ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
ShoutChat
Recent Posts
Canada for the win
by gfretwell - 12/06/22 08:28 PM
Tiny Homes and the NEC
by gfretwell - 12/06/22 01:43 AM
EMC Glands on Motors
by Trumpy - 12/01/22 06:12 AM
Ground Rods: Installation and Hook-Up
by Trumpy - 12/01/22 05:54 AM
Happy Thanksgiving all!
by gfretwell - 11/30/22 05:55 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 (), 20 guests, and 11 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 3 of 4 1 2 3 4
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,876
E
e57 Offline OP
Member
When I posted the topic I knew there were going to be some opinions. And, I got them Thanks! I still have my own.

Peter, I was going to bring up the nightclub fires, and the casino fires. And glad you mentioned,
Quote
... ushered in a total overhaul and complete revision of Rhode Island's fire code. It is now one of the strictest fire codes in the nation.
The same thing happens everytime there is a big death count fire. They go through and start getting rid of combustables, and toxics. But one of the things most places do, is question the use of NM after an event like that. The Contractors and Developers complain, and then go back to using it.

It comes down to reducing fuel load in the building, I know there are some Fire Fighters on the forums that would understand that. And it should also be noted that most deaths in fire are smoke inhalation related. Many building code require reductions in combustables, and low smoke materials. Plenum, and riser rated comm wire for instance. Tin can framing, etc. Most office furnature has to have a higher fire retardant rating than most household items. This is all done for a reason. The NFPA writes our code, and I think this is one thing they caved in to some lobbyist for. Just my opinion.

Bob, the PM seems excited about it, but the Boss/Owner is on my side on this. And, I have been out on my own, and will again, when the time is right. And hopefully, I'll never have to worry about it as SF may write it own code as it does for many things. And, NM isn't legal here now in commercial, or multi-unit resi. But I won't feel good about it ever changing.

FYI, any wiring added to my own house is MC, or piped.

Anyway, thanks for all the comments....


Mark Heller
"Well - I oughta....." -Jackie Gleason
Stay up to Code with the Latest NEC:


2020 NEC & Related Reference & Study Guides
2020 NEC & Related Reference & Study Guides
Pass Your Exam the FIRST TIME with these Exam Prep Combos:
 

>> Master Electrician Exam Prep     >> JourneyMan Electrician Exam Prep
 

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,391
I
Moderator
This is one of the reasons it is a great country we can, for the most part do things are own way. [Linked Image]

Quote
having my circuits surrounded by steel makes me feel all warm & fuzzy inside, as well as those larger bank deposits.

So you would walk away from the one, two or three approximately $500,000 to $700,000 commercial NM jobs we do.

Cool, more for us. [Linked Image]

The majority of the work we do is MC and EMT, but I see no reason not to use NM in a code compliant manner.

My experience with NM in commercial is mostly super markets, the fuel load presented by NM pales in comparison to the fuel load presented by the products down on the sales floor where the people are. [Linked Image]

Quote
FYI, any wiring added to my own house is MC, or piped.

FWIW Any wiring added in my house is NM and my new service is SE. I did bend up a piece of RMC for the service but it did not hide as well as SE. [Linked Image]

To each their own. [Linked Image]

Bob




[This message has been edited by iwire (edited 09-16-2004).]


Bob Badger
Construction & Maintenance Electrician
Massachusetts
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 687
A
Member
Count me as another EC from IL that hates NM. When I see NM it is almost allways installed by a non electrician. I see some homes south of here that are built with NM. Then I find out I can't just pull another switch leg or another circuit. I don't work in Chicago but I've been told that some cases the electrical boxes need to be sealed or plenum in a building.

Tom

Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 41
N
Member
I have to admit I am still confused and can not get a straight answer on the new code language requiring NM cable in non-dwellings to be within a 15 min rated concealment. This appears to prohibit it if you have wood wall covering or wood exterior. Any thoughts?


