Inspected a job where the manufacturer built walls in the factory and installed non metallic boxes and smurf tubing inside the walls and styrafoam (spelling) insulation. Walls are sealed up and now he wants the electrical contractor to pull in NM cable for the wiring method. My understanding is that this would violate the code. NM cable is not Listed for use in ENT. I believe the contractor should be using single conductors. What does this forum think?
In addition to support issues described by sc, the width of the NM cable would have to be considered in order to satisfy raceway fill, per "Notes to Tables" in Chapter 9. What size tubing? What size NM? In my opinion, it seems amateurish to attampt to install romex in raceways. Single conductors is the proper way to go.
[This message has been edited by Redsy (edited 03-12-2005).]
Re: Fish it in#92295 03/12/0503:13 PM03/12/0503:13 PM
The 2005 clears this up and it is allowed. It was never really the intent that NM was not allowed in raceways, but I won't dwell there.
Article 362.22 (all the xxx.22 sections are the same)
Cables shall be permitted to be installed where such use is not prohibited by the respective cable articles. The number of cables shall not exceed the allowable percentage fill specified in Table 1, Chapter 9.
Re: Fish it in#92296 03/12/0503:33 PM03/12/0503:33 PM
Depends on the runs. I'm going to assume that they are stubbed up into the ceiling space at the top. I think the main issue is going to be the transition from NM to the tubing with the connector requiremment. I don't believe that you can put an adaptor and NM connector on the end of the tubing because it needs to be accessable. This would mean extending the tubing to an accessable J box. This would also mean that there would be no reason to pull NM but rather single conductors as necessary.
I agree with Roger as to intent. After all, adapter fittings to connect NM to EMT have been around for a long time. But, the issue has been debated several times, with the "securing the cable" argument probably being the most compelling reason not to do it.
Re: Fish it in#92298 03/12/0507:49 PM03/12/0507:49 PM