Has anyone used these before ? http://www.ecmweb.com/news/electric_nonmetallic_cable_splice/index.html

Today I watched one of our jouneyman install these on a 12/2 cable. Then I was asked to connect some more. I cannot believe these things are UL approved for residential in wall splicing! The only thing connecting each conductor was a flimsy thin looking "U" shaped piece of metal that the conductor gets pushed into. I actually felt guilty leaving the job knowing that these inferior connections were left inside our trusting customers walls. After telling the boss my concerns he just said: They are code complient... If I was running the show I would have said NO WAY - do it right! Anyone else use these before and what is your opinion regarding them?

(edited to activate the link the link)

[This message has been edited by electure (edited 01-25-2006).]

Well, I confess to being partly guilty. I used the T-shaped one on the right to tap onto an existing 14-2 run to add an inwall receptacle behind a plasma TV.

One major difference in our uses, to me anyway, is that the junction is under the house, where it's exposed, and that the load is no more than about 2 amps.

I looked over the device carefully before deciding to use it, and consider it adequate for the job. Each conductor's connection is actually two points of contact.

The cost is about equal to two J-boxes and wirenuts ($6 range), it was easy to do hot, and took less than 10 minutes. I consider this to be safe and legal.

I say two J-boxes, because there was little slack in the tapped run, which means I would have had to use two boxes and a 2-foot piece of NM between them, and 6 joints.



Edit: By the way, there is no mention of in-wall (inaccessible) use of the device in the article.

[This message has been edited by Larry Fine (edited 01-25-2006).]

I have no comment on the connectors but why would you need to splice NM in a wall?? Is that expensive now that you couldn't use a longer piece to get where you needed to go??

That's not as funny as it used to be.

IMHO you're confusing UL approval with code compliance.

Dave

I seem to recall the NEC saying all splices will be in junction boxes- period. I am also sure thet UL would not list something for use contrary to the NEC.

Now, there is some "wiggle room" in the code as it's applied to manufactured homes; perhaps that is where these connectors are approved for use.

Perhaps we need to quiz UL as to these connectors, and the details of the listing. I know we have several IAEI members out there- perhaps one of you can ask the UL guy at the next meeting?

The items on page 27-28


Some of the lit. says it complys with this code...


IMO they are bogus! (due to insulation piercing, a born failure...) However it they were mechanical and soldered perminant, or even exothermicaly welded, I might be OK with that....

I'm currently working on some modular t-houses. The manufacturer's rep was there one day and I asked him if those were rated to be concealed and he assured me they are.These had screw terminals though.

My only expierience with these connectors was a home that caught on fire.
They remind me of those moba home cut in switches and receptacles.
The world would be a better place with out them.
Each time I see a fire truck on its way to a fire I sometimes think of those connectors.

A second floor wall in a three story finished house was being removed. Several switch points coming from various locations were moved 5' over to the closest wall. It was one of those situations where extensive wall tearout would have been required to do the job right. I have read about these somewhere before and recall some fuss about their use in concealed walls. It would be very interesting to corner the UL people about these.

These things come and go. They have been around in the manufactured home community for over a decade. It is what they snap the modules together with. For a while AMP was selling these as the way to fix the 90c/<old>NM ceiling box problem.
After a lot of hubbub they removed the 336-21 (now 334.40) language from their ads. I think we went through this a year or so ago here and the language was gone, only the 551 reference. I see it is back.


[This message has been edited by gfretwell (edited 01-25-2006).]

Got called to a house today for a partial outage. I found these in the crawlspace. The one without the cover was the one causing the outage, what was scary was two of the others were arcing and smoking everytime I touched them, you can see the black spots where they were cooking. I cut all of them out and used 1900 boxes and wirenuts to repair, also got rid of the flying splices.









edited to size pic to screen and put on ECN server




[This message has been edited by electure (edited 01-28-2006).]

If you take a look at the instructions on page 27 you will see the fittings used in attic spaces and not in finished walls. I still think that they need to be better developed before they can be marketed.

In German-influenced countries there is only one way of legally doing this and that is using crimp connectors and filling the entire enclosure with some resin that will permanently enclose the splices and keep any moisture out. Then it is acceptable to be buried. Connections using screw terminals may not be buried at all.

We hide cables in the wall all the time, and only have a general requirement that _splices_ be accessible.

On the one hand, it seems perfectly reasonable to me that a _good enough_ splice in a cable would be as secure and safe as an equivalent length of cable, and thus should be safe enough to hide in the wall without access.

On the other hand, it seems to me that _these_ splices are not good enough

-Jon

My bad - I replied above that the ones I saw have screw conns.- they're push conn. like the ones in the photos.I'm going to ask the codes guy in town where these mod. units are going up to ban them. Didn't want to festoon the ceings w/ j-boxes, but I like sleeping well.

Just last week I sent an enquiry to UL about connectors like these being used on site built construction. They are UL listed for consealed work in walls.

The brand I checked on are listed for use ONLY in modular and manufactured homes.

The manufacturer of the splices does not make this clear in their literature.
If in doubt about the use check with the listing laboratory.
Alan--

Lone gunman:

I'd bet those flying splices were from previous connector failures. Probably done by a maint. guy or homeowner, as I would think any EC with standards would do exactly as you did, and remake tham all in 1900's with proper connections.

Kudos to you for doing the right thing!!

By the way, it looks like the main cause (other than crappy design) of the failures was corrosion.

Know what, I had a 12V trailer plug incinerate itself on my pickup because of a little salt and dampness getting in! God forbid it was a connector like what I see here in a damp location with 120V present!


