parrellel runs again

Status
Not open for further replies.
randys said:
I believe this discussion began with a question about Parallel Installations, can we please stay focused.
Click to expand...
It did. And it was quickly, and correctly, answered with the assertion that parallel sets of conductors are allowed to be in the same conduit. You took us off topic with an incorrect description of what parallel means. Since your profile lists yourself as someone seeking to become an apprentice, a lack of complete understanding of the fundamental concepts is to be expected. I (and the others) made an effort to correct your misconceptions. You don?t seem open to the suggestion that your conceptions might be invalid.

We are open to contrary opinions, and to disagreements, so long as they are offered in a professional and polite manner. You don?t have to agree with another member, for no better reason than that person might be a master electrician with 30 more years of experience than yourself, or might be (like myself) a licensed professional engineer with a master?s degree and 35 years in the field. We might be wrong, and you might be right, and I for one am willing to admit when I am proven wrong. But if you are a betting person, as I am not, then it might be a wise bet to put your money on the guy with the master?s license or the one with the master?s degree. The odds are definitely in their favor, that they might be the ones who are right.
 
Intended meaning of the code vs. personal interpretations of the code

Intended meaning of the code vs. personal interpretations of the code

Different strokes for different folks until the electrical inspectors and AHJ look at the electrical installations and approve or deny such handiwork.
 
randys said:
Different strokes for different folks until the electrical inspectors and AHJ look at the electrical installations and approve or deny such handiwork.
Click to expand...


Randy, what's with the attitude. Members here are trying to show you where you are incorrect. If you have an ahj that is turning this down then he is incorrect. The mods have gone out of there way to show you but I guess my joke of trying to convince you is a reality. You don't have to accept this info. You can believe what you want but as a student I am quite surprised with your unwillingness to listen and learn.
 
randys said:
Different strokes for different folks until the electrical inspectors and AHJ look at the electrical installations and approve or deny such handiwork.
Click to expand...

If they are inspecting for NEC compliance they will have to approve the installation described by the OP.

Once again, have you looked at the profiles of those responding in this thread?


Roger
 
A picture is worth a thousand words.

A picture is worth a thousand words.

If you ever get a copy of the Illustrated Guide to the National Electric Code 4th Edition by Charles R. Miller, please look at page 88 concerning Conductors in Parallel. I'm sure that will answer this question once and for all and forever.

There will always be exceptions.
I am still learning just not at as fast a pace as I used to, so please forgive me for believing in myself so much and not believing in others as much as I should.
 
So you've been a member for four years and not a post until today?:confused:

Some picture a guy drew in a book is not enforceable.

Mr Kennedy's old signature:(I think)
"NEC Handbook commentary is not enforceable"
 
Now if your running all the wires in parallel in the same conduit 2-As, 2-Bs, 2-Cs, and 2-Ns and an egc 9 would you have to derate since each set of wires making a phase would be added as one making it seem like five wires all together?
 
walkerj said:
So you've been a member for four years and not a post until today?:confused:
Click to expand...

Randy, to be honest with you, I found your join date and post count interesting to say the least.

Some picture a guy drew in a book is not enforceable.

Mr Kennedy's old signature:(I think)
"NEC Handbook commentary is not enforceable"
Click to expand...
You are correct Jason, in both statements.
 
nunu161 said:
Now if your running all the wires in parallel in the same conduit 2-As, 2-Bs, 2-Cs, and 2-Ns and an egc 9 would you have to derate since each set of wires making a phase would be added as one making it seem like five wires all together?
Click to expand...


The derating was posted a few times but why would you only count the parallel wire as one. I see this as 6 CCC if we have a 3 phase system. Where do you get 5 from.
 
