Panelboards and "skirts"

Merry Christmas
Status
Not open for further replies.
riverjig87

riverjig87

Member
Location
Minot, North Dakota, USA
First, If this question has been answered, I would appreciate the link to it. I have done a pretty good job of searching for this topic.
(Please note I use the term "skirt" to describe what I think is a metal wireway but remain unsure at the present)

I have my panelboards in the electric room with metal skirts attached to the bottom of each panelboard in order to extend the panel to the ground. Our branch circuit conduits are in the form of rigid elbows with at least 3" of the rigid elbow extending above the slab. This "skirt" has a removable cover in order to access these conduits. The purpose of this skirt is to provide protection to our branch circuit conductors so they may enter the panelboard. We did remove the bottoms of the panelboards and bolted the skirts to them to create mechanical continuity.

Does this "skirt" qualify as a wireway? Is this wireway now part of the panelboard?

Our inspector feels that by adding this "skirt", we now have created a floor standing panelboard and remain subject to Article 408.5. If indeed we are subject to 408.5, we will have to either trim some of the conduits extending above the slab to 3" or shorter, or provide a divider between the skirt and panelboard and punch a couple holes with chase nipples to provide seperation..

I appreciate any help on this matter. Thank you
 
The inspector should read the definition of Switchboard in Article 100. "switchboards are generally accessible from the rear as well as from the front and are not intended to be installed in cabinets." See the definition of cabinet in Art 100.



Are the panels service panels, or are they located on the load side of the service disconnecting means?

If the panels are service panels, you have auxilary gutters (366), if the panels are located on the load side of the service disconnect, they are metal wireways (376).
 
If your inspector doesn't accept Pierre's answer (which he should) you may consider not cutting down the pipe but raising the floor. A few bags of concrete may change the condition.
 
wow! talk about opening a whole can of worms. If they are auxilary gutters or wireways, what about listing & labeling ?
 
Pierre C Belarge said:
If the panels are service panels, you have auxilary gutters (366), if the panels are located on the load side of the service disconnect, they are metal wireways (376).
Click to expand...
IMO they are are aux gutters no matter what equipment they are on - they share the same listing with wireways (Some are both), although both are wireways to the effects of 310.15 etc., and aux gutter being allowed to have buss work extend for the panel they are an "Auxiliary" to, and not extend more than 30', but still does not make them part of the "panel-board", or for that matter even part of the "cabinet" that the "panel board" is in..... And by no means would it make it subject to 408.5 IMO, since even if you did want to call it a "Switch board" - there are no "exposed live parts". (Unless this code number changed)
 
For the OP - is there a 'bottom' to this wire-way/enclosure or just open to the concrete floor????? The augument above still stands - but does not sound like the 'enclosure' is fully kosher though from your wording.
 
e57 said:
IMO they are are aux gutters no matter what equipment they are on - they share the same listing with wireways (Some are both), although both are wireways to the effects of 310.15 etc., and aux gutter being allowed to have buss work extend for the panel they are an "Auxiliary" to, and not extend more than 30', but still does not make them part of the "panel-board", or for that matter even part of the "cabinet" that the "panel board" is in..... And by no means would it make it subject to 408.5 IMO, since even if you did want to call it a "Switch board" - there are no "exposed live parts". (Unless this code number changed)
Click to expand...



Good catch. I stand corrected as to the kind of equipment the auxillary gutter is attached to.
 
riverjig87,

Are these "skirts" made by the manafacturer of the panels, or something that was

fabricated ? IMO, This is not a floor standing panelboard , it's a wall mounted panelboard

with a metal extention to the floor. IMO, 408.5 is not for the type of set-up you have, but

need to know what the "skirt" really is.

side note: Why not just use emt from floor to original bottom of tub ?
 
Thinking about this one more, while the inspector is dead wrong on what he sited you with - there is a point..... And solely IMO to his descretion to allow or dis-allow it.

