Email
More
What's Wrong Here?
Jan 12, 2007 12:58 PM, By Joe Tedesco
Answer:
Hint: Bad bend or lack of protection?
As noted in 300.4 (Protection Against Physical Damage) of the 2005 NEC, “Where subject to physical damage, conductors shall be protected.”
It looks as if this “pancaked” conduit was backed into by a delivery vehicle. The conduit contains energized conductors, most likely supplied from the space below to serve the upper floors. As you know, fishing in wire in older buildings, especially those made of brick, is not possible.
However, I could find no reference in Art. 342 or 344 that requires any special or additional protection be provided in this type of installation because these wiring methods are supposed to be used in areas subjected to physical damage [300.5(D)]. So I would have to say that in this case it was not the fault of the installer, but the fact that this driveway is used every day for deliveries to a hotel kitchen's back door.
For definitions of intermediate metal conduit (IMC) and rigid metal conduit, see 342.2 and 344.2, respectively.
Sponsored by:
Back to Question | See Full List of Quizzes
Want to use this article? Click here for options!
© 2010 Penton Media, Inc.
Code Challenge
Code Quiz
Feb 18, 2010 4:56 PM, By Steven Owen
With respect to Art. 240 (Overcurrent Protection), which of the following scenarios permits the use of a slash rated circuit breaker in a circuit?...
More Code Quizzes
Code Q&A
Feb 18, 2010 5:00 PM, By Mike Holt
Q. If I run PVC between the meter and service disconnect, is an equipment grounding conductor required?...
More Code Q&As
Acceptable Use Policy blog comments powered by Disqus
What's Wrong Here
Sponsored By:
advertisement
what's wrong here?
|
What's Wrong Here?Feb 18, 2010 5:04 PM |
|
What's Wrong Here?Feb 4, 2010 5:06 PM |
|
Whats Wrong Here?Jan 21, 2010 4:40 PM |
View all What's Wrong Here?
What's Wrong Here
Sponsored By:
