NEC Code Question

[iwire]

Absolutely not. In fact, quite the opposite. I'm actually saying they can.

This sentence...

...meets the requirement of this conditional clause...

...thereby allowing solid EGC's to be 8AWG and larger in raceways.

No, not buying it.

 

[iwire]

I totally disagree with that assessment. The first part says nothing of the size but does mention solid. The other section says not over #8 unless required by other sections of the code. Where in the first section does it say it is required to be solid. It gives a choice but 310.106 limits that choice to smaller than #8

Well put, I could not find a way to word it.

 

[iwire]

Yes, a solid or stranded option is provided, but I see nothing in the "other" section which prohibits one from choosing the solid option.

I don't see how you can miss it.

 

[Smart $]

No, not buying it.

I'm not selling it. It is what it is. Not my fault or problem y'all can't invoke some logical deduction to a couple simple statements.

I don't see how you can miss it.

I don't have blinders on. I'm not missing anything.

 

[Smart $]

Here, I'll add another section into the mix and see if it helps y'all...

310.1 Scope. This article covers general requirements for
conductors and their type designations, insulations, markings,
mechanical strengths, ampacity ratings, and uses.
These requirements do not apply to conductors that form an
integral part of equipment, such as motors, motor controllers,
and similar equipment, or to conductors specifically
provided for elsewhere in this Code.

Does the highlighted section include conductors specifically provided for in Article 250?

 

[infinity]

You're on an island all by yourself on this one.

 

[Smart $]

You're on an island all by yourself on this one.

Not unusual... :lol: