1 members (Scott35),
235
guests, and
27
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,056
Member
|
Turkey,
If it is installed outdoors, you can not install NM cable inside the EMT, it would have to be UF. If a conduit is installed in a wet location, the interior of it is considered a wet location as well. NM cable is only suitable for normally dry locations per 334.10 (A) BTW, There are those who believe that NM cable installed in conduit is a violation of 334.40 which requires it to be secured within 12" of your boxes, etc. If the cable is in conduit, this requirement can not be met.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 131
Member
|
Redsy, boxes do have interior clamps which would meet code.
Sparky, the conduit would be grounded provided the romex ground was connected to the box.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 9
Junior Member
|
Turkey, Why would you run romex in emt. It seems to me to be much easier to run THWN in the conduit instead.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 43
Member
|
I don't understand the concept of running romex in conduit!! That 10/3 romex, will hardly fit in ½" and will still be tight in 3/4", even in 3/4" you won't get 10/3 around more than 1 90 degree bend. Save yourself a lot of headache and use single conductors in the conduit. If it is in the middle of the run splice in correctly sized boxes at each end.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 112
Member
|
10 ga. THWN would be a better choice, and cheaper too.
gramps
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,056
Member
|
tsolanto,
I'm not sure the conduit can be connected to the box if it is the type of box that has NM cable clamps? BTW, I am not opposed to the practice of using a section of EMT for protecting drops of NM cable to outlet boxes, in a basement, for example. I know of at least one authority who considers it a violation. My opinion is that, with a proper transition fitting, the intent of the above mentioned article is satisfied. Still thumbs down on wet locations, though.
[This message has been edited by Redsy (edited 02-11-2003).]
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 169
Member
|
This is the very type of thing that caused so many problems in getting a workable code passed. I believe that Mr. M, a board member, said it all when he insisted that "common sense" prevail. I have minimal amounts of romex in EMT as well as PVC. As long as the EMT has watertight fittings and boxes there is no valid reason to exclude. Many of the farms in the county have EMT w/romex, most in WP raceways. They are used for grain dryers, farrow houses, butchering houses, etc and as some are under the county health dept full inspections as to safety are performed. Rowdy
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 642
Member
|
As has been noted romex is only allowed in a normally dry location. No matter what type of conduit usad in a wet or damp location especally outside you will get some condensation in it. How much depends on mother nature's weather in your area. Outside is a violation. Inside may not be if you can make the appropate transitions between wiring methods.
ed
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 131
Member
|
Here in Long Island romex was allowed for many years to be installed in conduit outside. It lasted indefinetly.... I have never encountered a problem caused by this practice. However in the last year or so the AHJ's are now violating this practice for the reasons described in this post.
Don't agree with it...Gota live with it...
|
|
|
Posts: 57
Joined: August 2003
|
|
|
|