|
1 members (Scott35),
140
guests, and
12
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 187
OP
Member
|
I do some work in South Philly, were there is a lot of old brick fronts that need replacing. When the fronts are being replaced, the contractor puts pvc in between the two layers of brick, from the basement to the second floor and pops out with a 90, to where the service is to be attached. Noboby wants to see pvc or service cable on a new front. Then the EC comes in and does the service. Is this legal or not?
Hank
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 751
Member
|
The disconnecting means and the OC device must be located inside or outside, nearest the point of entrance of the service conductors.
Service conductors have no short circuit or ground fault protection, so if there is a problem with the conductor insulation inside the conduit, it will spark and arc undetected until it melts clean through the PVC and may burn the building down. A safer installation would be rigid metal conduit, but that would only take a little longer to burn through.
[This message has been edited by earlydean (edited 05-30-2006).]
Earl
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,391
Moderator
|
I am not so sure it is a violation. the contractor puts pvc in between the two layers of brick, 230.6 Conductors Considered Outside the Building.
Conductors shall be considered outside of a building or other structure under any of the following conditions:
(1)Where installed under not less than 50 mm (2 in.) of concrete beneath a building or other structure
(2)Where installed within a building or other structure in a raceway that is encased in concrete or brick not less than 50 mm (2 in.) thick It sounds to me like this raceway is 'outside the building' and you can run service conductors as far as you want outside the building. Bob
Bob Badger
Construction & Maintenance Electrician
Massachusetts
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 751
Member
|
?
[This message has been edited by earlydean (edited 05-30-2006).]
Earl
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 821
Member
|
I notice this more and more as I like to look at services whenever I'm out and about. I don't like the design of hiding the pipe, but it sure seems like it's legal to do, as long as it's in pipe. SE cable is a different story.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,928 Likes: 34
Member
|
The only question I would have is how is that void between the brick verniers capped at the top? If this is a "chimney" into the attic it is still "inside" the building. If it is capped with more than 2" of mortar, brick or concrete, across the whole bay where the SE resides, it would be OK by me.
A wood top plate would not suffice.
Greg Fretwell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,391
Moderator
|
Greg I agree with you, we would have to see it to determine if it is indeed 'encased'. That is why I carefully did not commit to a firm answer. ![[Linked Image]](https://www.electrical-contractor.net/ubb/biggrin.gif) I am not so sure it is a violation.It certainly could be a violation but we also have to assume the local AHJ is on board with it. Bob
Bob Badger
Construction & Maintenance Electrician
Massachusetts
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 40
Member
|
I don't know if it is ok in Philly or not, but I sure miss the hoagies and cheesesteaks and the real pizza. I used to work in the shipyard until it closed,as a machinist, then got transferred to DC, became an electrician, and finally retired to NC. I don't know who the AHJ is in South Philly, but there was a time, I have been told, that a C note was required before the permit was signed off. Another thing to note is the homes don't look like much outside, but some contain 18 karat gold bathroom fixtures, imported Italian marble floors, front doors costing thousands etc...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,928 Likes: 34
Member
|
This is one issue we wouldn't have here in Florida. Masonry walls are capped with a 16" tie beam of poured concrete and rebar along with solid corners and window/door frames.
You never have more than 5' of wall without a poured cell.
Bury a pipe in there and it is "encased"
Greg Fretwell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,876
Member
|
This is the commentary from 230.70 A: No maximum distance is specified from the point of entrance of service conductors to a readily accessible location for the installation of a service disconnecting means. The authority enforcing this Code has the responsibility for, and is charged with, making the decision as to how far inside the building the service-entrance conductors are allowed to travel to the main disconnecting means. The length of service-entrance conductors should be kept to a minimum inside buildings, because power utilities provide limited overcurrent protection and, in the event of a fault, the service conductors could ignite nearby combustible materials.
Some local jurisdictions have ordinances that allow service-entrance conductors to run within the building up to a specified length to terminate at the disconnecting means. The authority having jurisdiction may permit service conductors to bypass fuel storage tanks or gas meters and the like, permitting the service disconnecting means to be located in a readily accessible location. However, if the authority judges the distance as being excessive, the disconnecting means may be required to be located on the outside of the building or near the building at a readily accessible location that is not necessarily nearest the point of entrance of the conductors. That said, I often run (required) RMC in the exterior WOOD walls, and have been allowed 35'+ inside the building with varying opions from different AHJ's. Good idea to always ask before jumping in too far.....
Mark Heller
"Well - I oughta....." -Jackie Gleason
|
|
|
|
Posts: 22
Joined: August 2009
|
|
|
|
