using conductors from NM in conduit

[RustyShackleford]

Is it acceptable to remove the insulated conductors from NM and use them in conduit (where one would normally use THHN/THWN or XHHW) ?

 

[jumper]

Is it acceptable to remove the insulated conductors from NM and use them in conduit (where one would normally use THHN/THWN or XHHW) ?

Sorta,

some no because no marking on the individual conductors.

and some yes because we use it in panels and such all the time.

Never a substitute for W rated conductors in wet conditions though.

 

[Sierrasparky]

Unfortunately no as the conductors inside NM are not rated or identified as such.
You can use the conduit as a sleeve for NM though.

 

[480sparky]

If there's no marking per 310.120, then no.

 

[tom baker]

Sorta is right. We run NM in panelbards, but can't in conduit.
Is it the same conductor as we get on a spool?
Would be interesting to submit a code change...
However there was a change to clarify what everyone thought the code said on support of conduit, its not 3 feet. That change was awful and it went away the next cycle.

 

[Adamjamma]

If you take nm apart and the individual conductors are marked properly, then yes. But, most of the time the conductors are not marked. So no, in that case.

 

[electrofelon]

Sort of nit -picky, but IMO it's not just that they are not marked, it's that they are not an NEC conductor. If you look at the standards for NM, there is a whole bunch of messy language that doesn't really say the inners are thhn.

 

[480sparky]

Sort of nit -picky, but IMO it's not just that they are not marked, it's that they are not an NEC conductor. If you look at the standards for NM, there is a whole bunch of messy language that doesn't really say the inners are thhn.

They are an NEC recognized conductor. See 334.112.

It's just they're not required to be marked individually.

 

[Craigv]

They are an NEC recognized conductor. See 334.112.

It's just they're not required to be marked individually.

I have *very* rarely seen marked conductors inside actual Romex branded NM-B, but not in years, perhaps before General Cable was bought by Southwire. I recall reading from an unverifiable source (more forum chatter) that marked conductors would occasionally be used in NM if the factory had run low/out of unmarked thhn, implying that it was simply an expedient and not a specification. But again, that part is all just innuendo.

 

[480sparky]

I have *very* rarely seen marked conductors inside actual Romex branded NM-B, but not in years, perhaps before General Cable was bought by Southwire. I recall reading from an unverifiable source (more forum chatter) that marked conductors would occasionally be used in NM if the factory had run low/out of unmarked thhn, implying that it was simply an expedient and not a specification. But again, that part is all just innuendo.

But whether they're marked or not, they're required to be an NEC-recognized conductor/insulation.

 

[Craigv]

But whether they're marked or not, they're required to be an NEC-recognized conductor/insulation.

Absolutely.:thumbsup:

 

[Adamjamma]

But both USA and UK require any cables in conduits to be marked along its length according to specific rules, so only use usually is for pigtails.

One of the rules that I may not be able to quote the numbers on, but all 4 code books I use have the same..lol...

 

[roger]

Just install it in the conduit as a cable assembly, the only thing to remember is it will be limited to 60 deg.

Roger

 

[RustyShackleford]

You can use the conduit as a sleeve for NM though.

Tough pull.

 

[480sparky]

Spool off some THHN from the 500-footers.

 

[LarryFine]

Tough pull.

No, UF in PVC is a tough pull. :roll:

 

[electrofelon]

They are an NEC recognized conductor. See 334.112.

It's just they're not required to be marked individually.

This?

334.112 Insulation. The insulated power conductors shall
be one of the types listed in Table 310.13(A) that are suitable
for branch-circuit wiring or one that is identified for
use in these cables.

 

[480sparky]

This?

Or this:

334.112 Insulation. The insulated power conductors shall
be one of the types listed in Table 310.13(A) that are suitable
for branch-circuit wiring or one that is identified for
use in these cables.

 

[electrofelon]

Or this:

[/COLOR]

Haha, ok. But that is an "or" not an "and" . The way I read that, the inners may be "nm specific" conductors which aren't necessarily "regular" nec conductors approved for use outside of the cable assembly.

 

[infinity]

Why don't they just use "regular" conductors in the cable with the markings on them? :slaphead:

I see MC cable that has individually marked conductors.