UF Cable Support

[stevenje]

I ran across a job that was still in the rough in stage. I noticed that that there was a 14-3 UF wire run from the ductless indoor unit to the outdoor unit. It was taped to the ductless line-set from the indoor unit to the outside unit. I think that taping the UF wire to the line-set it is a code violation. NEC 300.11(B)(1) What do you think?

 

[big john]

I don't think it applies. The lineset is not a raceway by the definition of that section.

Not sure if it is explicitly code compliant but I will say that's a very common method for the HVAC guys.

 

[JFletcher]

300.11(C) in the 2008 NEC prohibits cables from supporting other cables, or do you mean the copper HP/LP tubing between the units when you write "line set"?

 

[stevenje]

300.11(C) in the 2008 NEC prohibits cables from supporting other cables, or do you mean the copper HP/LP tubing between the units when you write "line set"?

Yes, that is what I mean.

 

[iwire]

Yes, that is what I mean.

I agree with the others that 300.11(B) does not apply.

 

[kwired]

We generally can't allow other systems to be supported by wiring methods and we generally shouldn't support wiring methods from other systems either. Exceptions may be when they are associated with one another.

 

[MasterTheNEC]

I ran across a job that was still in the rough in stage. I noticed that that there was a 14-3 UF wire run from the ductless indoor unit to the outdoor unit. It was taped to the ductless line-set from the indoor unit to the outside unit. I think that taping the UF wire to the line-set it is a code violation. NEC 300.11(B)(1) What do you think?

Greetings,

My opinion is that 300.11(B)(1) does not apply to your question. The real issue depends if your inspector has an issue with compliance with 340.12(10) subject to physical damage. Again I am not here to agree or disagree with that perspective (as I am sure others will flap about) just to express what may be the concern.

Secondly, when referenced back to Part II of Article 334 in terms of the "exposed work". there are specific aspects of protection afforded in Section 334.15(A) and (B) that have to be met as lastly you have to convince the inspector that the "tape" you are using to secure and support the Type UF-B meets the items expressed in 334.30.

Now, do I see it done as you say often yes.......