Violation or not - and why?

Status
Not open for further replies.
celtic

celtic

Senior Member
Location
NJ
Below are some pictures from an array of condensors on a roof.

Can you tell me if the termination of the line voltage wiring is in violation - and what Article you cite.
I am asking because, at this point - I don't know/am unsure :?:

********

spreadcloseup0pd.jpg


The #8's here are spread to fit under the pressure plate of this termination(around screw) - 3 strands on one side & 4 strands on the other.
Is it a violation? (Article please)

*********

onesidecloseup2cr.jpg


In this picture, the #8's are brought to one side under the pressure plate.
Is this a violation? (Article please)

*********

Personally, I think a Sta-Con should be used.

(Sorry for the crappy quality - a camera phone has it's limits!)
 
Jim W in Tampa said:
Would depend on what size wire the terminals are rated for.
Click to expand...

That's a good question.
There's no wire range listed on them - at least as far as I could see.


Jim W in Tampa said:
Red tag on that white wire,get some blk tape on it.
Click to expand...
That doesn't seem to be enforced in NJ.
 
If this is a raceway installation then its a violation to pull a white and reidentify as a black or red.
I would install single hole lugs on the ends of the 8 AWGs. Thelug should fit neatly under the wiring binding plate
 
celtic
Personally, I think a Sta-Con should be used.

_____________________________________________________________

It looks like they use them on the load side.
Maybe a violation of 110.14(A) Terminals. because it does not look like a good connection.
Also the terminals don't look like they could take #8.
Sta-con would be my way of terminating them
Click to expand...
 
Here's an overview:

0502061324a7st.jpg


0502061324c1uk.jpg


The "Doghouse":
05020613257zt.jpg


What is here is a MC run to a "doghouse".
The doghouse contains the linsets, LV wiring, and line voltage(HV~240v) wiring.
The linesets are cutout on the bottom of the doghouse.
The LV wiring is in LNFC, no connector/bushing in the doghouse - just "there", there is a LNFC conn on the unit.
The HV wiring is MC (10/2 and 8/2, depending on unit size), in the doghouse there is a MC conn...to a RMC coupling...hole punched in doghouse...to a LNFC conn....to LNFC...to pullout disco...to LNFC (including conn)

BTW....the rack the disco's are on...it's NOT attached to ANYTHING. The weight of the linesets is holding down a piece of strut for the linesets. A strurt 90 is bolted to the lineset strut and a rack was built off that 90. (Cheesey, no?)

The LNFC (both LV & HV) are simply ty-wrapped to each other as they run to the individual units...occasionally, the LV LNFC is ty-wrapped to the lineset.

If we want to play "Count the violations" ( :) ) we can ~ My real concern is the termination.

(EDIT: LNFC should say LFNC~Liquidtight Flexible Nonmetallic Conduit LFNC)
 
I rather dought either of these will cause any problems.They at least gave you terminals to land your wires.The ones i been seeing dont even have lugs anymore.All we seem to get are a set of wires to wire nut to.Running amps not likely to be very high.I would give thought to liability if they overheat and burn up them contactors.
 
By splitting the conductors under the terminals to make them fit in this case wouldn`t that change the cir.mils. of the conductor.IMO when this is done it would violate the listed ampacity of the wire.Also coudn`t the contactor have to have a listing of min. and max. wire size to be installed on said contactor :wink: My bet is that if you get the manufacturer and cat. # you can find the max listed size of the conductor the contactor will accept.
Question were the conductors matched to the min for wire size or sized to the max. OCPD . My bet is that they were sized for the max and not the min. as permitted.Most manufacturers match the contactors to the min so as to avoid this type of rigged install.
 
allenwayne said:
Question were the conductors matched to the min for wire size or sized to the max. OCPD . My bet is that they were sized for the max and not the min. as permitted.
Click to expand...

I believe you are correct Allen.
I'll check the min/max tom'row.

Was it you who posted that rule of thumb: "Wire for min, fuse for max"?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top