Remote emergency light heads

[qcroanoke]

Can I pull the 12 volt DC feed for them in the same conduit that contains the 120 volt AC feed for the lights in that room?
Please give me the code reference.
Thanks!

 

[don_resqcapt19]

No. 700.10(B)

 

[qcroanoke]

No. 700.10(B)

I can't find 700.10 (B) in 2008. Are you looking at 2011?

 

[raider1]

I can't find 700.10 (B) in 2008. Are you looking at 2011?

Yes, 700.10(B) is the 2011 section number. For the 2008 NEC it is section 700.9(B).

Chris

 

[qcroanoke]

Yes, 700.10(B) is the 2011 section number. For the 2008 NEC it is section 700.9(B).

Chris

Doesn't 700.9 (B).4 allow it?
That is my situation. Emergency light is mounted to 4" square box with a raceway containing only the AC conductors for the unit equipment and the emergency conductors to the remote emergecy heads.

 

[iwire]

Doesn't 700.9 (B).4 allow it?
That is my situation. Emergency light is mounted to 4" square box with a raceway containing only the AC conductors for the unit equipment and the emergency conductors to the remote emergecy heads.

Nope

700.9(B)(4) Wiring within a common junction box attached to unit
equipment, containing only the branch circuit supplying
the unit equipment and the emergency circuit supplied
by the unit equipment

That section only allows the conductors to be together in your 4" square, not the conduits. You can't put the 'emergency conductors' (in this case the DC wiring) in the conduit with the utility supplied wiring.

 

[qcroanoke]

Nope




That section only allows the conductors to be together in your 4" square, not the conduits. You can't put the 'emergency conductors' (in this case the DC wiring) in the conduit with the utility supplied wiring.

That is kinda what I thought, but I needed someone else to verify it. Thanks Bob.

 

[iwire]

It is a pain, I had to go back to a construction job and add a bunch more RMC because the crews had run the AC and DC together.

 

[qcroanoke]

It is a pain, I had to go back to a construction job and add a bunch more RMC because the crews had run the AC and DC together.

Oh, so you are painfully aware of what it says!

 

[iwire]

Oh, so you are painfully aware of what it says!

Yeah ....... even had an inspector screaming at me (yes full bore screaming :rant over the phone about it.

I called him to say it was done and he could go check it out, he asked me to meet him there and I tried to get out of it, he flipped out. :blink:

 

[Howard Burger]

why, please

why, please

Bob, what's the reasoning here for the prohibition? If only one set of wires is activated at a time, why does it matter that the pipe would be shared? I'm missing the irrefutable logic of this section of the NEC. Thanks

 

[pete m.]

Bob, what's the reasoning here for the prohibition? If only one set of wires is activated at a time, why does it matter that the pipe would be shared? I'm missing the irrefutable logic of this section of the NEC. Thanks

I'm not Bob (obviously) but my take on it would be that if the AC conductors faulted, melted, etc... it could have an adverse affect upon the DC wiring in the same raceway. The DC wiring in the raceway is the wiring for the "life safety" aspect.

Pete

 

[iwire]

I'm not Bob (obviously) but my take on it would be that if the AC conductors faulted, melted, etc... it could have an adverse affect upon the DC wiring in the same raceway. The DC wiring in the raceway is the wiring for the "life safety" aspect.

Thanks, that is pretty much what I would have said.

 

[Howard Burger]

thansk

thansk

Thanks, that makes good sense.