Pull box with oversized raceways.

[electrofelon]

Is there a new exception allowing minimum allowed conduit size to be used in calculating pull box dimensions even if the actual installed raceway is larger? I could have sworn I recall that mentioned in a recent thread. I am still in the Stone age with my 2014 and do not see any such allowance.

 

[infinity]

I never heard of such an exception up to the 2017 NEC. Given the mountain of the dumb stuff they put into the 2020 anything is possible.

 

[ActionDave]

Since it is still close to Christmas I am going to grant you your wish and tell you it's true - you can now size a pull based on the conduit size you wanted to use and not the conduit size that was actually used.

 

[LarryFine]

Since it is still close to Christmas I am going to grant you your wish and tell you it's true - you can now size a pull based on the conduit size you wanted to use and not the conduit size that was actually used.

"Is it really true, or are you just saying it's true?"

 

[ActionDave]

"Is it really true, or are you just saying it's true?"

Well Larry in Virginia, I hate to break it to you, but.......

 

[electrofelon]

I never heard of such an exception up to the 2017 NEC. Given the mountain of the dumb stuff they put into the 2020 anything is possible.

Hmmm, maybe Im making that up or misread it. But why would that be dumb? Isnt it common sense? I have always thought about proposing a rewording of that section. If I have a set of 250's in a 4" pipe, what is the point of using 4" for my pull box sizing?

 

[electrofelon]

Since it is still close to Christmas I am going to grant you your wish and tell you it's true - you can now size a pull based on the conduit size you wanted to use and not the conduit size that was actually used.

YAY!!!!

 

[electrofelon]

While we are on the topic, another change I would like to see is the 6X between entries rule. Say I have a entry in the bottom of a box, on the right side, and its continuation is on the right side of the box near the bottom, what is wrong with just doing a big loop in the box? There should be an allowance for that. Hopefully Dave will grant me that too.

 

[LarryFine]

If I have a set of 250's in a 4" pipe, what is the point of using 4" for my pull box sizing?

A future upgrade with the largest conductors that will fit in the 4" conduit?

 

[wwhitney]

But why would that be dumb? Isnt it common sense? I have always thought about proposing a rewording of that section. If I have a set of 250's in a 4" pipe, what is the point of using 4" for my pull box sizing?

If you don't want to use 4" for the sizing requirements, and a smaller size is sufficient for the conductors, you could always put reducers at the box connections, right?

Cheers, Wayne

 

[Carultch]

If you don't want to use 4" for the sizing requirements, and a smaller size is sufficient for the conductors, you could always put reducers at the box connections, right?

Cheers, Wayne

You read my mind, I was just about to make the same suggestion.

 

[electrofelon]

A future upgrade with the largest conductors that will fit in the 4" conduit?

I dont think what ifs should be part of the code.

 

[electrofelon]

If you don't want to use 4" for the sizing requirements, and a smaller size is sufficient for the conductors, you could always put reducers at the box connections, right?

Cheers, Wayne

sure I suppose, but it just seems silly and un-necessary. Also its rather expensive. Try pricing out a 4" RGS coupling and reducer bushing to get down to 2.5 or 2".......