Sealoff or cap?

Status
Not open for further replies.
E

eeggoorr

Member
Can a spare conduit for future use be stubbed into class 1, div. 2 area and capped only or will this require a sealoff even though there is no wire?
Thanks in Advance,
Dave
 
eeggoorr said:
Can a spare conduit for future use be stubbed into class 1, div. 2 area and capped only or will this require a sealoff even though there is no wire?
Thanks in Advance,
Dave
Click to expand...
If there is no electrical source of ignition, it is not a wiring method - it is only a hole in the ground. It may still be prudent to review both ends of the conduit to insure that it isn't feeding to a location that may have electrical equipment.
 
I believe from the description of the OP, that the stub out/up is the boundary.

DRGREG is right since the potential of gas entering the raceway through the threads is as great for a seal as it is for a cap.
 
"As long as you have a boundary seal you would not need a seal at the end of conduit. "

You will need at least one seal installed and filled with sealing compound. It has nothing to do with whether there are conductors in the raceway or not..
 
stormywyo said:
...
You will need at least one seal installed and filled with sealing compound. It has nothing to do with whether there are conductors in the raceway or not..
Click to expand...
This is erroneous.

The basic definition for raceways in Article 100 and the specific definitions for IMC and RMC in Articles 342 and 344 respectively indicate that they are not actually part of a wiring method until the conductors are installed. Before that, they are simply pieces of pipe. They will possibly need to be bonded under various conditions of Article 250, but they do not necessarily need to be sealed. Even if they did, they wouldn?t need to be explosionproof under the basic rule in 501.15(B) (2). Since I don?t know the details it is quite possible, even likely, that either Exception 2 or 4 would also apply ? if they need to be sealed ? but they don?t.

Finally, understanding the proper installation of seals would indicate that a seal would afford no greater protection than a cap in the system described in the OP. In fact, 501.15 FPN No 1 recognizes that ?? conduit and cable seals are not intended to prevent the passage of liquids, gases, or vapors at a continuous pressure differential across the seal.? The major entry into the conduit system is the threads for either seals or caps. So a cap may actually be better.
 
rbalex said:
This is erroneous.

The basic definition for raceways in Article 100 and the specific definitions for IMC and RMC in Articles 342 and 344 respectively indicate that they are not actually part of a wiring method until the conductors are installed. Before that, they are simply pieces of pipe. They will possibly need to be bonded under various conditions of Article 250, but they do not necessarily need to be sealed. Even if they did, they wouldn?t need to be explosionproof under the basic rule in 501.15(B) (2). Since I don?t know the details it is quite possible, even likely, that either Exception 2 or 4 would also apply ? if they need to be sealed ? but they don?t.

Finally, understanding the proper installation of seals would indicate that a seal would afford no greater protection than a cap in the system described in the OP. In fact, 501.15 FPN No 1 recognizes that ?? conduit and cable seals are not intended to prevent the passage of liquids, gases, or vapors at a continuous pressure differential across the seal.? The major entry into the conduit system is the threads for either seals or caps. So a cap may actually be better.
Click to expand...

I am sorry but you are misreading this and your lengthy explanation is not correct...
 
stormywyo said:
I'll just agree to disagree (without a clearer picture)--I don't believe the ordinary electrical professional on the street would see it this way..
Click to expand...
That may very well be true.

Then again the ordinary electrical professional hasn?t been working with hazardous location installations for over 40 years, and hasn?t served on three national level technical committees dealing specifically with the subject. The ordinary electrical professional is usually very uncomfortable with hazardous locations and routinely overcompensates.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top