Pvc into top of nema 3 enclosure

[wwhitney]

listing nonsense

This is just speculation and possibly a bit naive, but I would think that if Bridgeport could have gotten their regular EMT connectors to pass the necessary listing tests for going into a threaded hub, they would have just done that, rather than design a whole new fitting for the purpose. So I would expect there is some test that the combination of regular EMT connector into threaded hub fails.

Cheers, Wayne

 

[don_resqcapt19]

This is just speculation and possibly a bit naive, but I would think that if Bridgeport could have gotten their regular EMT connectors to pass the necessary listing tests for going into a threaded hub, they would have just done that, rather than design a whole new fitting for the purpose. So I would expect there is some test that the combination of regular EMT connector into threaded hub fails.

Cheers, Wayne

The UL product standard UL 514B, shown the the Bridgeport stuff you posted indicates the you can make the EMT connector with either a straight thread or one with the same taper used for RMC. My guess would be that they just switched the thread type.

Maybe the standard for all raceway connectors should just require tapered threads.

 

[electrofelon]

I would think that if Bridgeport could have gotten their regular EMT connectors to pass the necessary listing tests for going into a threaded hub, they would have just done that

Cheers, Wayne

speculation and possibly a bit naive

 

[electrofelon]

The UL product standard UL 514B, shown the the Bridgeport stuff you posted indicates the you can make the EMT connector with either a straight thread or one with the same taper used for RMC. My guess would be that they just switched the thread type.

Maybe the standard for all raceway connectors should just require tapered threads.

So the question is what does the listing/ product standard for the Bell box say about entries?

 

[LarryFine]

If you want to go into a threaded hub, you need something like this:

Bridgeport

Since 1925, Bridgeport has led the industry with US-made fittings, built from our principles of innovation, quality, outstanding service and rapid delivery, a tradition we maintain as part of the NSI…

www.bptfittings.com

Must the box with the threaded hub be listed to accept these connectors?

 

[electrofelon]

Must the box with the threaded hub be listed to accept these connectors?

I think so. Aren't the ports on bell boxes also "only" for RMC like the Myers hubs?

 

[wwhitney]

Must the box with the threaded hub be listed to accept these connectors?

No, my whole point for jumping into this thread is that if the connectors have actually been investigated for use with metal hubs (Don's comment casts a bit of doubt on this assumption), that should suffice. There's no need to have the listing agency investigate a given transition twice, once by the maker of one side of the combination, and a second time by the maker of the other side of the combination.

Cheers, Wayne

 

[letgomywago]

That listing standard says pretty much the same as the one for the conduit hubs....the connector has only been investigated for use with a locknut and has not been investigated for use in fittings having female threads.
The same as LFMC connectors....where at least 95% of the ones I have installed or my crew has installed have been threaded into fittings or equipment having female threads.
For the most part things like this are just ignored by the AHJ, but when they are not, it is totally up to the AHJ.

Carlon even has it in its instructions for non metallic liquid tight. Even so I don't think it is 100% blessed by UL

 

[kwired]

These people are a sleep at the wheel and no one seems to care. Installers and inspectors are up against this nonsense everyday with no relief in sight. At least the NEC has an avenue for those who dislike something to express their opinion in the form of a PI every three years.

Express your opinion in the PI yes. They still likely will say it is a listing issue and not an NEC issue.

So any idea who's idea it was to create a product standard that only allowed RMC? Maybe this goes back a long ways before PVC was used much?

Other fittings have forever had similar issues like EMT connectors, offset nipples, even threadless RMC connectors.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Express your opinion in the PI yes. They still likely will say it is a listing issue and not an NEC issue.

Other fittings have forever had similar issues like EMT connectors, offset nipples, even threadless RMC connectors.

No question that would be the panel response for a PI on this issue.

 

[rambojoe]

You know... there is the small small chance the o.p. got called on it because it was sloppy looking or other things looked bad (no offense intended)
Or the ahj is still learning to deal with authority..
The dscussion is all relevant and i understand. I just had to add the tid bit.

 

[rambojoe]

A picture would be awesome...

 

[tortuga]

So the question is what does the listing/ product standard for the Bell box say about entries?

Carlon even has it in its instructions for non metallic liquid tight. Even so I don't think it is 100% blessed by UL

Here is an old therad I had on it.
If I recall correctly I was working with two teams to do dozens of bell boxes with EMT fittings, one lead wanted to throw away all the o rings. He had already separated them, the other lead (much more experienced) insisted on threading down the lock-nut then the o-ring on the EMT connector before threading it on the box, he used the locknut to keep the o-ring's shape. I was tasked with settling this debate when, if I recall correctly, I found out both ways were not UL approved.

 

[kwired]

You know... there is the small small chance the o.p. got called on it because it was sloppy looking or other things looked bad (no offense intended)
Or the ahj is still learning to deal with authority..
The dscussion is all relevant and i understand. I just had to add the tid bit.

There are some inspectors out there that when they find out some listing conflict think they need to stir the pot in their inspections, apparently only "because they can".

 

[rambojoe]

I can agree with that... Yet still, alot of work is getting sloppy too. I guess i didnt make that point readily clear.
Oh wait, i did.