312.5 Cabinets, Cutout Boxes, and Meter Socket Enclosures.
Conductors entering enclosures within the scope of this article shall be protected from abrasion and shall comply with 312.5(A) through (C).
(A) Openings to Be Closed. Openings through which conductors enter shall be adequately closed.
Click to expand...

Adequate is subjective language - and I'm one known to reach.... I don't see the words "Concrete floor" below:
II. Construction Specifications
312.10 Material.
Cabinets, cutout boxes, and meter socket enclosures shall comply with 312.10(A) through (C).
(A) Metal Cabinets and Cutout Boxes. Metal enclosures within the scope of this article shall be protected both inside and outside against corrosion.
FPN:For information on protection against corrosion, see 300.6.
(B) Strength. The design and construction of enclosures within the scope of this article shall be such as to secure ample strength and rigidity. If constructed of sheet steel, the metal thickness shall not be less than 1.35 mm (0.053 in.) uncoated.
(C) Nonmetallic Cabinets. Nonmetallic cabinets shall be listed or they shall be submitted for approval prior to installation.
Click to expand...
 
I have used "skirts" above and below panelboards for a cover of cables extending into the panelboards but never for what the OP is describing.

From what I am reading the conduits come out of the slab and then the conductors run without protection to the panelboard that had its endwall removed. Then a "skirt" was installed over the conduits to the panelboard. This "skirt" has an open back, bottom and top.

I don't see why the conduits couldn't have been extended to the panelboard with EMT either.
 
Pierre C Belarge said:
Listing and labeling of what?

Are you concerned about the installer cutting out the bottom to bolt the wireway to the panel?
Click to expand...

No, my concern is about a piece of sheet metal covering some exposed conductors as opposed to a listed and labled auxiliary gutter constructed in accordance with 366.100.
In addition, there might be legimate question about removing the bottom of the listed paneboard.
All in all, I just can't see it being Code compliant.
 
There is a requirement that they be approved, however.
In that major manufacturers such as Hoffman * Wiegmann do supply wireways & gutters that are UL listed, it's difficult to obtain an inspector's approval in this area without using "listed" wireways & gutters.
 
augie47 said:
There is a requirement that they be approved, however.
In that major manufacturers such as Hoffman * Wiegmann do supply wireways & gutters that are UL listed, it's difficult to obtain an inspector's approval in this area without using "listed" wireways & gutters.
Click to expand...

Correct, the auxilary gutter or wireway would need to be approved.

If all of the construction requirements of 366.100 or 376.100 are met, but the gutter was not listed, would you, or would you not approve it?

Chris
 
based on TN State Code:

ELECTRICAL INSTALLATIONS CHAPTER 0780-2-1
0780-2-1-.03 APPROVAL OF ELECTRICAL PRODUCTS.
(1) Approved Testing Laboratories.
(a) The State Fire Marshal will accept as satisfactory (when properly installed or used) materials,
equipment, devices, or applicants which:
1. Bear a label, symbol, or other identifying mark of one of the following independent
(NRTL listings)

I would not approve it.
 
Augie
What happens sometimes is we see an installation practice that has never been used in our jurisdiction/locale.
Because it is different and seems like an issue, our brains have a hard time wrapping around the idea that the installation is code compliant. Take out of the equation that we do not like something and then it gets easier to be open minded.
Opening the bottom of the panel enclosure is not to much different than having many cables or conduits entering the enclosure. As long as the panel is not structurally damaged and the bonding is satisfactory. I do not sse an issue.
As a matter of fact, I see a code compliant installation that may give some wiring relief to an installer in regards to the ease of access for wiring methods.
 
The 2008 NEC allow open bottom enclosures in section 300.12 Ex 2, but I am not sure about a "skirt".
 
Last edited:
Pierre,
I hope I am not approaching this, or any other inspection, with a "closed mind" attitude. I try hard not to do that. I agree, we must be "open" to new ideas. Not to beat a dead horse, but in this case it seems to me that the contractor could use: (a) an acceptable practice to terminate the conduits directly in the panel or (b) purchase "lsited" auxiliary gutters or j boxes to accomplish what seems to be the same goal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top