-->Just a little trick I use when making up connections where dampness or water could be present: A little "No -Alox" or any other brand aluminum joint compound OR "Thomas and betts Cop-r Shield" on the connection and in the wire nut will greatly help preserve the connection, and keep any water and dirt out!

What is odd to me is the inconsistency this device creates.

They are saying this device which we all seem to agree on is of poor quality is good enough to bury in a wall. OK fine maybe it is.

At the same time an electrician can not make a proper high quality splice in a real electrical box and conceal it.

Why is one a safety issue and the other fine?

Bob



[This message has been edited by iwire (edited 01-29-2006).]

There you go again with the common sense, Bob

Don't those work alot like the pre-fab connectors on office furniture partitions? (minus the romex) I've come across those burnt up before as well....

I talked with the manufacturer of these a couple of years ago, they said that the splice/tap connectors are designed to be used ONLY where they will remain accessible.

The advantage is being able to tap off an existing cable w/o using two boxes (there is never enough slack).

I've had situations where being able to splice or tap at a point that will be inaccessible would have saved a ton of time and money, but that's the breaks.

Cliff

as e57 points out:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
334.40(B) Devices of Insulating Material. Switch, outlet, and tap devices of insulating material shall be permitted to be used without boxes in exposed cable wiring and for rewiring in existing buildings where the cable is concealed and fished. Openings in such devices shall form a close fit around the outer covering of the cable, and the device shall fully enclose the part of the cable from which any part of the covering has been removed. Where connections to conductors are by binding-screw terminals, there shall be available as many terminals as conductors.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

it says the cable has to be exposed or can be "concealed and fished. seems to me if it is fished, it would still be accessible as it could be fished back out without removing any portion of the walls or ceiling. I read this as not being allowed to be stapled in place and drywalled over. And as gfretwell points out, it is for manufactured homes only.

334.40(B) applies to all occupancies, not just manufactured homes.

The real question is how are they listed.

I looked up the listings, all it says is install per the NEC.

The connectors I checked on were manufactured by Molex of Pinellas Park FL, UL listed # E182087. This brand is restricted to prefabricated / modular structures and homes.
They are not permitted with site built homes.
I recommend checking UL at their web for limits on the use of any other brand.

Alan using your listing number we end up at this UL page

Nonmetallic Sheathed Cable Interconnectors

Which says in part.



This page was written based on the 1999 NEC and is referring to the tap devices listed in 336-21

1999 NEC

If you do not think those Molex connectors you called out are what 1999 336-21 or 2002 334.40(B) are referring to what tap device do you think the NEC is referring to?

I am not a fan of these and have not used them, but I am confident they can be used in 'normal' dwellings.

Bob


[This message has been edited by iwire (edited 01-31-2006).]

By the way Molex makes straight 'one for one' connectors and a Tap connectors.

That UL page I linked to seems to say that the only the tap connectors can be used in 'normal' homes.

Sorry for coming in late, but there are a couple of points I'd like to make.

Here is a quote from the add linked in the OP.

Now look at the NEC definition of "approved". It is the Authority Having Jurisdiction that "approves" something. Not UL, not the manufacturer.

Secondly, UL does not write code. Jurisdictions do not adopt the UL listings, they adopt the NEC. If UL lists something for a particular use, but the NEC prohibits it's use, it is the NEC that has force of law and UL does not trump it.

300.15 requires that splices be made in a box. 314.29 requires those boxes to be accessible. 300.15(H) referes to 334.40(B) which allows switch, outlet, and tap devices of insulating material to be used with NM. The devices being discussed are not switch or outlet devices. Are they tap devices? Is a device that allows two conductors to be spliced a tap device? Even if they are tap devices, 334.40(B) only permits their use where the cable will be exposed or in existing installations where the cable is fished.

[This message has been edited by eprice (edited 01-31-2006).]

I agree


Yes if we are talking about the Molex device that ends up with 3 NMs connected to it. (In, Out and Tap)



In my opinion no, they would not be tap deices.



Precisely, that is what I have been trying to get across.

Bob

All code/listing issues aside it is clear these were designed for connecting 2 sections of a manufactured building together, not simply splicing or tapping a circuit. They are made with 2 parts that mate together, plug and socket fashion, after the cable connection is made up. I imagine after they were placed on the market someone said "say there seems to be a loophole we can exploit to sell more of these". They made the rounds about 10 years ago and I even had AMP send me some samples. Most of the folks I was yacking with at that time said this was only for manufactured housing but the code didn't address it specifically enough. Most inspectors hated them, hence they got far from universal "approval" and the issue went away. None of the guys at the IAEI meeting who saw the ones I had said they would take them fished in a regular wall.
The last time I looked, maybe a year ago, AMP, (now Tyco) was only addressing the manufactured homes in their docs. I see it is back.

Greg there are two types of these.

One type is as you describe, simply male and female 'plugs' that connect two separate NMs together.

I agree that type is not allowed in stick built homes.

But there is another type that Molex makes that is a tap.

It is made to tap a new NM in the middle of an exsisting run run of NM, this type is allowed in stick built homes.

If that is not the case can you tell me what type of device the NEC is referring to here?

part of 334.40(B)

The tap devices are permitted.

Bob

From EC&M

I'd be real careful about quoting EC&M....all they seem to do is re-print press releases. I won't forget the time they trumpeted PVC components as requiring no ground wire...

Bob the tap device I have is a plug and socket deal too. The socket connects to the run of RX with the tap plugging in.
Joe Tedesco has some pictures of a device he says 334.40 refers to. It is an old bakelite device that RX connects directly to.
We had a thread about this somewhere in the last year, maybe over at the HI board.