wire

Status
Not open for further replies.
iwire said:
:thumbsup:
Click to expand...

I think I let one of my designs slip through the cracks with SER spec'd in an installation that is mostly above ground, and part of it had a 10 ft "dive" below ground through the conduit as it swept through a panelboard. That was built long ago, and I overlooked this rule without thinking about it.

Is there any particular reason / real life consequence as to why SER / SEU is not allowed underground even in a raceway? The constituent XHHW-2 wires inside of it would be allowed underground in a raceway on their own.

Would it be permissible to strip away the SER jacket and continue the constituent XHHW-2 wires underground in a raceway?

And is there any close equivalent of SER/SEU, that is rated for underground use?
 
Carultch said:
Is there any particular reason / real life consequence as to why SER / SEU is not allowed underground even in a raceway? The constituent XHHW-2 wires inside of it would be allowed underground in a raceway on their own.

Would it be permissible to strip away the SER jacket and continue the constituent XHHW-2 wires underground in a raceway?
Click to expand...

I believe a few code cycles ago, it wasnt specifically stated that SE cable could not be used below grade and that wording is relatively new. I have always assumed that the issue is the bare EGC.
In general, can a bare aluminum EGC be used below grade?

Up thru 2005, yes. That changed in 2008- it's allowed only if it was existing, must have the egc for new sp's.
Click to expand...

but note that is for feeders between different structures. Separate N/G has been required for same-building sub panels for a long time.

so there is not a bare conductor with two insulated conductors? wrapped in a gray sheath?
Click to expand...

That is SEU.
 
electrofelon said:
but note that is for feeders between different structures. Separate N/G has been required for same-building sub panels for a long time.
Click to expand...

There was a thread about this recently- looked this up then and found no evidence 3 wire to sub in same structure was ever permitted or at least it wasn't enforced in many areas.
 
electrofelon said:
In general, can a bare aluminum EGC be used below grade? ....
Click to expand...
No
250.120 Equipment Grounding Conductor Installation

(B) Aluminum and Copper-Clad Aluminum Conductors.
Equipment grounding conductors of bare or insulated alumi-
num or copper-clad aluminum shall be permitted. Bare con-
ductors shall not come in direct contact with masonry or the
earth or where subject to corrosive conditions. Aluminum or
copper-clad aluminum conductors shall not be terminated
within 450 mm (18 in.) of the earth.
Click to expand...
 
enireh said:
in the past three conductors was permitted to feed sub panel, now all are required to have a four wire feed yes?
Click to expand...
Yes

user 100 said:
Up thru 2005, yes. That changed in 2008....
Click to expand...
Yup

tkb said:
Yes, but that was only allowed if there wasn't any parallel ground paths like a water pipe, phone wire or cable tv.
Click to expand...
Correct

electrofelon said:
...but note that is for feeders between different structures. Separate N/G has been required for same-building sub panels for a long time..
Click to expand...
user 100 said:
There was a thread about this recently- looked this up then and found no evidence 3 wire to sub in same structure was ever permitted or at least it wasn't enforced in many areas.
Click to expand...
:thumbsup::thumbsup:
 
electrofelon said:
I used SER in pipe below ground (about 10 feet) back in 2007. I think that is before the wording was changed, at least that is my excuse :angel:. It still haunts me every day.
Click to expand...
338.12 [Uses Not Permitted] was added in 2008. The reason for not using SE underground prior to 2008 did not exist. :angel:
 
Smart $ said:
338.12 [Uses Not Permitted] was added in 2008. The reason for not using SE underground prior to 2008 did not exist. :angel:
Click to expand...

Oh grand, it is true and I didnt just subconsciously make that up!

250.120 Equipment Grounding Conductor Installation

(B) Aluminum and Copper-Clad Aluminum Conductors.
Equipment grounding conductors of bare or insulated alumi-
num or copper-clad aluminum shall be permitted. Bare con-
ductors shall not come in direct contact with masonry or the
earth or where subject to corrosive conditions. Aluminum or
copper-clad aluminum conductors shall not be terminated
within 450 mm (18 in.) of the earth.
Click to expand...

I was pretty sure that was the case but was too lazy to double check. So back to the SER, It seems that as Carultch was proposing, if one really wanted to get one up on the man and/or cause trouble, he or she could re-identify one of the insulated conductors as the EGC, and get away with using it in pipe below grade? (looking for the devil smiley, alas guess it doesnt exist....)
 
electrofelon said:
Oh grand, it is true and I didnt just subconsciously make that up!



I was pretty sure that was the case but was too lazy to double check. So back to the SER, It seems that as Carultch was proposing, if one really wanted to get one up on the man and/or cause trouble, he or she could re-identify one of the insulated conductors as the EGC, and get away with using it in pipe below grade? (looking for the devil smiley, alas guess it doesn't exist....)
Click to expand...
Sort of moot point to discuss, not being able to use underground now and all, eh?
 
se

se

electrofelon said:
Oh grand, it is true and I didnt just subconsciously make that up!



I was pretty sure that was the case but was too lazy to double check. So back to the SER, It seems that as Carultch was proposing, if one really wanted to get one up on the man and/or cause trouble, he or she could re-identify one of the insulated conductors as the EGC, and get away with using it in pipe below grade? (looking for the devil smiley, alas guess it doesnt exist....)
Click to expand...
I think because it was design for free air, like uf can't go in pipe!
 
electrofelon said:
Oh grand, it is true and I didnt just subconsciously make that up!

I was pretty sure that was the case but was too lazy to double check. So back to the SER, It seems that as Carultch was proposing, if one really wanted to get one up on the man and/or cause trouble, he or she could re-identify one of the insulated conductors as the EGC, and get away with using it in pipe below grade? (looking for the devil smiley, alas guess it doesnt exist....)
Click to expand...


OK, so that sort of covers the restriction on aluminum SE cable direct buried, even though the plastic jacket makes it no longer truly bare. But it doesn't cover the reason why copper SE cable couldn't be used underground. Or even any SE cable inside a raceway.

As I understand it, you can still run a bare EGC with individual conductors inside a raceway, even if that raceway goes underground, provided that it terminates at least the required distance above grade. Not a practice I recommend, because of bare EGC and abrasion of the remaining wires, but I don't see a rule why it can't be done. And if it can be done, then we still haven't explained why SE cable cannot be underground in a raceway.
 
electrofelon said:
If it has marked XHHW inners and I don't have a bare egc, than it seems plausible that then it's just XHHW conductors in conduit with some superfluous gray sheath.
Click to expand...
Doesn't change the fact it is SE cable and not permitted underground, does it?

If it's innards are marked XHHW, you can strip off that superfluous gray sheath to be compatible... :happyyes:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top