ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
Top Posters(30 Days)
Potseal 11
Recent Posts
Electrode boilers question
by annemarie1. 04/27/17 01:40 PM
Why cables look like they do
by LongRunner. 04/26/17 09:36 AM
Dimmable LED 2x4 lay in fixtures
by HotLine1. 04/24/17 05:43 PM
Old decora style outlets
by Lostazhell. 04/22/17 07:59 PM
Permit Snafus...AHJs and Contractors Jump in
by gfretwell. 04/22/17 01:11 PM
New in the Gallery:
SE cable question
Popular Topics(Views)
234,840 Are you busy
169,613 Re: Forum
162,863 Need opinion
Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 52 guests, and 11 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
#194781 - 06/22/10 12:44 PM 250.122 [B]  
KJay  Offline
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 763
How are you interpreting “equipment grounding conductors, where installed,” as stated in 250.122[B] when ungrounded conductors are upsized?
Do you consider this as meaning where an EGC is actually pulled in a raceway, or simply where any EGC is present, whether physically pulled or part of a listed cable assembly, such as SER?

It seems that this could possibly be interpreted either way and might allow using an upsized cable assembly containing an equipment-grounding conductor sized only per Table 250.122, as opposed to a raceway where the conductors are pulled and the EGC sized on the ratio of the circular mil area of the upsized ungrounded conductors.
What is your take on this?


2017 / 2014 NEC & Related Books and Study Guides

#194783 - 06/22/10 01:37 PM Re: 250.122 [B] [Re: KJay]  
gfretwell  Offline

Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,069
In a cable, the EGC size gets bigger in proportion to the other conductors getting bigger so 250.122(B) is satisfied.
I assume that is built into the listing standard for all cables.
In the case of SE cable (TYLZ in the white book) it says

Based upon tests which have been made involving the maximum heating
that can be produced, an uninsulated conductor employed in a service
cable assembly is considered to have the same current-carrying capacity as
the insulated conductors even though it may be smaller in size.

Greg Fretwell

#194784 - 06/22/10 03:58 PM Re: 250.122 [B] [Re: gfretwell]  
KJay  Offline
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 763
Thank you Greg. Good find on the SE cable listing.
I had considered that the cables must have had this rule applied already, but now that I have thought this through a bit more, it appears that since Table 250.122 is based on overcurrent, not wire size, it wouldn’t have any relevance when over sizing conductors for things such as voltage drop calcs, being that the actual overcurrent protection would normally be lower than the maximum rating of the conductor.
Unfortunately, sometimes I’m not the sharpest tool in the shed.

#194788 - 06/22/10 06:12 PM Re: 250.122 [B] [Re: KJay]  
gfretwell  Offline

Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,069
The white book is a great resource if you are curious about the listing on a particular product. Unfortunately it usually ends up making you want to actually see the listing standard and U/L charges big bucks for that.
I suppose that is why they give the White Book away for free. wink

Greg Fretwell

Member Spotlight
Bill Addiss
Bill Addiss
Posts: 3,878
Joined: October 2000
Show All Member Profiles 

2017 NEC and Related
2017 NEC
Now Available!

Shout Box
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0
Page Time: 0.013s Queries: 15 (0.002s) Memory: 0.7610 MB (Peak: 0.8926 MB) Zlib enabled. Server Time: 2017-04-27 22:45:43 UTC