ECN Forum Forums Code Related Discussion NEC & other Code issues Wiring Methods

OK, so you strip the outer jacket off the portion inside the pipe- no different than removing the jacket from MC.

I'm not sure you can object to even the complete cord in the pipe, with the strain relief connector where it exits the pipe. There's the 'termination' fitting some speak of when the 'romex in pipe' discussion comes up.

It may be time to read Article 400.7 & 400.8., before we all get to deep into this.

400.7 (B) may come into play. (2011)

Perhaps the OP could add a little more info?

Greg has a point on raised eyebrows.

I get to 400.8 (not permitted)
"(6) Where installed in raceways, except as otherwise permitted in this Code"
... and I am trying to find out where it is permitted.

Physical damage? 400.14?

BTW Reno, there are plenty of inspectors who would write a 110.3(B) for loose conductors from a cable or cord in a raceway.
"What kind of wire is that? It doesn't say on the insulation"

Greg:
I was alluding to the part about 'connected with a cord cap'. The OP mentions 'splices'.

I agree on the 'what kind of wire', re: the insulation of the internal conductors not being identified. A lot of guys look at that.

It seems like a lot of confusion, just to avoid using a box.

I agree with Greg, use a box, it's cheaper, easier to mount and makes more sense than arguing with the AHJ. Since I am an AHJ, I'm probably going to give you a what for when I see a LB instead of a box.

I did say in post 4 that I would use a box, but the OP was going down a different road.

All this worry about "arguing with the AHJ!"

The opposition seems based upon a religious belief that flexible cords ought not be inside pipe, and that there can be no tolerance of such heresy.

No one seems to recognize that this whole issue is the direct result of the NEC making a 'design decision' to ban flexible cords from above dropped ceilings.

So, why did we ban cords penetrating drop ceilings? I seem to recall a few folks arguing at the time that the soft cardboard tiles would damage the cords. Then there was that whole fire/smoke issue.

So, what's a 'drop ceiling?' It's a framework filled with rather insubstantial tiles. By definition, there's quite a distance between the ceiling and any structure- if for no reason than that one must be able to remove the tiles.

Why is this relevant? Because boxes must be supported- and we've had recent code changes that preclude supporting anything from the grid, even though there are some very nice brackets marketed for that exact use.

Plus, a box anywhere near the tiles will interfere with the removal of the tiles.

So, what's someone to do? Well, it's no trick to have a length of pipe to be 'cantilevered' from it's last support. Let that pipe pierce a tile, and you have a nice, clean penetration. All that remains is the transition to the cord.

So, I'd look to 400.14 as providing me with a loophole big enough to drive a circus train through. To wit: "In industrial establishments where the conditions of maintenance and supervision ensure that only qualified persons service the installation, flexible cords and cables shall be permitted to be installed in aboveground raceways that are no longer than 50-ft. to protect the flexible cord or cable from physical damage."

Since the NEC does not define any of the qualifying conditions in that section, the AHJ has no choice but to grant the greatest possible lattitude to 'industrial,' 'qualified,' 'supervision,' 'ensure,' and 'protection.'

Therefore, the NEC specifically allows that you run the cable through a fitting into pipe, and to continue the cable to the junction box.

How far to the junction box? Well -apart from the 50-ft. limitation- the pipe is required to be supported within 5ft
(not a typo) of the structural support, I'd say that the junction box would be required at that support point.

well i was tryin to be HotOne, i mean the mogul deal is usually par for the LB course.....

~S~

what say you to Buss Drop Cable Greg?

~S~