Randy,
If you won't believe us, maybe you will believe Code Making Panel 6.
6-33 Log #3097 NEC-P06
(310-15(B)(2)(a))
Final Action: Accept
Submitter: James W. Carpenter, International Association of Electrical Inspectors
Recommendation:
Add a new last sentence to Section 310.15(B)(2)(a) so the section will read as follows:
(a) More than Three Current-Carrying Conductors in a Raceway or Cable. Where the number of current-carrying conductors in a raceway
or cable exceeds three, or where single conductors or multiconductor cables are stacked or bundled longer than 600 mm (24 in.) without
maintaining spacing and are not installed in raceways, the allowable ampacity of each conductor shall be reduced as shown in Table
310.15(B)(2)(a). Each current-carrying conductor of a paralleled set of conductors shall be counted as a current-carrying conductor.
Substantiation:
Section 310.4 states, in part, "shall be permitted to be connected in parallel (electrically joined at both ends to form a single
conductor)." Section 310.15(B)(2)(a) details the ampacity adjustment requirements for installations where "More than Three
Current-Carrying Conductors in a Raceway or Cable" are installed.
In applying these provisions, each current-carrying conductor of a parallel set of current-carrying conductors is counted when
determining the total number of current-carrying conductors. For example, if two current-carrying conductors are paralleled together for
each phase of a three-phase circuit, the total number of current carrying conductors is six. However, the language in 310.4 infers that
paralleled conductors, "(electrically joined at both ends to form a single conductor)", are counted as a single conductor as the language
uses the word "single". This would result in three (3) current-carrying conductors when applying the example mentioned above. Several
contractors have expressed this opinion when I have turned down the installation.
This proposal is intended to resolve the misconception, presented by the language in 310.4, that paralleled conductors are counted as a
single conductor when applying the provisions in 310.15(B)(2)(a).
Panel Meeting Action: Accept
Number Eligible to Vote: 11
Ballot Results: Affirmative: 11
Click to expand...
The text in bold was the proposed change. The only reason you would ever need to apply this would be if you have more than one conductor of each phase within in a common raceway or cable.
 
Bill Doziers Question

Bill Doziers Question

To Don ResqCapt:

Why are you so into convincing me that I'm wrong when you are supposed to be convincing Bill Dozier of the correct answer to his question?

His question was : "Hey guys talking to one of the guys who is working on the commercial job with the parrellel runs this morning. He threw me a curve ball in saying that they had multiple sets of wires in the same conduit. My understanding of this statement is that from poco to the mdp they ran one conduit with two full sets of wires. Is that acceptable. To me it sounds like a major screwup on thier part. What article would address this. Ill try to post more info tomorrow thanks as always" end quote

It's up to Bill what to believe when he gets back here tomorrow.

His obvious concerns were "parallel runs" and "major screwup on their part"
 
Last edited:
randys said:
...
His obvious concerns were "parallel runs" and "major screwup on their part"
Click to expand...
And it is also obvious that his installation is code compliant, with the only possible issue being the derating that is required for more than 3 current carrying conductors.
His question was correctly answered very early in this thread.
 
randys said:
To Don ResqCapt:

Why are you so into convincing me that I'm wrong when you are supposed to be convincing Bill Dozier of the correct answer to his question?

His question was : "Hey guys talking to one of the guys who is working on the commercial job with the parrellel runs this morning. He threw me a curve ball in saying that they had multiple sets of wires in the same conduit. My understanding of this statement is that from poco to the mdp they ran one conduit with two full sets of wires. Is that acceptable. To me it sounds like a major screwup on thier part. What article would address this. Ill try to post more info tomorrow thanks as always" end quote

It's up to Bill what to believe when he gets back here tomorrow.

His obvious concerns were "parallel runs" and "major screwup on their part"
Click to expand...


Bill's question was answered many times over by many different posters. I'll say it again too. Parallel conductors are permitted in the same conduit providing they're derated. Do you disagree with those statements?
 
The derating was posted a few times but why would you only count the parallel wire as one. I see this as 6 CCC if we have a 3 phase system. Where do you get 5 from.
Click to expand...
Well if lets say your doing a 3-phase delta system with no line-to -neutral loads but your pulling a grounded/neutral conductor for fault conditions when sizing this grounded conductor, and all the conductors are in the same conduit you would add the circular mils of the conductors of any 1 phase and then divide by 12.5 % for your grounded conductor. So my question is how can you derate the ungrounded conductors when your calculating them as 1 larger conductor for the neutral?
 
nunu161 said:
Well if lets say your doing a 3-phase delta system with no line-to -neutral loads but your pulling a grounded/neutral conductor for fault conditions when sizing this grounded conductor, and all the conductors are in the same conduit you would add the circular mils of the conductors of any 1 phase and then divide by 12.5 % for your grounded conductor. So my question is how can you derate the ungrounded conductors when your calculating them as 1 larger conductor for the neutral?
Click to expand...

You should probably start a new thread with that question.
 
I think you're beating a dead horse with this one guys.

You've all explained it to him six ways from Sunday and he can't accept the fact he might be wrong. Not even a little, and with a slight attitude to boot! You all certainly have more patience than I do....:cool:
 
Randy with no offense to you I am inclined to trust those who have posted many times on this forum over you. My thought was Ive never seen this done before thus it seems wrong. However just because ive never seen it done doesnt mean its the wrong way to do something. I guess well have to wait approval from the ahj on the job. Which could be monthes. To the moderators due to the nature of this post and my question being answered perhaps it should be closed. Thanks to all who have posted
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top