Is this any different than if the riser was in the wall with a semi-flush installation?

-Randy

Looks like a great way to hide evidence of power theft to me. Does the local POCO actually allow this kind of thing?

I believe that California permits Rigid within the walls, in NY the Service Entrance cannot be installed within the wall cavity.
One thing I do see in my travels is some SE Cable that has been enclosed by siding or some other fashion. I wonder just how dangerous this may be? Is it not permitted by the NEC?

Pierre

I do not agree that this is a 'heat trap' conduits are often in walls with insulation.

That aside in this area (New England) this would not be allowed as this would be considered as service conductors "inside" the building and a violation of 230.70(A)(1).

Randy not putting down what is allowed in CA but that method (semi flush services) is, as far as I know only acceptable in CA.

It was an eye opener when Bill A. showed me some pictures of CA services, as a NY native he was also surprised by that method.

Bob

Bob,

Other Western states have services very similar, if not identical, to California's, including Utah, Nevada, and Arizona.

Being a New Englander myself, that method of doing the service really surprised me too. I was a bit leery of having the panel and all the breakers outdoors, to say the least. But, there are millions of homes out there done that way, so it can't be all that bad! It saves quite a bit of time over our way of doing things, that's for sure.

Pierre,

I took these pics when I visited CA and as you can see from the second pic, PVC is very commonly used within the wall for the riser into the panel.

Peter

Peter I am not talking about the breakers being outside you can find that anywhere.

The thing that I find unusual is the service riser pipe runs inside the wall cavity to a main panel meter combo that is also inside the wall cavity.

Obviously it works good for them but how is it not a NEC violation?

Don't try this in our area it will not pass.

I don't have a problem with this. As was pointed out, risers are frequently places within wall cavities. They almost always pass throgh the attic space for part of their run. On older homes, the meter/fuse box is often set into a cabinet that was built into the wall at the time of construction; the riser then is in the wall.

On the brighter side, too often I see exposed risers with questionable attachment to the side of the building- as well as other things attached to them!

FWIW, a subdivision around here is rewuiring services to be flush with the face of the wall; everything is inside the wall.

They want to hide the pipe, I say OK.

I am certainly not an expert in this method. I saw this on a post awhile back, and it was stated that it had to be rigid, with no more than 6 inches of conduit run horizontally.

I do not like the idea of unprotected service entrance conductor of any chapter 3 method run inside the wall cavity. That is just my opinion.

"it is hard to teach old dogs new tricks"

Up until ECN, I thought that everybody did services like we do here in California
The idea of SE Cable run on the exterior of a building I thought laughable at best, much like a piece of "Giant Romex".

It all depends on what you're accustomed to, and what your climate dictates.


I think the siding issue here is akin to saying conduit can't be run inside a wall. If it's going to cause a fire, then there's much bigger problems than a piece of siding...S

Scott I would not even call SE a giant piece of romex, I find the outer sheath of SE to be more fragile than NM.

Still I have it on my own house.


That is really the truth and I will add what your AHJ expects.

Bob

If the service entrance conductors and raceway are on the outside of the building sheathing, are the conductors considered in the building solely based upon the encasement??

Being a California Electricain myself, I know this would pass out here.

However, consider an underground feed. Out here, the ALWAYS come up through an insulated wall.

I have never seen a heat related problem either way with the in-wall feeder conduits.

Not saying how any other place is doing it wrong just different from how we read it here in MA.



Given those NEC sections the service disconnect would have to be at the weather head or the raceway encased in concrete.

At least in this area.

IMO the way CA does it sounds good.

Bob

It is not the heat that concerns me, just the fact that I am so use to seeing unprotected service conductors outside of the building until the first point of disconnect.

One of the benefits of a forum like this is, I do not need to travel to see the different methods used in different parts of the country - also we get to see and speak to such a diverse group of really good electricians/people

Pierre

Bob,


I'm not quite sure what you mean by that. I was just saying that having all of the branch circuit breakers outdoors is a pretty rare occurence here in New England, at least in residential and commercial. I'm sure at refineries, chemical plants and maybe even sewage treatement plants this is far more common, but those are different circumstances [ie qualified maintenance personnel].

I know what the letter of the NEC says, but how are service conductors protected by PVC for a short distance in a wall any different than a 5' piece of unprotected service cable inside a house that we might see? Either installation is unlikely to be damaged in its lifetime, IMO.

As I said, when I first visited CA and saw those Western methods it took some getting used to. It was the first time I saw uninsulated NM staples being used. (Anyone from Mass, RI or CT knows what I mean.) But it was fun to see and learn a new way of doing things.

Peter


[This message has been edited by CTwireman (edited 08-16-2004).]

I've got to take a few pic's of the average SF service, you gent's will loose your minds! 25' - 35+' inside walls, meters and mains in the building behind locked doors, etc. Nothing other than RMC above ground though! (All service conductors only) No PVC at all for branch, above or below grade, unless in concrete. Supply houses dont even know what SE cable is, or stock it! (I take that back, I have seen some use it for ranges, but not recently.)

Heck, Mark.

The way you've described it, I'll lose my mind when I see the pictures!!

Send them on down!...S

Variety is the spice of life! Even within the area I cover, there are several versions of what's allowed.

In this town, SEC is allowed. Twenty miles North, only RMC is allowed outside of the building. Outside of city limits, it's whatever someone can get away with (no inspectors).

Based upon 230.6, this would be considered "outside" the building. The Line and Load side conduit and conductors were on the surface, and then covered. Since there's no insulation, this set up is like an easy-bake oven on a hot day.

230.70 doesn't help much, because "readily" accessible can mean several things. The towns that do have an inspector, they don't have a maximum distance to the disconnect.

Energy theft is still possible, but takes a lot of effort, and the ones who are careless end up in he "Darwin Awards".

One other issue. Although this one is OK, sometimes the meter base cover can't be opened because of the added siding.

Thanks for the good comments!!!

I don't have a problem with this. I wonder if just painting the pipe might look better than what they came up with.

OK here's the pic's of an average SF service.

www.markhellerelectric.com/services/serviceconds.htm



[This message has been edited by e57 (edited 08-21-2004).]

An excellent and interesting discussion.

As for the breakers being located exterior, that is the norm here in Southern California.

You have to remember, in Orange, LA and San Diego counties, we only see snow and harsh weather on TV. And e57 might agree, SF has two types of weather - foggy and not so foggy.

I'm in the same boat as e57, and have rarely encountered SE in any part of California.