Uf behind vinyl siding

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

bluecollar84

Senior Member
Location
US
What code article says that i cant run UF wire behind vinyl siding on a house to feed lets say a flood light ? Is this legal to do ?

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
 
bluecollar84 said:
What code article says that i cant run UF wire behind vinyl siding on a house to feed lets say a flood light ? Is this legal to do ?

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

From the 2014-

Art. 340.12 (10): Where subject to physical damage- But that is open ended and subject to interpretation......

ETA-What do you mean by running it "behind the siding"? How is the UF going to be supported?
 
Last edited:
user 100 said:
From the 2014-

Art. 340.12 (10): Where subject to physical damage- But that is open ended and subject to interpretation......

ETA-What do you mean by running it "behind the siding"? How is the UF going to be supported?
Click to expand...

I would assume it's going to be fished like a wall.

I dont see anything in 340 or 334 that would prohibit running UF behind already installed siding. I dont know how you'd do it unless it was vertical vinyl siding, or run to a corner channel then down.
 
bluecollar84 said:
Anyone else ?
Click to expand...
I think it comes down to two issues, Code wise:
  • 110.2 (AHJ approval)
  • 110.12 (workmanlike manner)
While there is no explicit and direct prohibition for installing in this manner, doing so is in complete defiance IMO of the intent for 300.4(A).
 
Smart $ said:
I think it comes down to two issues, Code wise:
  • 110.2 (AHJ approval)
  • 110.12 (workmanlike manner)
While there is no explicit and direct prohibition for installing in this manner, doing so is in complete defiance IMO of the intent for 300.4(A).
Click to expand...


My first thought when I read the OP was no way, that is asking for trouble.

But is it?

When do people put nails and screws into already installed vinyl siding?


That said it I agree it could come down to 110.2.
 
iwire said:
My first thought when I read the OP was no way, that is asking for trouble.

But is it?

When do people put nails and screws into already installed vinyl siding?


That said it I agree it could come down to 110.2.
Click to expand...
Been debating this since OP.

The thing is, it only takes one in the wrong place at the wrong time... :(
 
gadfly56 said:
The ubiquitous phrase "Where subject to mechanical damage" is also a "what if", but you see it in code sections all the time.
Click to expand...

No argument from me on that.

Here is an example


110.27(B) Prevent Physical Damage. In locations where electrical
equipment is likely to be exposed to physical damage,
enclosures or guards shall be so arranged and of such
strength as to prevent such damage.
Click to expand...




The following is from the NFPAs manual of style
PossibleUnenforceableandVague.jpg



:D
 
iwire said:
My first thought when I read the OP was no way, that is asking for trouble.

But is it?

When do people put nails and screws into already installed vinyl siding?


That said it I agree it could come down to 110.2.
Click to expand...

Smart $ said:
Been debating this since OP.

The thing is, it only takes one in the wrong place at the wrong time... :(
Click to expand...

Smart $ said:
I think it comes down to two issues, Code wise:
  • 110.2 (AHJ approval)
  • 110.12 (workmanlike manner)
While there is no explicit and direct prohibition for installing in this manner, doing so is in complete defiance IMO of the intent for 300.4(A).
Click to expand...

The damage from screws and other fasteners was what crossed my mind when I first saw the op. I personally don't like it-vinyl is thin and others who may decide to mount/affix something to may not be aware of the cables presence, and hit it but the same thing could happen with thicker beefier siding and someone who uses extra long nails and hits nm installed thru the studs.

And I agree about about it also boiling down to ahj.

junkhound said:
Why not NM, could it be considered a dry location?
Click to expand...

Depends on the definition of damp.

It could be argued that its considered a dry loc if the nm is behind a vapor/moisture barrier- otherwise, it could be interpreted to be considered damp and that's a no go per 334.12(B)(4)- but how damp does it get directly behind vinyl siding that doesn't have a moisture barrier?
 
Last edited:
user 100 said:
...
It could be argued that its considered a dry loc if the nm is behind a vapor/moisture barrier- otherwise, it could be interpreted to be considered damp and that's a no go per 334.12(B)(4)- but how damp does it get directly behind vinyl siding that doesn't have a moisture barrier?
Click to expand...
Conduit materials are great vapor barriers. Why not consider inside conduit a dry location?
 
iwire said:
My first thought when I read the OP was no way, that is asking for trouble.

But is it?

When do people put nails and screws into already installed vinyl siding?


That said it I agree it could come down to 110.2.
Click to expand...

When they put a flagpole on the side of the house?
A plant hanger?
Decorations, holiday lighting, etc...

You'd have a hard sell with AHJ on that one.
 
mgookin said:
When they put a flagpole on the side of the house?
A plant hanger?
Decorations, holiday lighting, etc...

You'd have a hard sell with AHJ on that one.
Click to expand...

Exactly the points I was thinking of. :thumbsup:
 
We recently did a panel and meter changeout that required the feeder from the meter be re-routed thru 2 exterior studs instead of straight thru the wall. We used gigantic plumber's (4x16") nail plates as the nearest supply house was a plumbing one. We put the fiberboard back up and told the siding guys, who were there, that there was a feeder in that section of wall. Despite oversized nail plates and that they knew a cable was there, a week later the PoCO refused to connect as there was a short from phase to phase on the load side of the meter. If you guessed "siding nail hammered thru feeder", give yourself a pat on the back.

Just out of curiousity, why cant you run it in the exterior wall as opposed to between it and the siding?
 
mgookin said:
When they put a flagpole on the side of the house?
A plant hanger?
Decorations, holiday lighting, etc...

You'd have a hard sell with AHJ on that one.
Click to expand...

gadfly56 said:
Exactly the points I was thinking of. :thumbsup:
Click to expand...
Retail store we wired. On the opposite side of the wall that the panels were mounted to, in the store room, a guy putting up shelves put a screw through the wall and on into the back of the 480V panel. It was some kind of monster toggle bolt. Missed the buss by a fraction of an inch. The panels were surface mounted, mind you. I don't think that showed up on anybody's "What if" radar.

Nothing is safe any where. A run of UF behind some siding is ok by me. It's ugly and should be covered up.
 
Smart $ said:
Conduit materials are great vapor barriers. Why not consider inside conduit a dry location?
Click to expand...

If the op could run conduit, why would he insist on using nm vs. uf or pulling sep conductors? Also, while nm in conduit isn't allowed in wet locs, does the same apply if it the loc is damp? IOW's, is the interior of conduit in a damp loc considered a dry loc or still a damp loc? I can't find where it makes that distinction.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top