Let's look at this as an exercise, for the benefit of those who have never actually 'sized' things.

In choosing a gutter, we have a couple of different criterial to meet. Not only does there need to be room for wires (cable fill), there has to be adequate bending space, and there is a limit to the number of circuits in any particular cross section. Exactly how you count the wires matters, as a spliced wire counts as two for cable fill, but not for the circuit count.

You say that the wires pass 'straight through,' so I will assume there are no splices. I will also assume that the GEC passes through the raceway.

First, the cross sectional rules: For the 4" conduits, I will assume each contains 4 copper wires, 600MCM, and the insulatiion is THWN. Table C8 tells me that 4"RMC has space for as many as six, so we're OK there.

Now .. do we have an 'auxilliary gutter"(Atricle 366), or a 'pull or junction box"(Article 314)? From the tables in 314.16, I think it's safe to assume that this section is aimed at much smaller boxes, and that Article 366 is where we need to look for guidance.

Lest there be any doubt, Article 366 begins it's definition with "enclosure used to suppliment wiring space at meter centers ..."

366.22 limits our wires to 20% of the cross sectional area of the box. Table 5 gives us an area for each 600MCM wire as 0.8676 sq. in. Since, in addition to the circuit wires, we also have a GEC and bonding jumpers in this gutter, we'll just assume 10 wires for the sake of simplicity. 10 x 0.8676 = 8.676 sq. inches. Five times that (20% rule) tells us that the minimum cross-sectional area is 43.38 sq. in. You gave the size of the gutter as 14x14", or 196 sq. in ..... so there's plenty of space.

Let's look at bending space. 366.58(B) tells us that where used as a pull box, we need to look at 314.28(A) -pull box rules - for the size of the box.

314.28(A) takes us away from wire size, and focuses on the 4" conduit used. For straight pulls, we are told the length has to be 8x the nominal pipe sixe ... 8x4" in this case ... or 32", if we consider these to be 'straight' pulls. If we consider them 'angle' pulls - and a case can be made, as the pulls are not absolutely straight - we need to look at both of the pipe runs. That is, the math is 4 (pipe sixe) x 6 (multiplier) + 4(2nd pipe size). This comes to 28".

Let's back up again, and see where we might 'cheat.' Code would have allowed us to use 3-1/2 pipe. 314.28(A) also says that the distance will not be less thn 6x the pipe size, no matter what assumptions you make. 3-1/2 x 6 = 21.

In other words, no matter how you slice it, we need 21" between the two conduit entries. The gutter is two small.

Let's look at the argument that you have a 60" gutter, so you can make the wire 'fold' in. This still gives us a need for 21" for the necessary right-angle and "U" bends, so again, the gutter is too small.

If the pipe entries were truly more-or-less in line, and the gutter simply used to adjust for minor differences between the pipe and the KO locations, I'd be willing to let it pass. There's enough offset, though, that I can't really say that you're 'pulling through' the gutter. That would be one ugly pull! I'd almost have to use single right-angle bends, and splice the wires at the far end of the gutter. The gutter, or box, however you slice it, needs to be 21" tall, or 50% larger than it is.

Please note that at no point did we look at the 'minimum bending radius' of the wire. That's really not relevant here, as we are passing through the enclosure, not making connections within it.

If I were the guy on the job .... sometimes life gives you lemons. I'd try to get approval, as I see there are real problems on the site with clearances. Then I'd make a serious note to not let this happen again!

Everything looks too low versus final grade.

The underground conduits should have been re-dug and shifted. That would take less labor than this eye-sore.

If I were the GC I'd reject the work.

What's with the LB's? If the entire assembly were raised everything would start to make sense.

It's as if two different foremen schemed up this array.

The wasted materials and labor indicates foreman #2 flunked out of class.

You know, Tesla, you might be spot-on. I had not looked at the installation as a whole, but the waterproofing on the concrete does suggest that the grade was intended to be higher.

I suppose they have to be that low so the meter reader can read the top meter. I wonder if they just couldn't afford the last 18" of dirt?

IMHO .,,

They did bloody poor job on the whole thing .,,

• the whole meter stack is too low
• the service entrance conduit is out of whack
• wrong gutter size.

I did count the number of rows of prefourm blocks and they are typically 8 by 16 inches and with waterproof tarring the whole thing need to be rasied couple feet up.

Merci,Marc

Ugly yes,the gutter looks as if only 12" under the main (caved in).
Did they use hubs on the top? I can't zoom in to tell.

Leland .,

If they used Meyers hub IMO it too tight to get corret spacing there unless they use the overhead hub with flange which I doubt with this type of metering stack.

Merci,Marc

The gutter is attached to the disconnect cabilet using rigid couplings and chase nipples on either end.

That close to the upper cabinets, I would not insist on a Myers' hub ... I'd call it a 'damp' location there.

PoCo's usually want the center of the meter face no more than 6-1/2 ft from grade.

Thankyou Reno for the effort to explain the proper way to size this Auxiliary Gutter. I believe also the gutter was used because the underground conduits didn't line up with the main 800amp cabinet. So if the proper sized gutter (32inch in height)were used the upper disconnects in the meter stack modules would be over the 6ft 7inch rule.

The grade is as shown in the photo. The wall was sealed above grade.

The LB's exiting the top of the meter modules are connected with myers hubs. These LB's enclose the 3/0 feeder conductors to the tennant units. Only 4 of the 8 positions have been installed.

The smaller LB connected to the center 800amp main encloses the 3/0 grounding electrode conductor. This also uses a myers hub.

The gutter does connect to the bottom of the 800amp cabinet with couplings and chase nipples. No bonding of these 2 nipples or the gutter are present. The two 4inch conduits at the bottom of the gutter are connected in a poor workmanship manner (angled with locknuts improperly seated) but effort was made to bond these conduits with a 1/0 conductor in series through bonding bushings.

Furthermore the ferrous conduit to the grounding electrode is not continous from cabinet to electrode or bonded at all. Also the concrete encased electrode present at the site is not part of the electrode system.

Code sections violated include: 110.12, 230.7, 250.64(E), 250.92, 250.94, 250.102(C), 300.7(A), 366.58(B)

The CH equipment is listed for top exit with the Myers Hubs. But think of what will happen if and when they do leak water.

shortcircuit

OK, I'm going to make some assumptions, and wild guesses.

I'm thinking that the gutter was an attempt to make up for poorly placed pipes.

Since everything before the meter is PoCo territory, either they have already pulled in the wires, or are refusing to.

I suspect that there's a dispute, and they're refusing to pull in the wires.

With that in mind ... it's just barely possible that the gutter can be replaced by a length of 4" sealtite. Maybe. The offset of the pipes is enough to make this a tough application. (BTW, use an angle grinder to cut the sealtite). Get PoCo approval before you try.

Best approach is to remove the gutter and DIG. Those pipes should go down 5ft ... dig down, tilt, and somehow make a piece with a slight bend; use compression connectors. For a hole that deep, get a backhoe, and give yourself a real nice ramp in, and workspace on either side of the pipes. If the wires are not in you won't have to worry too much; if they are, have the PoCo kill them first.

The original question was:
"Is this gutter properly sized?"

The wireway should be marked somewhere with the maximum conductor size. Try looking on the inside of the cover.

I agree, and - as I detailed in my first post - the answer is "no." There just isn't enough distance between the 'in' and the 'out.'

Reno, I would disagree with the "wet" vs "damp" assessment, if only because of the dent in the top of the gutter. That will fill up with water that has no place to go but in, around those couplers they are using for nipples (It sure looks to me like couplers with bushings screwed into them from the inside)
I also bet they set the gutter. Laid the meter stack on it, crushing the top and then attached it to the wall. I imagine that one piece of strut buckled or slid ... if it was even at the right height to start with.

I agree 100% with your assessment of the gutter sizing.

The other question is what is in the 3 (or is it 4) pipes coming in the bottom, besides the small one on the right that looks like the GEC. Per chance did they put a phase per pipe and the smaller one in the back in the #2 spot with the grounded conductor?
How else do you parallel 2 sets of 3 hot and a neutral in 3 pipes (plus 1)?
If so, maybe that is a damp location. The water would boil off before it had a chance to penetrate

I'll agree that there are meny things about the install that I do not understand, and a few other things (like the couplings) that could have been done better.

I just wanted, in my first post, to stick to the question. I wanted to take the opportunity to explain the different factors that go into gutter sizing.

The more I look at it, I think the OP has some major re-work in his future.

The GEC is connected to the top of the main switch through that LB.

The other conduits at the bottom of the gutter include a 4inch conduit underground for a feeder to a proposed detached shed on the property.

The smaller 1 and 1/4 conduit at the bottom of the gutter goes to the parking lot pole lights.

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but you get to rip this all out and start over.

Everything before the meter is "PoCo territory." You're not allowed to run your feeders through the same raceways as the service conductors - or the meter cabinet for that matter.

Now there's no option but to get the backhoe, and place those pipes where they belong. Service straight to the bottom of the meter can, the other pipes straight to the appropriate meter bank. Make that gutter go away.

You just can't make a silk purse from a sow's ear.

One thing that hasn't been mentioned. I'll bet you anything that those 2" LB's aren't factory approved for 4- 3/0 conductors. They either have to be stamped with that fill rating or they have to be 12" long. If you can show me a standard length LB rated for that many 3/0's I'd love to buy some.

OK, lets say this gutter is not considered a pull box and sizing is subject to 366.58(A) which says to go by the dimensions in table 312.6(A)

Then the dimension for 600MCM conductors in the Auxiliary Gutter would be 8 inches.

This depends on whether you consider the wiring in the gutter was pulled in or layed in.

Can we agree on this?

Oh, I would agree with the concept ... but there's no way that gutter is anything but a pull box.

366.58 addresses wires that terminate, rather than pass through. There are no lugs or bussbars here.

Since you're bending the wires twice, (once in and once out) you would have to apply that table twice- giving you a dimension of 28", not 14." (Otherwise, there's absolutely no point in having the code requirements for pull boxes).At this point, though, debating the gutter is sort of like arguing whether the Titanic was painted the right color.

It's not my intent to nit-pic things to death; it's just that, in the course of this discussion, enough other issues arose to make the gutter size the least of your problems.

Having metered (load/tenant) circuits in the same space as unmetered (supply/PoCo) ones is a major foul; apart from the issue of power theft, it puts you in the position of having to work around stuff you can't turn off.

Which, naturally, brings us back to the placement of those underground pipes. There's no getting around it; the pipes were placed wrong. Once you dig out the pipes and place them correctly, you won't need that gutter anymore.

Gregtaylor also made a good catch; on the load side those 2" LB's are way too small for 3/0's. 3/0 is kind of a goofy size, but I have no idea what size service each tenant is getting.

Others (off forum) have raised questions as to the design of this service. It seems that many PoCo's would require a test bypass, and others would want a master meter and CT cabinet for this service. Those are issues that only you can address.

It's never pleasant to have a job blow up on you, and doubly nasty in these tight times.

What to do with the gutter? Well, add a few brackets and I'd say it's a great tools and parts tray for when you work off a scissors lift. I'm not being a wise-guy; how do you think I got my "parts tray?"

The "gutter" is actually a WIREWAY. Article 376 will determine what flies, and what doesn't.

376.23 Insulated Conductors. Insulated conductors installed
in a metallic wireway shall comply with 376.23(A)
and (B).

(A) Deflected Insulated Conductors. Where insulated
conductors are deflected within a metallic wireway, either
at the ends or where conduits, fittings, or other raceways or
cables enter or leave the metallic wireway, or where the
direction of the metallic wireway is deflected greater than
30 degrees, dimensions corresponding to one wire per terminal
in Table 312.6(A) shall apply.

(B) Metallic Wireways Used as Pull Boxes. Where insulated
conductors 4 AWG or larger are pulled through a wireway,
the distance between raceway and cable entries enclosing
the same conductor shall not be less than that required by
314.28(A)(1) for straight pulls and 314.28(A)(2) for angle
pulls. When transposing cable size into raceway size, the minimum
metric designator (trade size) raceway required for the
number and size of conductors in the cable shall be used.

(Which, BTW, is the same thing it says verbatim in the Article on Auxiliary Gutters)

I got a laugh at the semantics argument (no offence intended guys) because I'm going through exactly the same thing on a major job I'm doing. The Contractor has installed a gigantic version of what is shown in the picture.

But, when I pointed out that it's not properly sized per the wireway rules, he tells me that it's a pullbox. When I point out that it's not sized properly as a pullbox, he tells me that it's a wireway.

Maybe there's a need in the NEC for a new Article covering Wireboxes and Pullways, where the height is sized as a wireway and the depth is sized as a pullbox.

I LOVE THIS JOB!!!!

Auxiliary gutter, wireway, or pullbox ... reminds me of the old saying that figures don't lie, but liars can figure.

IF that was the only issue, AND the openings were aligned close enough that one gould realistically expect to pull the actual wires straight through, I might turn a blind eys.

As this thread has revealed, this install has a few issues, far more serious, to address. The patient has terminal cancer, and we're debating brands of aspirin...

Ghost, I can't speak for the job you have. I'd put myself in the shoes of the installer and ask: Were the wires pulled, or did they assemble the boxes over the already-pulled wires? (After all, that's another NEC requirement.)

Otherwise, there's a legitimate role for the use of flex or sealtite. If anyone out there is rolling their eyes with disdain, remembering the last time they tried to cut large flex ... might I suggest using an angle grinder with a cut-off blade, positioned the 'long' way, like a roto-split blade?

The last time I cut 4" sealtite flex, I did so with a power bandsaw, which worked MUCH better than an angle grinder.

Hear hear for the porta-band!! But I must say I never even thought of the angle grinder.

Up or over here, we call a wireway a troff; just to add that to the mix. Based on what I saw in the pic, and the sizing explanation from Reno, I kept out of this.

When I saw the pic, that would never fly here. First the POCO would do a LOL, get back in the truck & leave. The AHJ would have a red tag as he walked up. No offense intended, but it's a rip out & start over.