Pancake box capacity

[jumper]

You ma omit If the conductors enter from the dome. But when the conductors enter through the box then you still count the EGC of the NM cable.

:happyyes:

 

[jumper]

echnically the canopy has to be labeled with the cu.in in order to use it. That seems silly , IMO esp, in the case of using a 12/2 vs a 14/2.

That's what I thought but I don't see that in Jumpers post. In 30 + years I have never seen a canopy labeled with the cu in amount so I just disregard that.

Using an unmarked canopy as per the exception is allowed for fixture wires that enter from the canopy or a domed fixture. If the fixture wires entered from the box they would have to be counted and if one wanted to use the canopy for extra fill space the canopy would need to be marked.

At least that is how I read it.

 

[gadfly56]

Using an unmarked canopy as per the exception is allowed for fixture wires that enter from the canopy or a domed fixture. If the fixture wires entered from the box they would have to be counted and if one wanted to use the canopy for extra fill space the canopy would need to be marked.

At least that is how I read it.

...And by the manufacturer.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

...And by the manufacturer.

The point was made that the article does not mention marked by the manufacturer but, IMO it is implied and How I would call it.

(A) Box Volume Calculations. The volume of a wiring
enclosure (box) shall be the total volume of the assembled
sections and, where used, the space provided by plaster
rings, domed covers, extension rings, and so forth, that are
marked with their volume or are made from boxes the dimensions
of which are listed in Table 314.16(A).

 

[gadfly56]

The point was made that the article does not mention marked by the manufacturer but, IMO it is implied and How I would call it.

I don't believe you are correct. Please see post #17 and what (A)(2) says.

 

[GoldDigger]

I don't believe you are correct. Please see post #17 and what (A)(2) says.

You could argue that the canopy is a box extension and not a box subject to (A)(2).

 

[luckylerado]

FWIW, the code does seem capable of differentiating between field marked and factory marked when they mean to. I base this mainly on the language of 110.16 but both terms appear together in several places throughout the code. IMO it is or it is not, we should take it for what it says and give the author the benefit of the doubt that they knew what they were stating and not stating. Since the term "marked" is not defined, it could be taken both ways unless qualified with "field" or "factory"

I also see the code as drawing a clear line between "boxes" and "domed canopies" and therefore would not apply 314.16(A)(2) to a domed cover as it is not a box or the tittle of this paragraph would be "other boxes and domed covers".

JMO but I like to stir the pot:lol:

 

[gadfly56]

You could argue that the canopy is a box extension and not a box subject to (A)(2).

It is not in the table and so is not "standard" and as such I'd argue it must be marked, as is otherwise assumed by (A).

 

[Dennis Alwon]

I don't believe you are correct. Please see post #17 and what (A)(2) says.

You don't believe I am correct yet you agree with me that the manufacturer should mark it...:? :lol:

I also don't think A(2) has anything to do with canopies. Canopies are not mentioned there just boxes-- different animal. Now because the manufacturer requirement is mentioned in A(2) should we infer the same for (A) or did the code panel deliberately leave it out in (A). Again, I think the manufacturer marking is req. as it would be beyond most of us to try and calculate the volume of some canopies and we certainly can make it whatever we wanted...LOL It would be silly to expect the installer to mark the canopy.

That being said I have never seen a canopy with the volume written on it.

 

[ritelec]

They don't go inside the fixture box. They mount in the fan canopy so don't effect the box fill.

barely

 

[JFletcher]

That would be the 4" version. So the 3.5" ones are never compliant I guess - 4 Cu in.

Would have been with older 2 wire NM or if the raceway is an EGC.

 

[kwired]

Would have been with older 2 wire NM or if the raceway is an EGC.

I can't tell you how many older installs I have seen with 3 or 4 NM cables entering one of those boxes.

 

[Frank DuVal]

I just want to know if anyone has had an inspector make a note of a pancake box and then had them request removal of the canopy to check for cu in marking at final.:?

 

[gadfly56]

I just want to know if anyone has had an inspector make a note of a pancake box and then had them request removal of the canopy to check for cu in marking at final.:?

Assuming the inspector asks at all, wouldn't he/she be more likely to make that request at the rough-in?

 

[kwired]

Assuming the inspector asks at all, wouldn't he/she be more likely to make that request at the rough-in?

The canopy of the fixture generally isn't there at rough in.

 

[gadfly56]

The canopy of the fixture generally isn't there at rough in.

Ahhh, yes. Misread the original comment to mean removing the canopy to view the box capacity. :slaphead: