So are we unconfused yet?![]()
No,
Does the threaded pipe have to thread into the hubs directly without any fittings or not?
Most all of the NEC drawings show it that way.
JAP>
So are we unconfused yet?![]()
I thought PVC male adapters use tapered threads, like their plumbing analogs (although I believe I've seen assertions both ways on this forum). In which case the same logic would allow PVC to support a box.
BTW, I'm not convinced by your argument that the threads have to be on a stick of conduit and not a fitting, but I agree it is one reasonable interpretation of the text.
Cheers, Wayne
Even if fittings are permitted, the section specifically uses the word conduit, not raceway, so EMT is definitely out....
BTW, I'm not convinced by your argument that the threads have to be on a stick of conduit and not a fitting, but I agree it is one reasonable interpretation of the text.
EMT is definitely out because of (2011) 358.12(5), not because of 314.23(E).Even if fittings are permitted, the section specifically uses the word conduit, not raceway, so EMT is definitely out.
Clearly an important concern, but one that is moot for PVC raceway. Also, if the metal conduit carried a wire type EGC inside, that also would also obviate the issue, right?The reason I mostly say fittings cannot be used is that threaded entries and hubs are generally female NPT tapered threads. AFAIK, no connector (i.e. a fitting) has been investigated for grounding continuity when used with other than a locknut to secure it.
Points taken. My rebuttal is 314.23(E) specifically states "It shall be supported by two or more conduits threaded wrenchtight into the enclosure or hubs. Each conduit shall be secured within 900 mm (3 ft) of the enclosure, or within 450 mm (18 in.) of the enclosure if all conduit entries are on the same side." And (F) also specifically states "It shall be supported by two or more conduits threaded wrenchtight into the enclosure or hubs. Each conduit shall be secured within 450 mm (18 in.) of the enclosure." These statements render the use of the word raceway quite moot.EMT is definitely out because of (2011) 358.12(5), not because of 314.23(E).
If (2011) 314.23(E) consistently used the word conduit rather than the word raceway your argument would demand consideration. But it uses the word raceway twice and then the word conduit twice. IMO the usage is not clear enough or consistent enough to rise to the level of an intentional distinction to exclude some raceways.
Clearly an important concern, but one that is moot for PVC raceway. Also, if the metal conduit carried a wire type EGC inside, that also would also obviate the issue, right?
Cheers, Wayne