Switch leg wire size

[infinity]

. . . and not for connecting fixtures to other fixtures.

Agreed, I was merely pointing out that the smaller conductors feeding some fixtures are not required to be an integral part of the fixture.

 

[Rich Elec.]

Larry,
I see where I may have misread the OP.

I am an Inspector and I had a contractor ask me about using 14 ga wire for his light fixture switch legs on a 20amp branch circuit.

He never asked about Fixture Wires.
I jumpped there.:smile:
Thanks.

 

[Smart $]

. . . and not for connecting fixtures to other fixtures.

Agreed, I was merely pointing out that the smaller conductors feeding some fixtures are not required to be an integral part of the fixture.

Correct... I am of the impression 402.10(2) is explicit enough that goes without saying... but there is no harm in actually saying it :wink:

BTW, one can use branch circuit tap rules to use 14AWG whips using building type wire to connect luminaires to 12AWG, 20A branch-circuit conductors. See 210.19(A)(4) Exception No. 1(b) and 410.67(C).

 

[celtic]

BTW, one can use branch circuit tap rules to use 14AWG whips using building type wire to connect luminaires to 12AWG, 20A branch-circuit conductors. See 210.19(A)(4) Exception No. 1(b) and 410.67(C).

Would that really be a switch leg then?

 

[construct]

switch leg

switch leg

I would like to thank all of you for your input and knowledge of the code. I am in a small jurisdiction and have to know something about and inspect all of the trades plus other duties. The bottom line I am getting here is that tapped fixture wires are only going to have the small load of the one fixture. But a switch leg with a lower ampacity than the branch circuit rating, could feasibly have enough other fixtures added to exceed the ampacity of the switch leg wire while not exceeding the allowable load for the branch circuit. Am I getting it?

 

[Smart $]

Would that really be a switch leg then?

Actually, yes if the ungrounded conductor of the whip is connected to the "switch leg" branch-circuit conductor. It would not if connected to an unswitched, ungrounded branch-circuit conductor (e.g. a circuit which uses the ocpd as the only switch).

 

[M. D.]

Construct, welcome, this is a link to a document that involves an appeal to a correction notice given by an inspector ,I think it is worth the read .


http://www.stillwater.org/cc092198/c98199.htm

 

[iwire]

Construct, welcome, this is a link to a document that involves an appeal to a correction notice given by an inspector ,I think it is worth the read .

From the link..

We anticipated at that time proposals to downsize the circuit breakers to 15 amps. It was felt that this alternate would have caused a dangerous situation in later work on the electrical system. If an electricial opens up a distribution panel and finds #12 gauge wire in the panel, he would be inclined to replace a 15 amp circuit breaker with a 20 amp, not knowing that somewhere else in the circuit there is a #14 gauge wire. The decision at that time was to require all branch circuits to be a minimum of 20 amp capacity.

Great substantiation for an amendment :roll:

I must assume fused disconnects are also prohibited from using smaller fuses then the disconnect rating.

 

[augie47]

14 on 20

14 on 20

As mentioned in the documnet M.D. referenced, the use of 14 ga "switch legs" on 20 amp circuits was very prevelant in the area I work (E TN, N GA)
for many years. In fact, at a recent meeting of the TN State Inspectors, the AHJ determined that the practice should be allowed on what they define as "true switch legs" (line & light to switch, no neutral). The entire sitaution has been a mess in this area for years.

 

[Smart $]

...Am I getting it?

I believe you've have the gist of it.

 

[M. D.]

...Great substantiation for an amendment :roll:
....

Perhaps not Bob , but in 08 I'll be installing fan boxes for a similar reason.
And I heard tell of a fire that destroyed a building in my town .The reason that I heard ,.. during a panel change a #8 was put on a 40 amp breaker it was feeding #14 wire . The guy that originally used the # 8 did nothing wrong he fused it at 15 amps it was the second guy that screwed up.

Most of the work I have done in the past several years is residential. I have, in my expierance, seen this all too often.

 

[brantmacga]

from the link:

It would also had violated a local amendment to the NEC made in 1993 which requires all branch circuits to be a minimum of 20 amp capacity

why is it that so many inspectors, and even "electricians" feel that #14 is unsuitable and even dangerous to use in a home? i posted an extremely long rant about this a couple of months ago referring to an issue w/ an inspector. they wanted me to rewire a home i had just roughed and change all #14 to #12 because #14 "is just code minimum". okay, why stop there? make small app. and laundry circuits be #10. i was picking up few thousand feet of #14 a few weeks ago when another "electrician" told me in a round about way that i was stupid for using #14. well, my bank account thinks otherwise. fused at its allowable ampacity, #14 poses no danger at all.