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
Correct rotation, wrong sequence
by Potseal
Today at 03:14 PM
Industrail Control Panel bonding per 409.108
by sparkyinak
Yesterday at 06:29 PM
Calling all Non-US members!! (Non-US only)
by aussie240
12/07/16 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
New in the Gallery:
12.5A through 0.75mm˛ flex (just out of curiosity)
Shout Box

Top Posters (30 Days)
gfretwell 11
HotLine1 10
Potseal 9
sparkyinak 8
Texas_Ranger 7
Who's Online
0 registered (), 218 Guests and 4 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 >
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#99151 - 07/25/06 12:54 PM Transition from EMT to.......
hbiss Offline
Member

Registered: 12/16/03
Posts: 893
Loc: Hawthorne, NY USA
Article 300.15 (F)
Fitting. A fitting identified for the use shall be permitted in lieu of a box or conduit body where conductors are not spliced or terminated within the fitting. The fitting shall remain accessable after installation.

I had a discussion today about this. EC wanted to transition from an EMT stub-up out of the floor within a partition to a short piece of greenfield so he can go into a box KO.

I know that such transitions to AC or romex have to be accessable, he doesn't think that applies to greenfield. I say it does but I'm not 100%. What do you think?

-Hal
_________________________
www.myphonetechs.com

Top
2014 / 2011 NEC & Related Books and Study Guides
#99152 - 07/25/06 02:04 PM Re: Transition from EMT to.......
renosteinke Offline
Cat Servant
Member

Registered: 01/22/05
Posts: 5305
Loc: Blue Collar Country
Hmmm. interesting.

I had never realised the "accessability" requirement. I wonder how many times I've violated that one!

I would not insist upon the connection being accessible IF the conductors are actually fished through... none of this "piece and pull" nonsense.

Top
#99153 - 07/25/06 02:26 PM Re: Transition from EMT to.......
hbiss Offline
Member

Registered: 12/16/03
Posts: 893
Loc: Hawthorne, NY USA
Well, the arguement is being made that the transition is simply a coupling, EMT to greenfield. Wire will be pulled in later. He says no problem which got me looking.

I have been guilty of this myself when absolutely necessary but the wording of 300.15(F) makes me wonder. I would normally do what's necessary to get the EMT directly to the box which in this case wouldn't be a problem but it's not me this time.

-Hal
_________________________
www.myphonetechs.com

Top
#99154 - 07/25/06 03:01 PM Re: Transition from EMT to.......
walrus Offline
Member

Registered: 07/25/02
Posts: 671
Loc: Bangor Me. USA
Isn't an EMT connector a fitting?? or a coupling??

Top
#99155 - 07/25/06 04:21 PM Re: Transition from EMT to.......
Tom Offline
Member

Registered: 01/01/01
Posts: 1069
Loc: Shinnston, WV USA
Both EMT and FMC are allowed to be run concealed. I can't believe that the fittings (couplings and connectors) would have to be accessible, even if there is a transition from one raceway type to another.

After reading the commentery in the Handbook, I think 300.15(F) only applies to cable/raceway transitions.
_________________________
Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example.

Top
#99156 - 07/25/06 04:44 PM Re: Transition from EMT to.......
hbiss Offline
Member

Registered: 12/16/03
Posts: 893
Loc: Hawthorne, NY USA
Both EMT and FMC are allowed to be run concealed. I can't believe that the fittings (couplings and connectors) would have to be accessible, even if there is a transition from one raceway type to another... I think 300.15(F) only applies to cable/raceway transitions.

Devels advocate says what's the difference? AC, MC and romex can be run concealed also as can EMT. Why would the transition have to be accessable in one case and not the other?

-Hal

[This message has been edited by hbiss (edited 07-25-2006).]
_________________________
www.myphonetechs.com

Top
#99157 - 07/25/06 05:36 PM Re: Transition from EMT to.......
gfretwell Offline

Member

Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 9045
Loc: Estero,Fl,usa
I think the "fitting" they are talking about is something like the 90s that you take apart. It isn't really a conduit body but you can't pull in a wire without "access".
I agree any adapter or coupling that allows a clean pull is not what they are talking about.
_________________________
Greg Fretwell

Top
#99158 - 07/25/06 05:53 PM Re: Transition from EMT to.......
HotLine1 Offline

Member

Registered: 04/03/02
Posts: 6805
Loc: Brick, NJ USA
Hal:
I have to agree with Gfretwell, IF you have to 'open' the connector/cplg item, OK, it has to be accessable; if it is designed for 'pull through' it can be concealed.

Good question though.

John
_________________________
John

Top
#99159 - 07/25/06 06:29 PM Re: Transition from EMT to.......
SolarPowered Offline
Member

Registered: 07/05/04
Posts: 615
Loc: Palo Alto, CA, USA
300.15(F) is attached to,
 Quote:
Where the wiring method is conduit, tubing, Type AC cable, Type MC cable, Type MI cable, nonmetallic-sheathed cable, or other cables, a box or conduit body shall be installed at each conductor splice point, outlet point, switch point, junction point, termination point, or pull point, unless otherwise permitted in 300.15(A) through (M).

A coupling between EMT and FMC is not a "conductor splice point, outlet point, switch point, junction point, termination point, or pull point." So 300.15(F) doesn't apply.




[This message has been edited by SolarPowered (edited 07-25-2006).]

Top
#99160 - 07/26/06 07:47 AM Re: Transition from EMT to.......
eprice Offline
Member

Registered: 08/07/03
Posts: 64
Loc: North Logan, Utah, USA
 Quote:
A coupling between EMT and FMC is not a "conductor splice point, outlet point, switch point, junction point, termination point, or pull point." So 300.15(F) doesn't apply.


I want to be able to agree with those who say that an adapter designed for straight pull through can be concealed, but I'm still trying to square that position with the code language. Isn't the coupling we're talking about a junction point, the junction between two wiring methods?

[This message has been edited by eprice (edited 07-26-2006).]

Top
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 >



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