Pvc conduit

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

codequestion

Banned
Location
MD, USA
I cant input ither thread. Is sech 80 pvc typically used for outdoor underground or typically pvc sech 40 is typically used outdoor underground?

Sent from my SM-G935U using Tapatalk
 
Depends.

While schedule 40 is prolly way more common underground and schedule 80 above ground, certain seismic areas, soil conditions like rocks and such, or other conditions may call for schedule 80 to be speced for underground.

What is the job parameters and location details? They would be factors on deciding which to use accordingly.
 
jumper said:
Depends.

While schedule 40 is prolly way more common underground and schedule 80 above ground, certain seismic areas, soil conditions like rocks and such, or other conditions may call for schedule 80 to be speced for underground.

What is the job parameters and location details? They would be factors on deciding which to use accordingly.
Click to expand...
Its for parking lot site light all outdoor football size. Service disconnect on frame outdoor.

Sent from my SM-G935U using Tapatalk
 
codequestion said:
Its for parking lot site light all outdoor football size. Service disconnect on frame outdoor.

Sent from my SM-G935U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Schedule 80 is very uncommon in my experience. See almost always schedule 40 with ridged elbows. From what I understand they don't make sched. 80 fittings, so all your couplings, connecters, LB's would be sched. 40.
 
GerryB said:
Schedule 80 is very uncommon in my experience. See almost always schedule 40 with ridged elbows. From what I understand they don't make sched. 80 fittings, so all your couplings, connecters, LB's would be sched. 40.
Click to expand...
Sech 40 for above gnd exposed to weather outdoor or below underground outdoor?

Sent from my SM-G935U using Tapatalk
 
Sech 40 for above gnd exposed to weather outdoor or below underground outdoor? There are places parking lot where conduits come up above ground to exposed weather.



Sent from my SM-G935U using Tapatalk
 
GerryB said:
Schedule 80 is very uncommon in my experience. See almost always schedule 40 with ridged elbows. From what I understand they don't make sched. 80 fittings, so all your couplings, connecters, LB's would be sched. 40.
Click to expand...
The fittings are universal for both schedule 40 and 80 and do not matter. I suspect it is a geographical issue but most supply houses I use have pretty good stock of schedule 80 including larger sizes up to 3 and 4"

Roger
 
I see a fair number of job specs that say "schedule 80 above ground". If it's not a spec, I like to use 80 for just the transition from below to above ground. I don't see much point in using 80 everywhere above ground - if I was worried about physical damage I wouldnt use pvc at all. Note 80 is nec required on poles.
 
GerryB said:
Schedule 80 is very uncommon in my experience. See almost always schedule 40 with ridged elbows. From what I understand they don't make sched. 80 fittings, so all your couplings, connecters, LB's would be sched. 40.
Click to expand...

It's more accurate to say that they don't make Sch 40 fittings, and that we are using Sch 80 fittings for our everyday Sch 40 pipe.
 
electrofelon said:
Note 80 is nec required on poles.
Click to expand...

jumper said:
What code section?
Click to expand...

Ok, this may not be the way I am remembering it. I could have sworn the NEC stated schedule 80 was required on poles, and I remember thinking that was perhaps the only specific location 80 was required. After some quick research, I believe that language is in the UL white book and/or part of the listing, but not specifically in the NEC.
 
electrofelon said:
Ok, this may not be the way I am remembering it. I could have sworn the NEC stated schedule 80 was required on poles, and I remember thinking that was perhaps the only specific location 80 was required. After some quick research, I believe that language is in the UL white book and/or part of the listing, but not specifically in the NEC.
Click to expand...

Maybe a local amendment possibly, but it would not be a UL thing. UL might say schedule 80 is suitable for use where possibly subject to damage, but it is not going to define that area. PVC on a pole prolly fits, but it would be an AHJ call.
 
jumper said:
Maybe a local amendment possibly, but it would not be a UL thing. UL might say schedule 80 is suitable for use where possibly subject to damage, but it is not going to define that area. PVC on a pole prolly fits, but it would be an AHJ call.
Click to expand...

The is what Tom Baker said in an old thread

The verbage is in the UL listing. It says sch 80 pvc conduit is considered suitable for protection against physical damage when installed on poles. You can find this in the UL white book or on line at the UL web site.
Click to expand...

Here is the thread link:

http://forums.mikeholt.com/showthread.php?t=64584
 
electrofelon said:
The is what Tom Baker said in an old thread



Here is the thread link:

http://forums.mikeholt.com/showthread.php?t=64584
Click to expand...

Okay I looked it up, it says PVC is suitable where subject to physical damage AND installation on poles in accordance with the NEC.

This does not mean that PVC 80 is mandated if PVC is used on a pole IMO. If it does I can not find that section.

And I was incorrect about UL and poles. I find it wierd that they even mention it.
 
jumper said:
Okay I looked it up, it says PVC is suitable where subject to physical damage AND installation on poles in accordance with the NEC.

This does not mean that PVC 80 is mandated if PVC is used on a pole IMO. If it does I can not find that section.

And I was incorrect about UL and poles. I find it wierd that they even mention it.
Click to expand...

I agree it is oddly specific they mention poles. Why mention it is suitable to use on poles? Was there doubt about this? It's like those fixtures that say "suitable for undercabinet mount"
 
electrofelon said:
I agree it is oddly specific they mention poles. Why mention it is suitable to use on poles? Was there doubt about this? It's like those fixtures that say "suitable for undercabinet mount"
Click to expand...

Totally screwy. I can now see someone demanding that poles be defined.

Telephone pole, power pole, North Pole.....Ugh. Are all pole installs automatically defined as an area that is subject to damage? I want no part of that argument.:D
 
The key is the wording in 352.10(F) and the I.N. after it.

Roger
 
roger said:
The key is the wording in 352.10(F) and the I.N. after it.

Roger
Click to expand...

Roger,

What is your thesis? Doesnt it still come down to interpretation of installations subject physical damage? Is there anywhere that defines a pole as such? I guess a case could be made with the statement in the white book, 110.3(B), and 352.10(F) but it still seems not definite to me.
 
electrofelon said:
Roger,

What is your thesis? Doesnt it still come down to interpretation of installations subject physical damage? This is the case anytime the term "physical damage" is used in the NEC, it boils down to the inspectors call if the AHJ has not already set guidelines. Is there anywhere that defines a pole as such? I guess a case could be made with the statement in the white book, 110.3(B), and 352.10(F) but it still seems not definite to me.
Click to expand...
I agree that there is no specific wording but exposed on a pole is most likely always going to be deemed subject to physical damage.

Roger
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top