Outdoor residential spotlight

[Jpflex]

Ideally, fish the cable down the exterior wall from the attic to the box. Come in the back of the box if it is surface mounted. If that isn't possible (e.g. a header you don't want to drill), surface mount a round exterior box to the wall and run PVC conduit up the wall to an LB and pop in to the attic. This doesn't look as nice, but is code compliant. Run UF cable from the nearest attic box if you don't want a splice at the LB (LB and PVC conduit will just be a sleeve). Or conduit into the attic enough to reach a junction box and then NM cable from nearest box to the splice box, and then individual conductors from the splice box, into the LB, and down to the light box.

Use #14 if the circuit is 15A, or #12 if the circuit is 20A. Then it isn't a fixture tap.

The pvc / EMT outside along the exterior wall to an lb poped into the attack seems ok but you would have to use similar to THHWN-2 in the outside pvc but the lb listed for internal splicing could have nm cable enter it from the attic

 

[Seven-Delta-FortyOne]

You cannot use common sense as an excuse to do what ever you want because it's the authority having jurisdiction who allows exemptions.

If nec documentation does not allow nm cable in wet locations it is a matter of reading comprehension but not common sense.

Find me an example, out of the millions upon millions of outdoor lighting and receptacle outlets attached to the exterior of a structure, that are installed every single day for the past 70 years, with NM cable terminated in the box, that was rejected by the AHJ. I’ll wait.….


However, if you wish to install pvc coated rigid conduit with explosion proof fittings and THWN-2 wiring to a residential outdoor sconce, no one will stop you.

 

[Jpflex]

Yes it will work, you can have a fifteen amp branch circuit, with #14 wire and tie to a 500 kcmil wire for voltage drop, would not make sense, but totally legal.

I understand your statement for voltage drop but going from a smaller wire to a larger wire is not a tap. It would have to be the other way around

 

[Jpflex]

Find me an example, out of the millions upon millions of outdoor lighting and receptacle outlets attached to the exterior of a structure, that are installed every single day for the past 70 years, with NM cable terminated in the box, that was rejected by the AHJ. I’ll wait.….


However, if you wish to install pvc coated rigid conduit with explosion proof fittings and THWN-2 wiring to a residential outdoor sconce, no one will stop you.

That is an issue for NEC to correct. It doesn't matter how many people are smoking crack and no longer get prosecuted, it's still wrong.

Is typical romex nm cable listed for outdoors or wet locations? I'll wait....

 

[rambojoe]

That is an issue for NEC to correct. It doesn't matter how many people are smoking crack and no longer get prosecuted, it's still wrong.

Is typical romex nm cable listed for outdoors or wet locations? I'll wait....

Churchs are except. Crack smoking devil worshiping or not...

 

[Seven-Delta-FortyOne]

That is an issue for NEC to correct. It doesn't matter how many people are smoking crack and no longer get prosecuted, it's still wrong.

Is typical romex nm cable listed for outdoors or wet locations? I'll wait....

First of all, the NEC has nothing to do with right and wrong, it’s a fairly well-designed document based on engineering, that’s all, and it cannot possibly cover every situation, nor is it infallible or all inclusive, which is why it’s rewritten every 3 years.

So in those areas where the NEC is partially unclear, industry standard methods and what is traditionally approved has as much weight as the NEC.

I don’t care what the book says, NM has been, and will continue to be, terminated in exterior boxes. Every electrician in this country who works in residential, and every inspector who inspects residential installations, understands this.

You however, are free to wire as you please. That doesn’t make me, or the tens of thousands of other electricians, wrong, nor does it make the NEC the Holy Word, written with the Finger of God. Its merely another pretty decent document based on imperfect engineering and educated guesses.

 

[retirede]

I like self-contained, solar powered motion lights. Especially if there’s no easy way to run power to the desired location.

 

[James L]

Just as a technical addition, NM is short for "non-metallic sheathed"

Once you strip the sheath off, it's no longer sheathed...right?

I contend that technically it's no longer NM where there's no sheath (in the box)

 

[ramsy]

I don’t care what the book says, NM has been, and will continue to be, terminated in exterior boxes. Every electrician in this country who works in residential, and every inspector who inspects residential installations, understands this.

AHJ combination inspectors have got by with less code knowledge than a first year apprentice, just by checking listing & nameplate requirements encountered in the field.

If checking product listing of NM cable without the sheath, typically found in boxes, inspectors can see THHN "Amperage Ratings*" change when not "Dry," but wont see a need to red tag if properly fused, unless equipment termination temperature is listed or marked otherwise.

https://images.thdstatic.com/catalog/pdfImages/50/5079b146-d445-4f17-8b2e-2fddf0de67b0.pdf

EC's that wont use solid wire in exterior boxes & raceways can keep that trade secret from GC's that don't know better.

IMHO, local AHJ inspectors may focus on revenue measures, tax assessment, and State-specific Certifications that favor NRTL listing & nameplate academics, so less consistent NEC adoption may be delegated to plan checkers & licensed-contractor experience.

 

[LarryFine]

EC's that wont use solid wire in exterior boxes & raceways can keep that trade secret from GC's that don't know better.

Would you please explain this? I read it several times and don't now what you mean.

 

[ramsy]

Would you please explain this? I read it several times and don't now what you mean.

Inspectors may not red tag unsheathed NM (THHN) in outlets attached to building exteriors, if NM product listing wont prohibit it.

 

[ramsy]

Would you please explain this? I read it several times and don't now what you mean.

EC’s may have other reasons for preferring stranded, or THWN-2, but need not argue that point with rivals.

