No raintite EMT fittings?

[tom baker]

Did anyone get Mike Holts email newsletter that stated no manufacturer makes a listed, raintight connector? Here is the orginal newsletter:

No EMT Fitting is Listed as Raintight!

At the local International Association of Electrical Inspectors chapter meeting we learned something I thought you should hear about. Feel free to pass the word.

Currently (June 2003), no manufacturer is authorized to mark their Listed compression type EMT fittings with the "Raintight" marking.

There are no raintight electrical metallic tubing (EMT) fittings approved by any nationally recognized testing laboratory at this time. No matter what the box or packaging says. Most manufacturers have removed the listing information, others have not.

Issue will be big deal in some jurisdictions and a non-issue in others (NEC 90-4 and 90-7). Be advised.

For more information: http://www.ul.com/regulators/raintight.html

Scott Davis, Electrical Plan Examiner
sdavis@ci.santa-ana.ca.us
City of Santa Ana
Planning & Building Agency

 

[bphgravity]

Re: No raintite EMT fittings?

I already made a post on this issue a few days ago, however maybe you will get more of a response.

http://www.mikeholt.com/codeforum/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=11;t=000941

 

[roger]

Re: No raintite EMT fittings?

I want to know if there is going to be an announcement by UL that the reference in the Green and White books to these listed fittings doesn't exist. :roll: Or in the least, that after April 03 they don't exist.

I would be interested to know why in the middle of a code cycle (I know this is not relevant to UL listing proceedures) the rules have changed.

Is there some entity that wants EMT eliminated from the raintight installations?

Roger

 

[curt swartz]

Re: No raintite EMT fittings?

Roger

If you click on the link to UL's site it looks like they haven't existed since March 2002 and as of April 2003 none of the manufactures have redesigned their fittings to meet the new requirements yet.

I wouldn't be surprised if the reason that the manufactures haven't changed their fittings to meet the new requirements is that very few people were aware that these fittings were no longer listed for raintight use. Now thanks to Mike Holt for making electricians and inspectors aware of this issue the manufactures will be forced to redesign their fittings.

 

[roger]

Re: No raintite EMT fittings?

Curt, this is fine and dandy, but as you said, (and this is my point)

very few people were aware that these fittings were no longer listed for raintight use.

.

Another problem is why did this happen after the 2002 UL books were out. (March 02)

Take in reality as you said here,

Now thanks to Mike Holt for making electricians and inspectors aware of this issue the manufactures will be forced to redesign their fittings.

the majority of electrical associated people probably don't read trade magazines, Mike Holts information , IAEI information, visit here, etc...

I'm not saying they are inferior for not doing so either.

My problem is with the way this covertly came about and why.

If this installation is and has been safe in the past, what all of a sudden red flaged a flaw.

If in a wet enviroment the conductors are suited for such, what is the problem anyways? (I know, this has nothing to do with a listing for the fitting)

Roger

[ June 15, 2003, 09:44 PM: Message edited by: roger ]

 

[curt swartz]

Re: No raintite EMT fittings?

Roger

I agree that this whole thing seems strange and I can't give you any answers as to why it all of a sudden came about.

I also realize that only a small percentage of electricians and inspectors visit this forum but at least those of use that do are now aware of this listing issue. Many of use have been installing these fitting unaware that they are no longer listed for raintight applications. As you said if the conductors are suitable for wet locations its probably not a big deal if the raceway is entering the bottom of enclosures but if the raceway is entering the top of enclosures then we need to make sure we use connectors listed to prevent the entrance of water.

 

[bennie]

Re: No raintite EMT fittings?

Buy stock in the manufacturers of fittings. There will soon be a five dollar raintight coupling and connector

 

[jim dungar]

Re: No raintite EMT fittings?

On 6/13/03, a gentleman in my office contacted Thomas and Betts tech support and was told their EMT compression connectors are suitable for raintight applications when used with sealing washers or sealing locknuts.

 

[tom baker]

Re: No raintite EMT fittings?

Jim, what T&B describes is how to terminate into a panel or can. Isn't the issue the connector itself?

 

[noxx]

Re: No raintite EMT fittings?

