ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
ShoutChat
Recent Posts
Do we need grounding?
by gfretwell - 04/06/24 08:32 PM
UL 508A SPACING
by tortuga - 03/30/24 07:39 PM
Increasing demand factors in residential
by tortuga - 03/28/24 05:57 PM
New in the Gallery:
This is a new one
This is a new one
by timmp, September 24
Few pics I found
Few pics I found
by timmp, August 15
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 376 guests, and 7 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
#3605 08/23/01 01:12 PM
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,749
Member
Discussion:

1999 NEC, Section 310-4, Exception No. 4: Under engineering supervision,
grounded neutral conductors in sizes No. 2 and larger shall be permitted to be run in
parallel for existing installations.

FPN: Exception No. 4 can be utilized to alleviate overheating of neutral conductors in
existing installations due to high content of triplen harmonic currents.

This Question is for any engineer who can give the steps needed to accomplish Code
compliance:

Please give the answer to a situation where an existing EMT, using 4 #2 AWG THW
Copper conductors will require a larger neutral, such as another #2 AWG THW added
to make 5 wires in an existing 1-1/4 inch EMT.

How will your supervision be applied to this type of installation?


Joe Tedesco, NEC Consultant
#3606 08/23/01 10:28 PM
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,392
S
Member
probably with some long winded explanation of natural grey....

#3607 08/24/01 08:12 AM
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,056
R
Member
The engineering supervision exception allows parallel neutrals for a wire size smaller than the usual 1/0 minimum for parallelled conductors. It does not allow for increased condiut fill. An additional #2 THW in this conduit will exceed the allowable fill. 1 1/4" conduit allows .598 sq.in. fill. It currently is filled to .533 sq.in., and therefore maxed out for #2. This is a good example of someone following the minimum code requirements. 1 1/2" conduit would of been easier on the pull, also. But, hindsight is 20-20, and I can't say I blame the installer.
Is this a theoretical, or real instance?

#3608 08/24/01 09:28 AM
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,749
Member
Sparky:

Yes, I agree, you are probably correct, and the new 2002 NEC removes the word "natural" wherever it described the grounded conductor.

Redsy:

Just a scenario, and yours was a good reply -- and the first one that gives us a good reason to be concerned about "who" does the supervising!

Also, Chapter 9, Table C1 on page 585 in the 1999 NEC shows where only 4 THW are allowed in the 1-1/4 inch EMT, and where 6 are allowed in the 1-1/2 inch EMT.


Joe Tedesco, NEC Consultant
#3609 08/25/01 01:35 PM
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,392
S
Member
There would not be this 'engineering conflict' to simply upsize the noodle....

#3610 08/25/01 01:46 PM
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,392
S
Member
Better yet, there would be little concern if it were in fact fed via 1 ph.

#3611 08/27/01 01:46 PM
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 176
W
Member
Joe brings up a good question. What constitutes "Engineering Supervision"?

Every project I work on here at work is under the direction of a Registered Professional Engineer. I call that engineering supervision. However, if I were out there pulling wires, etc. as some of you are, then what is engineering supervision? Inspectors aren't required to be Registered Engineers in this state, perhaps in other states. As a field person, do you need to hire an engineer when necessary? How do you confirm that you have done so? Does the engineer sign off on something?

Just a few questions that come to mind.

#3612 08/27/01 06:53 PM
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,056
R
Member
Quote
Originally posted by WARREN1:
Joe brings up a good question. What constitutes "Engineering Supervision"?

Every project I work on here at work is under the direction of a Registered Professional Engineer. I call that engineering supervision. However, if I were out there pulling wires, etc. as some of you are, then what is engineering supervision? Inspectors aren't required to be Registered Engineers in this state, perhaps in other states. As a field person, do you need to hire an engineer when necessary? How do you confirm that you have done so? Does the engineer sign off on something?

Just a few questions that come to mind.


As a daytime employee of a chemical plant, I report directly to a chemical engineer. I have never used the "Engineering Supervision" clause, and the assumption could be made that an E.E. is required. However, chemical engineering seems to encompass many physical disciplines, and I have discussed many electrical & code issues with him.


Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5