I see the guy in the picture is smiling, but I don't think it's at the quality of the adjacent workmanship!.

Measure once, cut twice...three times..."Oops, now it's too short..."

Portrait kinda looks like Howard Cosell(sp.?)

Looks like some of the white wires and the black cord go right through the wall.

Man, that's ugly wiring, is this an office, or a storage room?

Location is office of a restaurant. Office is located in basement, inside former walk-in cooler.
Yes, some wired do exit through the wall.

I had never noticed the smiling picture! I think he's laughing at the work!

I was thinking Rupert Murdoch myself

i have heard some data comm people call that a "air gap" and have seen them do it with 4" backbone runs in hospitals

Kind of interesting, aside from ones own pride in workmanship do other trades have to install EMT to NEC standards if they choose to use it?

We work for a customer that sells flowers, a contractor for them (not electrical) uses 2" EMT to run plastic tubes that carry nutrients to the plants from a central location out to the flower displays.

They by no means install this as the NEC describes.

But does it matter?

They are not bound by the NEC.

As for the 'Air Gaps' left by data cabling guys what is the violation?

Data cables are not required to be in enclosures so a complete raceway system can be just a short section of raceway.

Not saying I like sloppy work, just asking for a violation to cite.

I do not think there is one.

Bob



[This message has been edited by iwire (edited 01-02-2005).]

Good point Iwire,
I see in the same pic a run of cable that looks like RG-6 Coaxial cable, un-protected throughout it's length, it seems to be doing OK.
Perhaps that's why Rupe is smiling so wide, his signals are getting through and at a cheaper price, no EMT where he comes from!.
BTW, is it my eyes or does that run of EMT have an upward bow in it, to the left?.

{Message edited to add last question.}

[This message has been edited by Trumpy (edited 01-02-2005).]

why bother putting any of the cable run in conduit if you leave some unprotected? well first code violation Neat workmanlike manner
our local AHJ would turn the work in that pic down and laugh while doing it.

i feel that several good points have been made here, 1 is does 2" pvc when used as a "holder" for hydroponics lines need to be installed to code? i would think not what part of that is an electrical installation? so the nec or a permit or even the licensing of the installer is N/A. but ...and theres always a but-usually me - in the picture i would think so (atleast in my area) due to the fact all of article 800 is now required to be inspected, have even seen inspectors go back after really bad installations that were done on the sly in a school, and make them be repaired to code. if something is listed and labeled for an open surface install then it would be ok to do that (workman like manner not withheld) or the use of conduit for protection from damage or to penetrate firewall or something to the like , my wondering is where do you draw the line of workman like manner. it sure wouldnt pass in my book but i have seen much worse work that others have been very proud of, yes proud to the point of bragging. and i cringed and wanted to point out the problems but the only one was workman like manner , and sometiomes that is the most dangerous violation.IMHO ok i will get off my soapbox now

Bob,
I think that there is a violation. Look at 800.48.
Don

I agree with Don... communication conductors have to be installed in accordance with the methods prescribed for the raceway... when they are installed in a raceway.

Just as everyone else... I see a lot hack jobs on communication wiring.

BTW. 800.48 has been renumbered in the 2005 NEC. It is now 800.110. But... I assumed that this was installed before the first of the year.

Don & Safety

I am not sure I follow you.

800.48 basically states if you use conduit it must be installed per chapter 3.

300.15(C) would allow this with the addition of a fitting to protect the cable from abrasion.

Not saying I like this or that I work like that.

Bob

I'm not actually saying (personally) that the conduit has to be continuous. I'm saying that it was not installed as you pointed out in accordance with 300.

Granted... I am making some assumptions here... but, looking at the picture (although from this distance its hard to tell) I don't see that a fitting has been attached in accordance with 300.15(F). If the fitting is/was there... I would have to let it go... as ugly as it might be to look at.

Bob,
What about 358.30? 300.12? 300.18(A)? I don't see the conduit in the picture as a short section providing protection for the cables, I see it as an incomplete raceway system.
Don

Don

358.30 - From what I can see it complies.

300.12 - As I said before add a fitting and 300.15(C) eliminates the need for a box at all.

300.18(A) - as no boxes are required we have a complete raceway between each end.

We often run conduits for the tel data guys from one LAN room to the other. At each end will be just a bushing.

I don't see this (if bushings where added) as being any different.

Just a lot uglier. ours are usually 4" and run in parallel on strut racks.

Bob

Bob,
I still see it as a "incomplete" raceway system. I think the conduit runs are more than "short sections" to provide cable protection.
Don

Good Morning Don we can certainly agree to disagree.

I don't like how that looks anyway.

I do have a question.


Where are we told they have to be short sections?

IMO 300.12 would be complied with if fittings where installed on the ends of the raceway as boxes are not required per 300.15(C) regardless of length.

If we do not need boxes just what is a complete raceway system?

10' of raceway with a fitting on both ends and two supports would be a complete raceway system in this case.

I am guessing the ambiguity here comes from the fact Chapter 3 was not really written with Article 800 in mind.

Good talking with you.

Bob

[This message has been edited by iwire (edited 01-04-2005).]

Bob,
I'm looking at 358.30 and 300.10.
Don

Shoddy (un)workmanship, period. All of the datacom statements of work I've seen include words like "plumb", "continuous", and "uniform appearance throughout".

And yes, the data/telecom guys are supposed to follow NEC. Here's quotes from ANSI/TIA/EIA-569A (Commercial Building Standard for Telecommunications Pathways and Spaces).


And the most blatant violation of all:

James

Are these Standards enforceable? If so, by whom?
Who's supposed to put the strings or ropes in?

Enforceable? The only enforcement I've seen is performed by government contracting officials or big company legal departments.

These standards are written mostly to ensure network performance, preventing EMI, etc. so the only ones really following them are the professionals.

There's even an FCC (U.S. Federal Communications Commission) standard that specifies twisted pair for residential telephone cabling, but some home builders still use the old 4-wire stuff.

The major network equipment manufacturers have stipulations in their product warranties that only cover equipment if it's been installed according to the standards.

As for the pull string: The first person using the conduit usually fishes one in, and pulls in another one with the data cables, so there's always a pull string ready for the next pull.

Of course, if the EC's conduit installation contract specifies NEC and 569-A (or 570-A for residential), then it's the electrician's job.

James

 
The datacomm hotdog left his 30° bender at another job. He only had his 90° bender that day. But, notice the portrait of Saint Emtus Tubeeni blissfully watching over the room. ;-]

Mystery solved...I am told that the painting is of "Miguel," the deceases founder of this restaurant. Local legend has it that he always had cans of dog food around, but no dogs- and had the best burritos in town!

Bjarney?,
Is he the patron saint of sad conduit work?.