ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals

ECN Shout Chat
Top Posters(30 Days)
Admin 16
Recent Posts
Another Forum Update
by Admin. 03/22/17 03:04 PM
Dining room plugs
by watersparkfalls. 03/21/17 10:31 PM
TRUE POWER
by jraef. 03/21/17 09:13 PM
WEG CFW-11 Frequency Inverter
by jraef. 03/21/17 08:50 PM
fuse rejectors
by HotLine1. 03/20/17 08:14 PM
New in the Gallery:
SE cable question
Popular Topics(Views)
231,174 Are you busy
165,916 Re: Forum
160,453 Need opinion
Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 55 guests, and 9 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
#77261 - 05/17/01 07:43 PM 370-23 (e) exception, (f) exception  
frodo  Offline
Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 129
louisville, ky usa
i hate to be a forum hog but i have a question that has come up and a few various qualified opinions on the subject would help solve the question.

here is the situation...

given a 3/4 inch run of rigid steel conduit with a 2" tee cut in. re's are used to bush the tee down to 3/4. the only support is a piece of unistrut a foot apart on either side of the tee for this example.. the rest of the run is supported correctly.

the issue is the support of the fitting...i see a code violation here because you would be using a 3/4 inch conduit to support the 2 inch tee...

given that the fitting should contain devices or fixtures you are bound by the same exception as in 370-23 (e)

i realize this has been done for a long time but.....i beleive it was changed in 1996 to eliminate this problem...

thank you for your response


2017 / 2014 NEC & Related Books and Study Guides

#77262 - 05/17/01 09:38 PM Re: 370-23 (e) exception, (f) exception  
sparky  Offline
Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,303
frodo;
there may be some consideration as to defining this as a 'conduit body' or 'enclosure'.

[Linked Image]


#77263 - 05/18/01 05:46 PM Re: 370-23 (e) exception, (f) exception  
sparky  Offline
Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,303
frodo;
maybe others can comment here, at one time an LB could be either definition. this depended on a termination within it or not. The fill calc ( seen on interior of LB's) were only to be applied to those used for terminations .

Or else we would all be using mogul LB's
(very $$$$$)

[Linked Image]


#77264 - 05/18/01 06:47 PM Re: 370-23 (e) exception, (f) exception  
resqcapt19  Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,148
IL
This gets a little tricky. 370-23(c) says two conduits screwed into threaded hubs are permitted to support enclosures 100 cubic inches or less without devices or fixtures in the enclosure. The exception tells us that conduit of the same trade size as the conduit body can support the conduit body even if the volume exceeds 100 cu. in.
It is now my opinion that is the volume of the 2" T is less than 100 cu. in. then the 3/4 conduits are permitted to support it.
Don(resqcapt19)


Don(resqcapt19)


Member Spotlight
NickD
NickD
Amish Country, PA
Posts: 46
Joined: March 2013
Show All Member Profiles 
Featured:

2017 NEC and Related
2017 NEC
Now Available!

Shout Box
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0
Page Time: 0.015s Queries: 14 (0.002s) Memory: 0.7581 MB (Peak: 0.8876 MB) Zlib enabled. Server Time: 2017-03-23 04:23:58 UTC