mounted 8ft fluorscent and replacing with same- the existing fixture is supported at one end by a hickey thru the ceneter of the outlet box- making a 4" hole in this situation would require breaking open the ceiling to provide an new support. Does the supported solely by the box cover this- it is supported at one end by the box.
2. 2ft fluorescent fixture (W44) about 4" wide barely covers the outlet box. A 4" hole would be the full width of the fixture and surely weaken it. Can I get away with the supported solely by the box rule if I want to add extra supports directly to the wall at each side to make secure. Fixtures are installed in schools where vandalism is a problem.
3. Highhats. Existing recessed high hat can- we remove the can and install a surface wrap fixture over the opening and connect the lamp whip directly into the back of the fixture. The highhat slice box is above the ceiling as it always was.
I can understand the reasons for the code change but should there be an exception for existing wiring conditions. Rewiring the building is not an option in these projects.
Pierre C Belarge
Senior Member
- Location
- Westchester County, New York
I could never understand how someone says this. If it takes rewiring to comply with the codes, then rewiring is in order. That is when knowing the codes really is a plus, and equal enforcement is applied.
access to boxes
access to boxes
Does the "supported solely by the box" just refer to incandescents, exit signs etc- fixtures that have mounting holes to match ethe box screws, or can a 2ft fluorescent be drilled and mounted to the box screws.
(in a 2ft fixture the ballast will almost reach the midpoint of the fixture so cutting a 3 or 4 inch hole and keeping box wiring 3 inches away from the ballast means having to install fixtures off-center. think replacing a incandescent centered over a medicine cabinet with a 2ft vanity fixture)
access to boxes
Does the "supported solely by the box" just refer to incandescents, exit signs etc- fixtures that have mounting holes to match ethe box screws, or can a 2ft fluorescent be drilled and mounted to the box screws.
(in a 2ft fixture the ballast will almost reach the midpoint of the fixture so cutting a 3 or 4 inch hole and keeping box wiring 3 inches away from the ballast means having to install fixtures off-center. think replacing a incandescent centered over a medicine cabinet with a 2ft vanity fixture)
access to boxes
access to boxes
""410.14 Connection of Electric-Discharge Luminaires
(Lighting Fixtures).
(B) Access to Boxes.
Electric-discharge luminaires (fixtures) surface mounted over concealed outlet, pull, or junction boxes...""
If the fixture is mounted over a surface or flush mounted "unconcealed" box, does this section not apply. A concealed box would be a violation without any fixture.
I see proposals to remove the word "concealed" from the 2011 code to rectify the interpretation.
Frank
access to boxes
""410.14 Connection of Electric-Discharge Luminaires
(Lighting Fixtures).
(B) Access to Boxes.
Electric-discharge luminaires (fixtures) surface mounted over concealed outlet, pull, or junction boxes...""
If the fixture is mounted over a surface or flush mounted "unconcealed" box, does this section not apply. A concealed box would be a violation without any fixture.
I see proposals to remove the word "concealed" from the 2011 code to rectify the interpretation.
Frank
- Status