0 members (),
161
guests, and
10
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 751
OP
Member
|
Say I feed a multiple gang box with a single 14/2 cable fed by a 15 amp cb, wire-nut seven neutrals, pigtail the hot to 6 switches, then feed six 14/2 cables up the wall and through a single bored hole in the top plate. These six cables continue on to six individual recessed luminaires. According to code, I have 12 current carrying conductors through this hole. Building code requires me to draft stop this hole, and 334.80 requires me to derate these conductors per 310.15(B)(2)(a). But, because I feed all six cables from a single 15 amp breaker, am I exempted from the derating requirement? (after all, I am limited to 15 amps shared among all cables)
Earl
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,391
Moderator
|
What you describe can happen in pipe systems as well. In my opinion it should be exempt. That said I do not believe there is anything in the NEC that allows us to 'exempt it'. Bob
Bob Badger Construction & Maintenance Electrician Massachusetts
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,507
Member
|
I could not agree more Bob. each wire will carry it's own current and generate it's own heat which will be additive and hence a large amount of heat right at the upper plate where they are closest together.
George Little
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 64
Member
|
How long is the hole? Even if it is a double top plate and the hole is 3" long, if the total conductor length not in the hole is at least 30" then 310.15(A)(2) exceptiion allows us to use the ampacity of conductors outside of the hole for that portion in the hole.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,934 Likes: 34
Member
|
I hate to be the spoil sport here but the code is wrong. The whole derating issue assumes all conductors will be on separate circuits so the heat adds. If they are on the same circuit it actually subtracts where they are paralleled. If the total amps is 15 and it is spread out across 1 pair of conductors "in" and 5 "out" pairs of conductors the heat generated in the insulation is ~60% of what it would be with a single Romex in and out. Resistance of the "outs" is 1/5th of a single pair and total heat is still I2R. The only way this current could add is if this was a series loop and full current comes in and out 3 times.
Greg Fretwell
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,507
Member
|
eprice- I think you are mistakenly using 310.15(A) because 334.80 specifically says that "B" applies and using your approach it would rarely be the case where there would be derating of NM cables. And I do understand the Exception in "A" of 310.15.
George Little
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,391
Moderator
|
I hate to be the spoil sport here but the code is wrong. I do not think anyone here is disputing that, I said as much in my post.
Bob Badger Construction & Maintenance Electrician Massachusetts
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 375
Member
|
The code is not wrong ---
(Assuming that the plate is thick enough that derating is required ...)
The code simply says that if you derate this situation then the AHJ will approve this portion of the work.
If you do not wish to derate you need to do engineering. In this case, engineering will show that derating below 15amp is not required.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 73
Member
|
quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I hate to be the spoil sport here but the code is wrong. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I do not think anyone here is disputing that, I said as much in my post.
The code is never wrong. Maybe poorly written in many instances, but not wrong. These examples are where you talk to the AHJ and get permission. When you parrallel conductors you do not significantly increase the heat when they are bundled or in raceway. If the AHJ doesn't know that he shouldn't be inspecting.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,934 Likes: 34
Member
|
George, the exception in (A) of 310.15 was discussed in the IAEI news a while ago. The assumption is the thermal conductivity of the conductor will tend to average out the hot spot. In that regard I don't understand the new language of 336.80. I guess the CMP has the same issue you do with the exception but they won't address it. Sometimes I think the guys who write new language do not rationalize it with old language they let stand.
Greg Fretwell
|
|
|
Tom
Shinnston, WV USA
Posts: 1,044
Joined: January 2001
|
|
|
|