|
|
|
0 members (),
1,443
guests, and
10
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,048 Likes: 38
Member
|
Is this MCAP wet location listed?
Greg Fretwell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 613
OP
Member
|
Iwire...I haven't seen it in the supply house yet.I have seen samples of #12 MC and also #12 HCF MC.
The metalic sheath was wrapped tight. The aluminum bond was #10 and was not covered with the mylar wrap.
gfretwell...dry location only with THHN rated conductors only.
I too would fear loose connecters at juction points leading to high impedance grounding with its use.
shortcircuit
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,048 Likes: 38
Member
|
OK that makes sense. (dry only) I guess that means not damp either. My only real concern with this is losing contact between the bonding conductor and the armor. A bit of corrosion would do that. I suppose part of the testing included "aging" this wire artificially in some way. I also wonder about how varying lengths perform. If they are short enough the armor itself is the bond, longer lengths have plenty of coincident contacts with the armor. Is there a sweet spot where there are not enough contact points with the armor to create a good bond but the armor itself is too long to be a good bond? Just idle musing.
I understand they design new products and do testing but the real test is 5-10 years in the field. Aluminum Romex was the hot lick in 1970. It was the devil incarnate by 1975.
Greg Fretwell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,391
Moderator
|
I am not sure of any grounding issue coming n the future.
This new MC grounds just like AC cable has for years only now the bond strip is bigger.
My only problem will be getting engineers to accept it.
Bob Badger
Construction & Maintenance Electrician
Massachusetts
|
|
|
|
Posts: 2,749
Joined: October 2000
|
|
|
|
|
|
