Splicing in Condulet

[EricNYC]

We are performing work for a NYC government agency. We are running 4#12 and 2#12 grounds (2 - 277 volt ckts. with 2 grounds) in 3/4" conduit for lighting. At each fixture, we need to splice onto one of the circuits. So the calculation for each splice point:

2 wire pass thru = 2 #12.
2 coming in, 2 going out, 2 to fixture = 6#12.
1 grounding = 1 #12.
total 9 #12 @ 2.25 cu. in. = 20.25 cu. in. required.

We proposed a 1" mogul condulet that has 31 cu. in. space.

We also noted that we would support the conduit within 12" on both sides of the condulet.

We submitted this and showed these calculations.

The comment came back "a dedicated code-size splice box for each lighting fixture shall be provided."

By code, is there anything wrong with what we submitted? By industry standards is there anything wrong with this?

 

[Strathead]

We are performing work for a NYC government agency. We are running 4#12 and 2#12 grounds (2 - 277 volt ckts. with 2 grounds) in 3/4" conduit for lighting. At each fixture, we need to splice onto one of the circuits. So the calculation for each splice point:

2 wire pass thru = 2 #12.
2 coming in, 2 going out, 2 to fixture = 6#12.
1 grounding = 1 #12.
total 9 #12 @ 2.25 cu. in. = 20.25 cu. in. required.

We proposed a 1" mogul condulet that has 31 cu. in. space.

We also noted that we would support the conduit within 12" on both sides of the condulet.

We submitted this and showed these calculations.

The comment came back "a dedicated code-size splice box for each lighting fixture shall be provided."

By code, is there anything wrong with what we submitted? By industry standards is there anything wrong with this?

Other than Why? I don't think so. couple of different approaches that would seem cheaper from the current description...
pull the wires that require splicing in and out of the fixture and do the splice there. The use a conduit size condulet (I assume you are talking about Tee's?) no splices.

or, use a box, condulets are quite expensive.

 

[Sierrasparky]

Use a box as said , Condulets are more expensive. unless we are speaking of FS boxes.

 

[infinity]

I see nothing wrong code wise with what you've outlined as long as they're supported in a rigid and secure manner and they have the cu in dimensions within the conduit body.

 

[Joe Villani]

I think that due to the oversized conduit body ( 1-inch on 3/4" conduit run) you would have to find a means to support the conduit body separately.

Its probably easier to just install a box.

Joe.

 

[infinity]

I think that due to the oversized conduit body ( 1-inch on 3/4" conduit run) you would have to find a means to support the conduit body separately.

Its probably easier to just install a box.

Joe.

Where would you find that requirment? And how do you support a conduit body other than supporting the conduit?

 

[Joe Villani]

I have no idea.

I was looking at 314.23(E) exception.

It states Rigid Metal Conduit, Intermediate metal or rigid non metallic conduit or electrical metallic tubing shall be permitted to support a conduit body of any size, including a conduit body constructed with only one conduit entry, provided the trade size of the conduit body is not larger that the largest trade size of the conduit or electrical metallic tubing

I always took this to mean that if the conduit body is larger that the conduit or raceway the conduit can't act as the sole support and the conduit body must somehow be supported.

Maybe I am looking into this too much :?

Thoughts?

 

[Sierrasparky]

I have no idea.

I was looking at 314.23(E) exception.

It states Rigid Metal Conduit, Intermediate metal or rigid non metallic conduit or electrical metallic tubing shall be permitted to support a conduit body of any size, including a conduit body constructed with only one conduit entry, provided the trade size of the conduit body is not larger that the largest trade size of the conduit or electrical metallic tubing

I always took this to mean that if the conduit body is larger that the conduit or raceway the conduit can't act as the sole support and the conduit body must somehow be supported.

Maybe I am looking into this too much :?

Thoughts?

I hope that is not the issue. That means that when when we upsize due to fill that we need support. EEKS>/

 

[cal1947]

I thought as Long as it is a c. Condulet you could splice in it


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[infinity]

The code doesn't differentiate as to which type of conduit bodies are permitted to have splices.

 

[kwired]

I have no idea.

I was looking at 314.23(E) exception.

It states Rigid Metal Conduit, Intermediate metal or rigid non metallic conduit or electrical metallic tubing shall be permitted to support a conduit body of any size, including a conduit body constructed with only one conduit entry, provided the trade size of the conduit body is not larger that the largest trade size of the conduit or electrical metallic tubing

I always took this to mean that if the conduit body is larger that the conduit or raceway the conduit can't act as the sole support and the conduit body must somehow be supported.

Maybe I am looking into this too much :?

Thoughts?

You are not looking into it too much, that is what it says. If that is not the intent then they need to make changes.

You could have a 2 inch tee with two 1/2 inch raceways but the third would need to be a 2 inch or you are in violation of this rule as written. Now you could have a short piece of 2 inch that has a support strap on it and then reduce that one as well.

 

[infinity]

I have no idea.

I was looking at 314.23(E) exception.

It states Rigid Metal Conduit, Intermediate metal or rigid non metallic conduit or electrical metallic tubing shall be permitted to support a conduit body of any size, including a conduit body constructed with only one conduit entry, provided the trade size of the conduit body is not larger that the largest trade size of the conduit or electrical metallic tubing

I always took this to mean that if the conduit body is larger that the conduit or raceway the conduit can't act as the sole support and the conduit body must somehow be supported.

Maybe I am looking into this too much :?

Thoughts?

Actually the applicable section for this installation would be 314.23(F) not (E).

 

[kwired]

Actually the applicable section for this installation would be 314.23(F) not (E).

And both sections apply to any (permitted) raceway supported enclosure not just conduit bodies.