"Stuffing" fixture whips?

[SpokaneSparky]

Being the good apprentice I am I searched through the NEC and couldn't pin-point the answer was looking for.

I was told by my foreman to 'stuff' the third ccc into each end of the lighting whip because it wasn't needed, but just in case it was later. So I've basically converted the 12/3 MC into 12/2 with a hidden spare. This just didn't sound right to me so I decided to try and find some answers.

Thanks

 

[physis]

Re: "Stuffing" fixture whips?

Are you saying that you only need 12-2 and you're using 12-3.

But instead of capping off the extra conductor that isn't being used you're hiding it from somebody or something?

I don't quite get it "stuffing the third ccc". You can just put a wire nut on it if you're not using it.

Is there a box fill issue or something?

 

[SpokaneSparky]

Re: "Stuffing" fixture whips?

Exactly. I've only been in this trade for about 16 mos. now and the prints are pretty straightforward. I don't know if the 12/3 whips were ordered in an attempt to foresee any changes or what the deal is.

My concern is stuffing the bare ends of a conductor into a raceway and having them abrade the live condutors. I know it may take forever, if at all, but why take the chance.

The closest article I've found is 300.13(A). From what I understand it says this is a no go. Did I misinterpret this?

 

[physis]

Re: "Stuffing" fixture whips?

I don't believe you can use 300.13. That's for splices in cables or conduits.

It's quite a stretch I think but 300.14 is closer. It depends on what "terminate" means though. Usually it's thought of as landing on a terminal but the word actually means "end".

I couldn't find anything either. I'm pretty darn sure you can't go stuffing things into a cable but I haven't found anything on it yet.

There's 110.14(B) It requires a covering equivalent to the insulation on free wire ends. I'm pretty sure if you comply with that you wont be able to get it stuffed into the cable.

I'm sure these other guys'll find something.

Edit: On second thought, if the unused conductor is considered to be terminated in the box for 314.16(B)(1) then it should also be considered terminated in the box for 300.14. And it'll have to be counted for box fill anyway. I don't see it being possible to stuff it into the cable so good that it doesn't enter the box.

[ August 10, 2005, 03:33 AM: Message edited by: physis ]

 

[allenwayne]

Re: "Stuffing" fixture whips?

As long as you don`t overfill box fill what`s the problem???Future expansion of a system yes.Likley yes

 

[jimwalker]

Re: "Stuffing" fixture whips?

We often end up with maybe 12-3 or 12-4 short pieces we want to use up.I cap them but see many just cut them off.Cutting them would probably be better than stuffing but both are wrong

 

[petersonra]

Re: "Stuffing" fixture whips?

I vote for a wire nut.

I would not be overjoyed with someone who just cut a wire off and left it hang. Too much chance for it to flop around and touch something hot.

Stuffing an unused conductor back into the whip seems like someone is too cheap to buy a wire nut to cap it off.

 

[luke warmwater]

Re: "Stuffing" fixture whips?

I vote for the wirenut also.

BTW, is it possible the whips were ordered because these are lay-in lights and the inner and outer lamps were originally to be switched seperately?

 

[LarryFine]

Re: "Stuffing" fixture whips?

As I was reading, I came to the same conclusion as Todd. Why not use the extra conductor to feed the second ballast, and connect them together on the same switched leg in the junction box?

If there is ever a desire to switch each ballast separately, you'll need to go into the box anyway. This way, you won't have to go into the fixture again.

Now, if the fixtures don't have two ballasts, you'll never need the third conductor; just cut it off flush with the end of the whip.

 

[roger]

Re: "Stuffing" fixture whips?

The third conductor might be necessary for level switching as already mentioned, another possibility could be dimming or battery backup in the future.

We do this at times and simply cap the conductor at both ends.

Roger

 

[physis]

Re: "Stuffing" fixture whips?

Would it be safe to assume that no one else was able to find a code violation with stuffing things into cables?