While T&B's suggestion may seal a can entry, it's no answer to couplings, which, if they allow water into the conduit, completely circumvent the seal at the can anyway.

On on a more realistic note, I have to say I too wonder what brought this about. It's been my experience that a properly tightened compression coupling is the most watertight fitting this side of well-glued RNC. I'll speculate tho that the most likely fix will be the addition of a non-metallic compression ring, akin to the variety found in seal-tite fittings.

Will be interesting to see how it resolves at any rate.

 

[bennie]

Re: No raintite EMT fittings?

If the fittings are no longer listed for raintight application, then the UL standards and credibility in past performance is questionable.

Has UL lost their listing?

 

[roger]

Re: No raintite EMT fittings?

Bennie, I was thinking the same thing.

Then again, maybe they just had low water pressure the day they listed these fittings way back when.


Roger

 

[jerod]

Re: No raintite EMT fittings?

i was taught never to use emt couplings in wet areas or unprotected from direct rain and snow. i have always specified my jobs rgc and pvc. if i know from past experience that a listed device is not living up to standard i will not use it, regardless if it is legal. if i had my way i would do away with all emt and fittings.

 

[iwire]

Re: No raintite EMT fittings?

Originally posted by jerod:
if i had my way i would do away with all emt and fittings.

Wow that is pretty extreme don't you think? :roll:

I do agree that it is a poor choice for wet locations, but I hope the issue of the listing of fittings gets straightened out so it is an option for the customer that wants it.

 

[roger]

Re: No raintite EMT fittings?

Jerod,

. i have always specified my jobs rgc and pvc.

as an electrician, how many jobs do you actually design?

Roger

 

[jerod]

Re: No raintite EMT fittings?

roger, i see alot of first year engineers and they come and go as fast as they arrive. our engineering department consists of civil only and only one of them is registered. i get prints for a job with absolutely no electrical drawings, i may get a one-line diagram that is stamped. once in a while they may farm out to an electrical engineer for design but there is usually a problem. so they give it to me and i spec it, draw it, buy the material and install it. then engineering department contracts to an electrical inspection firm. the best designers i have seen in all my years have been the all around experienced electricians. there seems to be many electricians on this forum doing design as well. believe me, i would rather have a decent set of drawings and have the material on site.

 

[roger]

Re: No raintite EMT fittings?

Jerod , with your previous post in mind, how do you, or should I say, what market are you in that you have the luxury to over design and make a profit. I must ask, do you not have to be competitive in the bidding world?

If you are in the competitve wars, installing RMC compared to EMT would certainly end a business in a short period.

Please enlighten us.

Roger

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Re: No raintite EMT fittings?

In my opinion, threaded couplings are not any where near as water tight as a compression EMT coupling. Why do EMT couplings have to be listed as rain tight when threaded couplings are not rain tight?
Don

 

[jerod]

Re: No raintite EMT fittings?

roger, it is your tax dollars at work! i have been at several installations where i have been brought in for rework, mostly to clean-up after inexperienced low bidder uninspected jobs. most of the emt jobs are shabby and very poor workmanship where the fittings are finger tight and stay secure for a very short time. my budget is open to a degree and depending on the project there is a return in the long run. some planning departments are starting to figure it out and outlaying a little more up front. someday they might pay enough to keep an ee. i could go on and on but i dont want to hijack this thread.

 

[iwire]

Re: No raintite EMT fittings?

Originally posted by jerod:
it is your tax dollars at work!

I am glad we have deep pockets. :roll:

Originally posted by jerod:
i have been at several installations where i have been brought in for rework, mostly to clean-up after inexperienced low bidder uninspected jobs. most of the emt jobs are shabby and very poor workmanship where the fittings are finger tight and stay secure for a very short time.

Did anyone think of forcing the original installer to do a quality job?

I am very confused, what is the environment that you are finding this in, factory, warehouse, office building?

Originally posted by jerod:
depending on the project there is a return in the long run. some planning departments are starting to figure it out and outlaying a little more up front.

If the installation is in an area that is likely to be exposed to physical damage then RMC might save money in the long run, but if not exposed to physical damage, the installation and future rework for changes gets much more costly when using a threaded system.

For myself there would have to be some compelling reasons to use RMC or IMC.