NM Raceway?

[websparky]

Hi Guys,

Found this today at a new home rough inspection.

Has anyone here used this product?
They tell me it comes with a three sided snap-on cover.

I don't think I like it. I can think of three code articles being violated in this application.
Do you agree?

[ July 18, 2005, 08:23 PM: Message edited by: websparky ]

 

[jimwalker]

Re: NM Raceway?

1. that looks like non PT wood on block wall
2. looks like less than 1 1/4 inches from edge of floor joist
3.walks very close on bunding

 

[jimwalker]

Re: NM Raceway?

what is that piece of romen 2 blocks to the right ?

 

[iwire]

Re: NM Raceway?

334.13(C) to start with.

Wheres the running board?

 

[mike1964]

Re: NM Raceway?

jimwalker, that is the gas line. Its also yellow in color

 

[ryan_618]

Re: NM Raceway?

This looks like a basement to me. If it is, anbd they are finishing it, they will probably be building a "drop" around it and the ducts. If they do build a drop, and they sheetrock anround this, this only thing I can think of would be bundling. But...310.15(B)(2)(a) only talks about bridle rings in regards to MC cable (exc 5), not NM cable...so is this really bundling?

Correct me if I'm wrong, please, but are those not basically bridle rings?

 

[pierre]

Re: NM Raceway?

Dave
That looks like a roughing plate for 'low voltage' work. A nifty idea, but it may be a violation of 334.15(C), 110.3(B) and possibly 310.15(B)(2)(a) exception No. 5. Unless this is a new product that I have not seen, then it is up to the AHJ - 90.4.

Pierre

 

[luke warmwater]

Re: NM Raceway?

I don't like what appears to be duct work in the panel workspace.

I would also be very concerned with the ?#8/3? and others being within 1-1/4" of the subfloor above.

?bundling issue, maybe
?running boards, true, but I still kind of like the plastic D-rings thing.

The 2x4 is kind of cheesy. I like a full sheet of plywood screwed to p.t. 2x4's on the wall.

 

[ryan_618]

Re: NM Raceway?

334.30 calls for securing of NM cable, not just supporting. Would these be considered a securing type of device? Supporting..yes. Securing?...I dunno.....

 

[criselect]

Re: NM Raceway?

It also looks as if the panel is mounted directly to the foundation. My guys would like to do it this way to save drilling the basement. Think some was cutting corners.

 

[charlie]

Re: NM Raceway?

I remember seeing this product and (if I remember correctly) it is listed for this purpose. Actually, I like it. It is open on the top to allow the cable to breath and yet it protects, supports, and secures the cable. This product is not meant to be made non-accessible by covering it with drywall (again, if I remember correctly).

 

[charlie]

Re: NM Raceway?

It also looks as if the panel is mounted directly to the foundation.

It looks to me like this is not an outside wall in direct contact with the earth. If that is the case, I don't see a problem.

 

[electricmanscott]

Re: NM Raceway?

Originally posted by charlie:
It looks to me like this is not an outside wall in direct contact with the earth. If that is the case, I don't see a problem. [/QB]

Charlie you never told us you had X ray vision.

 

[websparky]

Re: NM Raceway?

Some questions answered:

The panel is on an outside wall and is mounted on 2x4's to the block.
The duct work is not as close as it appears in the photo.
The basement will remain unfinished.

I remember seeing this product and (if I remember correctly) it is listed for this purpose.

Charlie,
Does this product also satisfy the "secured and supported" requirements? If it does, OK. But, what about derating of the conductors?

Does anyone have a guess as to where I could find product info on the net??

Thanks to all.

 

[curt swartz]

Re: NM Raceway?

I?m just curious here but what would be that problem with mounting the panel directly to the foundation? Being from California I don?t see many basements but when they do get built quite a bit of money and time is put into waterproofing them. I realize that water can still be wicked up by the concrete but using plywood behind the panel will not stop the water.

I don?t see how using these brackets is safer than stapling the cables to the bottom of the joists which would be a violation of 334.15(C)

 

[hbiss]

Re: NM Raceway?

Curt, you are supposed to mount the plywood to a couple of 2x4 cleats then fasten the whole thing to the wall so that you have an airspace behind the plywood.

My take on these hangers is the same- they promote bundling and I can't see how they are any different than stapling to the underside of the joists. If they are supposed to be only used for exposed runs consider that sooner or later most basements are finished. Then what the heck do you do? You think some home owner or contractor is going to rip out all that NM and put it through holes in the joists? I don't think so. This product just encourages lazy and sloppy electrical work and I can't see how it was ever listed anyway!

-Hal

 

[iwire]

Re: NM Raceway?

Originally posted by hbiss:
Curt, you are supposed to mount the plywood to a couple of 2x4 cleats then fasten the whole thing to the wall so that you have an airspace behind the plywood.

Where would I find that rule?

Sure these may be listed as NM supports but I still think these 'NM' hangers are a violation of 334.13(C) when used in an unfinished basement.

It makes no sense that this is OK but stapling the wires under the joists is wrong.

JMO

 

[msd]

Re: NM Raceway?

Nobody has asked so I will.

What is this product, and is it listed for this application? That is all that matters.

If we like it or not has no bearing here.

On a personal side..... I am leaning tword accepting this installation except for the stapled romex being too close to the edges of the joist. An easily fixed issue.

Although below the joists, I'de conclude that these conductors are less accessable than those exiting the top of the panel. Thus less likely to physical damage then those at a lower elevation. But only if the supports are listed for this use. Next I would have to consider the height of the conductors from the floor and if this height constituted a hazardous condition.

Althought this perticular installation may not be the best visual pleasing. I see no emminate safety concerns. As with any installation, we can knit-pick the NEC here and fail this job just like any oher installation. That is not the intent of the code.

 

[electricmanscott]

Re: NM Raceway?

Originally posted by hbiss:
If they are supposed to be only used for exposed runs consider that sooner or later most basements are finished.
-Hal

This is a completely untrue statement.
Does anyone have any product info for these. Maybe we can end the debate here. Dave? You're the inspector here right? What do you think?

 

[pierre]

Re: NM Raceway?

One of the reasons that smaller conductors are not permitted perpendicular to the bottom of joists for unfinished basements without being on a running board or through bored holes is that people will hang items from the wire. These 'hangers' (which in my estimation are low voltage roughing plates) will not satisfy the requirement, therefore are not compliant.
Also panels/equipment are not required to be mounted on plywood, just maintain the 1/4 space for mounting.
I do like them mounted on boards, but...

Pierre