The Electrical Contractor Network

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

Books, Tools and Test Equipment for Electrical and Construction Trades

Register Now!

Register Now!

We want your input!

Featured:
   

2017 NEC and Related
2017 NEC
Now Available!

   
Recent Posts
Industrail Control Panel bonding per 409.108
by sparkyinak
Today at 03:17 PM
Calling all Non-US members!! (Non-US only)
by aussie240
Yesterday at 02:39 AM
Photo Upload Tutorial
by DanK
12/06/16 11:35 PM
Sprinklered equipment 26-008
by bigpapa
12/02/16 04:24 PM
On Delay Relay with Auto Reset
by Potseal
12/01/16 09:59 AM
New in the Gallery:
12.5A through 0.75mm flex (just out of curiosity)
Shout Box

Top Posters (30 Days)
gfretwell 13
HotLine1 9
Texas_Ranger 8
sparkyinak 8
Trumpy 6
Who's Online
0 registered (), 185 Guests and 6 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#98640 - 02/04/05 08:55 AM 110.14(C)(1)(a)(4)
Elzappr Offline
Member

Registered: 12/20/01
Posts: 273
Loc: Oregon
Huh? Code change allows wires feeding certain motors to be running at the 75C current levels and yet be terminated in a 60C breaker?

Top
2014 / 2011 NEC & Related Books and Study Guides
#98641 - 02/04/05 10:05 AM Re: 110.14(C)(1)(a)(4)
gfretwell Offline

Member

Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 9045
Loc: Estero,Fl,usa
I didn't read it that way. "if equipment is listed and identified for use with such conductors" appears several times in that article. I do agree it is not written well and you could make that deduction from the scrambled text out of context but I don't think that is the intent.
_________________________
Greg Fretwell

Top
#98642 - 02/04/05 10:37 AM Re: 110.14(C)(1)(a)(4)
cpal Offline
Member

Registered: 05/17/04
Posts: 165
Loc: Cohasset MA
I agree with gfretwell, the original proposal 1999 was a modification to a exception adopted in 93. The proposal was directed towards the manufactures wiring of the motors, I take that to mean internal.
I believe the field wiring to the the motor would have to comply with the requirements of 110.14 (C) .

The 2005 change specifically was to delete reference to design E motors.

Top
#98643 - 02/04/05 11:33 AM Re: 110.14(C)(1)(a)(4)
Elzappr Offline
Member

Registered: 12/20/01
Posts: 273
Loc: Oregon
Yeah, gfretwell and cpal, I get the point that its ok to use the higher rated wire at the motor connections. Its just a bit confusing when they talk about both source and load end connections in the same section. The wording of 110.14(C)(1):
"(a) Termination provisions of equipment for circuits rated 100 amperes or less, or marked for 14 AWG through 1AWG, shall be used only for one of the following:
(1) Conductors rated 60*C (140*F).
.
.
(4) For motors marked..conductors having an insulation rating of 75*C (167*F)or higher shall be permitted to be used, provided the ampacity of such conductors does not exceed the 75*C (167*F) ampacity."

The 4th part leaves one to conclude that 75*C wire is ok to hook up to the 60*C breaker (or whatever overcurrent device is feeding the motor circuit). What would it hurt to change that last sentence to '..does not exceed the 60*C (157*F) ampacity.'?

PS, I'll be out of town for a couple of days, so I'll be glad to talk with you all some more about this at that time.

Top
#98644 - 02/04/05 12:01 PM Re: 110.14(C)(1)(a)(4)
rbalex Offline
Member

Registered: 12/29/04
Posts: 12
Loc: Laguna Hills, CA USA
The only change in this cycle was the elimination of Design "E" motors.

Read in full context, (Equipment Provisions) it is only saying that motor terminal lugs are already suitable for 75C, since motors “in ordinary locations” are not listed. It isn’t saying anything about the breaker end.


[This message has been edited by rbalex (edited 02-04-2005).]

Top



ECN Electrical Forums - sponsored by Electrical Contractor Network - Electrical and Code Related Discussion for Electrical Contractors, Electricians, Inspectors, Instructors, Engineers and other related Professionals