 

[Jpflex]

First of all, the NEC has nothing to do with right and wrong, it’s a fairly well-designed document based on engineering, that’s all, and it cannot possibly cover every situation, nor is it infallible or all inclusive, which is why it’s rewritten every 3 years.

So in those areas where the NEC is partially unclear, industry standard methods and what is traditionally approved has as much weight as the NEC.

I don’t care what the book says, NM has been, and will continue to be, terminated in exterior boxes. Every electrician in this country who works in residential, and every inspector who inspects residential installations, understands this.

You however, are free to wire as you please. That doesn’t make me, or the tens of thousands of other electricians, wrong, nor does it make the NEC the Holy Word, written with the Finger of God. Its merely another pretty decent document based on imperfect engineering and educated guesses.

Engineering is based on mathematics and science which findings result in a right or wrong answer. The NEC is built for safe working practices often designed from correct mathematical solutions among other things

 

[Fred B]

Just as a technical addition, NM is short for "non-metallic sheathed"

Once you strip the sheath off, it's no longer sheathed...right?

I contend that technically it's no longer NM where there's no sheath (in the box)

Better check 334.15(C) were in part it states:
"The sheath of the nonmetallic-sheathed cable shall extend through the conduit or tubing and into the outlet, device, or junction box not less than 6 mm (1⁄4 in.). The cable shall be secured within 300 mm (12 in.) of the point where the cable enters the conduit or tubing."

Big issue continues to be the paper wrapping of the conductors that WILL wick moisture up into the NM cable. Have yet to find an exterior enclosure that remained "water tight" after a few years. Have had some NM that will wick over 20ft and some that when replacing have been able to wring water out of the paper overwrap, and none of that was ever "submerged".

Common practice, and not being called out by inspectors, but still a violation. Not sure the solution. Change the rules? I don't think so as there is some validity, and definitely potential for abuse if allowed with limits. Extreme enforcement? Would be met with extreme pushback, as solution would be a lot of extra wiring of UF or conduit with thwn-2, from last point of connection prior to exit of structure that could be all the way back to the panel, just for the want of a 1/4" entering an exterior light of receptacle.
Best solution would be to create a listed device that could seal end of NM sheath to prevent water entry. Maybe I'll work on one, got an idea for one.

 

[Jpflex]

Better check 334.15(C) were in part it states:
"The sheath of the nonmetallic-sheathed cable shall extend through the conduit or tubing and into the outlet, device, or junction box not less than 6 mm (1⁄4 in.). The cable shall be secured within 300 mm (12 in.) of the point where the cable enters the conduit or tubing."

Big issue continues to be the paper wrapping of the conductors that WILL wick moisture up into the NM cable. Have yet to find an exterior enclosure that remained "water tight" after a few years. Have had some NM that will wick over 20ft and some that when replacing have been able to wring water out of the paper overwrap, and none of that was ever "submerged".

Common practice, and not being called out by inspectors, but still a violation. Not sure the solution. Change the rules? I don't think so as there is some validity, and definitely potential for abuse if allowed with limits. Extreme enforcement? Would be met with extreme pushback, as solution would be a lot of extra wiring of UF or conduit with thwn-2, from last point of connection prior to exit of structure that could be all the way back to the panel, just for the want of a 1/4" entering an exterior light of receptacle.
Best solution would be to create a listed device that could seal end of NM sheath to prevent water entry. Maybe I'll work on one, got an idea for one.

Thanks very much for the thorough explanation. I'm glad I'm not the only one who notices

 

[ramsy]

Thanks very much for the thorough explanation. I'm glad I'm not the only one who notices

The fewer clients your livelihood depends, the less leverage you have to notice.

Last contractor who fired me said, “go be an inspector somewhere else,” as if my nit picken, anal retentive, attention to detail was a bad thing?

Last Home-Warrant company that never called me back, was after they received my invoice with a material charge that included a $60.+ AFCI circuit breaker, as if AFCI’s were illegal.

 

[Jpflex]

The fewer clients your livelihood depends, the less leverage you have to notice.

Last contractor who fired me said, “go be an inspector somewhere else,” as if my nit picken, anal retentive, attention to detail was a bad thing?

Last Home-Warrant company that never called me back, was after they received my invoice with a material charge that included a $60.+ AFCI circuit breaker, as is AFCI’s were illegal.

I think you meant as "if" circuit breakers were illegal.

It's terrible that you can get outbid just for doing your job correct. Someone who offers a lower bid without using the more expensive code compliant equipment, gets the job. Meanwhile, the customer puts a bad review online for you and thinks your the crookfor charging more. However, it's the other guy who is the crook. Such utterly BS


Back when I was a licensed smog tech people would accept techs who would accept bribes to illegally pass their car without doing any work or repair but call the tech a crook who would refuse the bribe in favor of doing the actual work and often less than the cost of the bribe

 

[Fred B]

I think you meant as "if" circuit breakers were illegal.

It's terrible that you can get outbid just for doing your job correct. Someone who offers a lower bid without using the more expensive code compliant equipment, gets the job. Meanwhile, the customer puts a bad review online for you and thinks your the crookfor charging more. However, it's the other guy who is the crook. Such utterly BS


Back when I was a licensed smog tech people would accept techs who would accept bribes to illegally pass their car without doing any work or repair but call the tech a crook who would refuse the bribe in favor of doing the actual work and often less than the cost of the bribe

YES. But what really is the solution? As long as cheats are out there and allowed to do the cheat, legitimate EC desiring to do compliant work rarely have a chance when the customer is looking for the cheapest "lights come on" no matter the risk. Particularly when some of the risks don't come to fruition for years, and sometimes not until the next owner.

 

[LarryFine]

But what really is the solution?

Be happy with clients who understand and appreciate the difference.