|
|
|
0 members (),
355
guests, and
17
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 49
OP
Member
|
is it permissable to run a curcuit overhead from a residental home to a garage?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 106
Member
|
|
Mike
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,507
Member
|
Should also look at Article 396 which tells us, Yes if it's a factory assembly.
George Little
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,041 Likes: 37
Member
|
George, why only a factory assembly 396.2(2)?
Greg Fretwell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 49
OP
Member
|
so the way i read the code is it is allowed if i use triplex and maintain my clearances.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,507
Member
|
Kinda a suggestion that if he is using a cable method to look in each Article called out in T. 396.10(A) but if it's single strands of wire as identified in T. 310.3 or T. 310.6 he would not be able to comply with the (B) part of 396.10 and not be able to use it in residential. And, Yes tom triplex probably would be the best approach. IMHO
George Little
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 49
OP
Member
|
thank's for the info guys
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,391
Moderator
|
Why not UF cable on a messenger?
Bob Badger
Construction & Maintenance Electrician
Massachusetts
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 345
Member
|
so the way i read the code is it is allowed if i use triplex and maintain my clearances. If the circuit is 120/240 and there is any chance of a present or future metallic connection between the two buildings you will want to use quadplex. -- Tom Horne
Tom Horne
"This alternating current stuff is just a fad. It is much too dangerous for general use" Thomas Alva Edison
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 345
Member
|
Why not UF cable on a messenger? In My Unhumble Opinion (IMUhO) UF on a messenger makes one ugly installation. -- Tom Horne
Tom Horne
"This alternating current stuff is just a fad. It is much too dangerous for general use" Thomas Alva Edison
|
|
|
|
Posts: 75
Joined: June 2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
