ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
ShoutChat
Recent Posts
How's Florida doing with Hurricane Ian?
by Bill Addiss - 09/28/22 12:41 PM
Tough being a lineman's kid
by Bill Addiss - 09/28/22 12:39 PM
GFCI's pops in large numbers
by dsk - 09/26/22 04:35 AM
AFCI’s Revisited
by sparky - 09/24/22 09:58 AM
NFPA Price Increase Coming
by Bill Addiss - 09/23/22 02:22 PM
New in the Gallery:
240/208 to a house
240/208 to a house
by wa2ise, October 9
Now you know.
Now you know.
by Tom_Horne, September 7
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 25 guests, and 14 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
#127726 10/16/01 07:10 AM
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,056
R
Redsy Offline OP
Member
Why is only 31% conduit fill allowed for 2 wires, as opposed to 40% for 3?
I assume that it is precautionary, in the event that only 2 wires of a 3phase system are used, and the magnetic fields aren't cancelling. However, for all the commentary in the Handbook, this is not mentioned.
Anyone else.

#127727 10/16/01 02:44 PM
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 4,067
Likes: 3
Member
Redsy,

My guess is that it would be because 2 wires together that took up 40% fill may be too tight to pull through a conduit because they would be like >> oo or 8 << and together might approach the inside conduit diameter with the 40% fill limit. It would be a tight one for sure! Straight pulls might not be so bad, but 360 degrees would be another thing.

Does that make sense?

Bill


[This message has been edited by Bill Addiss (edited 10-16-2001).]


Bill
#127728 10/16/01 08:49 PM
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,392
S
Member
Redsy,
I see FPN #2 70-561, to back up the angle Bill's offered. Other than that the #'s do make me wonder if any specific mathematical logic was followed.
CMP9,,,
35!
no..29!
34 ?...
30
31.., an' it's break time!
[Linked Image]

#127729 10/16/01 10:06 PM
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,056
R
Redsy Offline OP
Member
Guys,
Ahh..
The jam ratio! Lots of thought went into this idea. I think it refers to 3 wires, though. Not two.

#127730 10/16/01 11:02 PM
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 4,067
Likes: 3
Member
Redsy,

That's my best shot...

[Linked Image]
Bill


Bill
#127731 10/17/01 07:12 AM
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,056
R
Redsy Offline OP
Member
Bill,

It's not anything that really concerns me. It's just something I have wondered about this in the past, and now, with this forum I thought I'd bounce it around.
Thanks.

#127732 10/17/01 07:22 AM
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,392
S
Member
Redsy,
We are, as electricians, always complying to code, and left wondering about the rationale. The handbook only goes so far, the only other resource would be a formal interpetation.
The thing is, some codes, and specifics , are probably so old there's no one left to explain it's orgin.

#127733 10/17/01 12:47 PM
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,148
R
Member
sparky,
A formal interpretation would be of no help in finding out the "why" as the NFPA requires that requests for a formal interpretation be submitted in a manner that will allow the NFPA to answer the question with either a "yes" or a "no". The only way that I know of would be to find the TCR (now known as ROP) and the TCD (now known as the ROC) for the proposal that became the rule.
Don(resqcapt19)


Don(resqcapt19)
#127734 10/17/01 07:55 PM
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,392
S
Member
Don,
Sounds like some serious archive searching, at least on this issue. It makes me wonder if anyone actually pursues code history to this extent.


Link Copied to Clipboard
Featured:

Tools for Electricians
Tools for Electricians
 

* * * * * * *

2020 Master Electrician Exam Preparation Combos
2020 NEC Electrician
Exam Prep Combos:
Master / Journeyman

 

Member Spotlight
Potseal
Potseal
Saskatchewan
Posts: 264
Joined: February 2013
Top Posters(30 Days)
Popular Topics(Views)
297,694 Are you busy
228,493 Re: Forum
213,326 Need opinion
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5