erickench
Senior Member
- Location
- Brooklyn, NY
Hi Guys, okay I'm gonna submit a few proposals for the 2014 NEC since I've detected a few problems. I haven't obtained a copy of the new 2011 NEC but I will eventually. One problem that sticks out like a sore thumb is the above NEC table. I had mentioned this on a previous thread that I started but nobody commented on it so I'm assuming that everybody is dumbstruck at what I pointed out. This table seem's to have incorrect spacing numbers for the following:
size of wire Al or Cu-clad Cu
18 AWG through 8 AWG 100 feet 100 feet
6 AWG through 1/0 AWG 200 feet 100 feet
2/0 AWG through 4/0 AWG 180 feet 80 feet
Now the problem is that the 18 thru 8 AWG is smaller than the 6 thru 1/0 AWG but the spacing is less. If you look at the table the spacing is progressively larger as the wire gauge becomes smaller. The spacing given as 100 feet is incorrect. It should be larger than 200 feet. Also, the spacing for the 6 thri 1/0 AWG for copper is the same as the 18 thru 8 AWG. The spacing given as 100 feet is incorrect because it is the same as the spacing given for the 18 thru 8 AWG which is smaller wire. It should read somewhere between 100 and 80 feet as given for the 2/0 thru 4/0 AWG wire. The numbers that I will propose will be 220 and 100 feet respectively.
size of wire Al or Cu-clad Cu
18 AWG through 8 AWG 100 feet 100 feet
6 AWG through 1/0 AWG 200 feet 100 feet
2/0 AWG through 4/0 AWG 180 feet 80 feet
Now the problem is that the 18 thru 8 AWG is smaller than the 6 thru 1/0 AWG but the spacing is less. If you look at the table the spacing is progressively larger as the wire gauge becomes smaller. The spacing given as 100 feet is incorrect. It should be larger than 200 feet. Also, the spacing for the 6 thri 1/0 AWG for copper is the same as the 18 thru 8 AWG. The spacing given as 100 feet is incorrect because it is the same as the spacing given for the 18 thru 8 AWG which is smaller wire. It should read somewhere between 100 and 80 feet as given for the 2/0 thru 4/0 AWG wire. The numbers that I will propose will be 220 and 100 feet respectively.