ECN Forum Forums Code Related Discussion NEC & other Code issues Romex in Flex

Hi,
Is it permissible to protect romex that is stubbed through the wall, with a short piece of flex (greenfield) with a connector on one end and none on the other? This terminates at a water heater.

I think I read somewhere that you need a fitting?

I guess it is better than nothing. I have seen plenty that were just romex throught the wall and terminate to the equipment.

Regards

Greg

greg,
were you going to use a "flex to nm" connector? why not use one of those on that end, and then strap accordingly?

or better yet, set a 4 sq. on the wall, enter the back of the box with the nm, then flex out of the 4 sq.?

[This message has been edited by goodwill (edited 02-04-2005).]

[This message has been edited by goodwill (edited 02-04-2005).]

Hi,
Thanks for the reply. I am not doing the work I am just looking at some that was done by another party.

The work is already done. There is about 4 feet of flex out of the wall and about 3 inches in the wall...the romex is in the flex and termiantes at the heater term box with a straight conn. nothing on the end where the romex enters the flex..

I was just wondering if there was any violation there. I think that if you do it that way you probably need to at least put a straight connector on the end where the cable enters...it has a straight flex conn on one end.

It is strapped to the wall and looks neat.

Regards

Greg

[This message has been edited by mustangelectric (edited 02-04-2005).]

Greg,
so far, all I've found is 300.16(b)
"bushing shall be permitted in lieu of a box...where conductors emerge from a raceway...".if they did that, and if they didn't violate 348.24, bending radius of the fmc, then I'd say they're OK.

Hi,
Thanks for looking that up..That does not apply to PVC, ENT, LNMFC etc. does it?

I will look at that myself.

Regards

Greg

Greg,

What is the purpose of this flex? If it is physical protection of the NM cable, it is not one of the methods mentioned in 334.15(B), though the AHJ does have the power to make this an "approved" method.

If it were me, I'd want a fitting on the end to protect the NM from being damaged by the cut end of the flex.

The chance of this cable being damaged is probably fairly low, but I do like the idea that someone went to the extra trouble to add a little more protection.

Tom

Hi,
It looks like the flex was added for protection. It comes out of the cieling from a main panel. There would have been no need for a box and a splice or a box and a straight pull, if you put a box there some idiot will come along and try to bug onto it for a new circuit!

Essentially it is a sleeve with a straight connector on the terminating end and just a cut end where the romex enters the flex.

Not the biggest issue in the world.

If I do anything I will probably set a disconnect (non fused).

Thanks for the replies on this.

Regards

Greg

mustang...although this type of installation is commonly done, it is not code compliant.

There are only 2 places in the code where type NM can be connected to an enclosure without a cable connector...314.17(C)exception, NM entering a single gang nonmetalic box and 312.5(C)exception for NM entering a surface mounted enclosure through NONFLEXIBLE raceways where the conditions of (a)thru(g) are met...2002 NEC

There is new wording in the 2005 NEC that allows NM cable to be installed in a listed conduit or tubing on walls in unfinished basements. 334.15(C)

shortcircuit

Hi,
Tom/Shortcircuit/All-Thanks for the comments. That answers the question.

Then how many hot water heaters and ac untis are out there that are done this way?

I would guess a lot.

Another common way is to leave the flex off and just use a romex connector.

Regards

Greg

[This message has been edited by mustangelectric (edited 02-05-2005).]

[This message has been edited by mustangelectric (edited 02-05-2005).]