Kenny Wilee
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,876
E
e57 Offline OP
Member
necbuff, I with you on that... Essentially we need to look in Annex E after determining what the Fire Rating of the building is supposed to be! And even then, it only allowed in certain areas, with a certain finish. This is the commentary in Annex E...
Quote
This annex is new in the 2002 Code. This table is extracted from NFPA 220, Standard on Types of Building Construction. It explains the various construction types and has been provided for use in conjunction with 334.10.
This annex is not a part of the requirements of this NFPA document (the 2002 NEC) but is included for informational purposes only.
(Parrenthesis added by me)
So what I was saying earlier in the thread is, (although not in those exact words) I guess we all have to get NFPA 220, Standard on Types of Building Constructionin order to figure out where we can, and can not use romex.
---------------------------
I pitty the guy who wires a building in NM, and then finds out it was supposed to be a type I, or type II fire rating!

[This message has been edited by e57 (edited 09-17-2004).]


Mark Heller
"Well - I oughta....." -Jackie Gleason
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,374
R
Moderator
What you need is the blessing of the building official. I could use romex in a 200,000 sqaure foot building if I meet some are exceptions in the building code.

Determining allowable height and area of a building, and therefore type of construction is a difficult thing.

The NFPA 220 won't do anything, because it isn't adopted as a building code. Even if it were, you need a lot of info before you can determine T.O.C.


Ryan Jackson,
Salt Lake City
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,876
E
e57 Offline OP
Member
Hola Ryan, I was wondering when you would show up on this one.... Seems up your ally. You must have posted while I was editing my last post... So who exactly would the last word be with on that? Building spec's, or Local AHJ, or the Insurance Company?


Mark Heller
"Well - I oughta....." -Jackie Gleason
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 681
P
Member
As far as which wiring method is better, is a moot question. For it is not the method that is so important as the skill (and pride) of the installer.
I have seen all different kinds of wiring methods that show great skill and pride, and I have also seen disasters including all different wiring methods.
Both wiring methods have their place, and both are very safe if installed properly.

As far as building types, in most states the type of building construction is supposed to be labeled on the print. If there are no prints, or they are not labeled, then the building department has that jurisdiction.

Pierre


Pierre Belarge
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,391
I
Moderator
Well I might as well come clean, I live in a state that has a lot of faith in plain old NM and you know what? Our buildings are not burning down at an alarming rate and I have gone on very few service calls that NM was the cause of.

Here is one of our State amendments.

Mass. Electric Code.
Quote
334.10(3). Add an exception as follows:

Exception: Type NM, Type NMC, and Type NMS cables shall be permitted to be used in one and two-family dwellings, multi-family dwellings and other structures of Type I and II construction, provided that where such dwellings or structures exceed three floors above grade Type NM, NMC and Type NMS cables shall not be permitted to leave the floor or dwelling unit from which the cables originated.


[Linked Image]

So yes I am bias but I am also into facts and figures, not feelings.

If someone can point to some facts that the buildings in this state are more dangerous to the occupants in a Raceway building please point me to them.

[Linked Image]

Bob


Bob Badger
Construction & Maintenance Electrician
Massachusetts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,876
E
e57 Offline OP
Member
Couldn't find you facts and figures, but a little history on the topic. We are not alone in our opinions! [Linked Image]

Found this article: http://www.rexelusa.com/power_outlet/PO_V2_N2/146_Controversy.pdf

A history of the overturning of the "3 floor rule" http://www.nfpa.org/PDF/Minutes0701.pdf?scr=nfpa- (Starting on page 12)

Mass' (the state I grew up in, by the way) has thier code, San Fran' still has it's own. [Linked Image]

Quote
('99 NEC)336-5(a). Uses not permitted. Add a new section as follows:
(10)In any nonresidential structure or occupancy.


Mark Heller
"Well - I oughta....." -Jackie Gleason
Page 3 of 4 1 2 3 4

Link Copied to Clipboard
Featured:

Tools for Electricians
Tools for Electricians
 

* * * * * * *
2023 National Electrical Code (NEC)
2023 NEC Now Available!
 
* * * * * * *

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

 

Member Spotlight
Alan Belson
Alan Belson
Mayenne N. France
Posts: 1,803
Joined: March 2005
Top Posters(30 Days)
Trumpy 9
NORCAL 3
Popular Topics(Views)
300,598 Are you busy
230,282 Re: Forum
215,057 Need opinion
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5