Go Back   DIY Chatroom Home Improvement Forum > Home Improvement > Electrical

CLICK HERE AND JOIN OUR COMMUNITY TODAY...IT'S FREE!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 02-20-2009, 11:36 PM   #1
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 13
Share |
Default

Sharing conduit (respect to code)


I have two subs in which one of them will be fed with 4awg Thhn conductors and the other with 6/3 romex. Would sharing these feeds in the same conduit abide by code? Do i even need conduit for indoor runs? Planning on using flexible conduit if indeed required. Thanks!

GoyimPersuasion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2009, 06:24 AM   #2
Licensed Electrical Cont.
 
Speedy Petey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NY State
Posts: 6,782
Default

Sharing conduit (respect to code)


Why in the world would you put 6/3NM in conduit indoors?
Why would you do it at all?

The size of conduit you would need would offset the reason for using conduit in the first place.

__________________
Sometimes I feel like if I answer any more questions it is like someone trying to climb over a fence to jump off a bridge and me giving them a boost.
Answers based on the 2008 & 2011 NEC. If you're on the '14 already I feel sorry for you.
Speedy Petey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2009, 06:47 AM   #3
Electrical Contractor
 
wirenut1110's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Chester, VA.
Posts: 1,046
Send a message via AIM to wirenut1110
Default

Sharing conduit (respect to code)


No, not normally is conduit required indoors. The NM anyway.

If you run the separate THHN conductors, they will need to be in some type of raceway.

The 6/3 will need to be derated to the 60 deg chart, and the THHN conductors use the 75 deg chart.

As always, it's best to check with your local authority, you never know, they may be from Chicago.
wirenut1110 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2009, 11:40 PM   #4
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 13
Default

Sharing conduit (respect to code)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Speedy Petey View Post
Why in the world would you put 6/3NM in conduit indoors?
Why would you do it at all?
Haha, its you again, thanks for the reply.......Why in the world you ask?
Well in my world putting all feeds in a single conduit then feeding them to the service is much easier than otherwise, with dual feed, therefore double the material and double the labor (drilling holes, fittings, screwing, etc).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Speedy Petey View Post
The size of conduit you would need would offset the reason for using conduit in the first place.
Please clarify. So your un-offsetting implementation would be to use conduit for the Thhn and bare run for NM?? Wouldn't 2" conduit house both feeds generously? Its not like i would require 12"conduit......lol This world isn't absolute, therefore i would like to hear some alternative......to offset my reasoning.

Thank for the informative reply wirenut1110
GoyimPersuasion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2009, 12:15 AM   #5
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Iowa
Posts: 1,543
Default

Sharing conduit (respect to code)


What speedy means is that, why would you run romex in conduit instead of separate conductors.

Unless your just sleeving the romex through conduit...
rgsgww is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2009, 12:19 AM   #6
nap
You talking to me?
 
nap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: sw mi
Posts: 5,407
Default

Sharing conduit (respect to code)


don't the current codes prohibit running NM in conduit except for a protective nipple?
nap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2009, 01:47 AM   #7
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Iowa
Posts: 1,543
Default

Sharing conduit (respect to code)


Quote:
Originally Posted by nap View Post
don't the current codes prohibit running NM in conduit except for a protective nipple?

I don't think it doesn't. Point is, why? You could need a larger conduit than if you were running separate conductors.

You can sleeve it through conduit for physical protection, in this situation, fill doesn't apply.
rgsgww is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2009, 09:58 AM   #8
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 13
Default

Sharing conduit (respect to code)


Quote:
Originally Posted by rgsgww View Post
What speedy means is that, why would you run romex in conduit instead of separate conductors.
Unless your just sleeving the romex through conduit...
Yes the plan was to just sleeve the 6/3, if i could find 4/3 i would do the same, but none is available in my area so for it i am going with 4awg Thhn. Any sources for finding #4/3?

Quote:
Originally Posted by rgsgww View Post
You could need a larger conduit than if you were running separate conductors..
You suggestion is instead of using romex 6/3 just use 6awg Thhn? Can sub Thhn-feeds share the same conduit? Any other consideration using this configuration? Thanks

Last edited by GoyimPersuasion; 02-22-2009 at 10:02 AM.
GoyimPersuasion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2009, 12:51 PM   #9
nap
You talking to me?
 
nap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: sw mi
Posts: 5,407
Default

Sharing conduit (respect to code)


Quote:
Originally Posted by rgsgww View Post
I don't think it doesn't. Point is, why? You could need a larger conduit than if you were running separate conductors.

You can sleeve it through conduit for physical protection, in this situation, fill doesn't apply.
I would need to look in my '08 NEC (and of course that would need to be the applicable code in the OP's situation) but I seem to remember other pro's pointing this out. I don;t do resi so it isn't a big point to remember for me.

Not sure how far OP is considering running the NM in conduit and I believe a protective sleeve does not include an actual conduit run (even though it may be very short) If the conduit were connecting 2 boxes or such, I do not believe it would be considered merely a protective sleeve and therefor not allowed under the protective sleeve situation. (seems to be the situation the OP is suggesting)
nap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2009, 01:31 PM   #10
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: South of Boston, MA
Posts: 17,248
Default

Sharing conduit (respect to code)


Where are you located?
Scuba_Dave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2009, 02:31 PM   #11
DIY'er
 
jamiedolan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Neenah, Wisconsin, USA
Posts: 2,032
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Sharing conduit (respect to code)


Quote:
Originally Posted by nap View Post
I would need to look in my '08 NEC (and of course that would need to be the applicable code in the OP's situation) but I seem to remember other pro's pointing this out. I don;t do resi so it isn't a big point to remember for me.

Not sure how far OP is considering running the NM in conduit and I believe a protective sleeve does not include an actual conduit run (even though it may be very short) If the conduit were connecting 2 boxes or such, I do not believe it would be considered merely a protective sleeve and therefor not allowed under the protective sleeve situation. (seems to be the situation the OP is suggesting)
This is my understanding / interpretation as well. I belive what he is proposing is a violation.
Jamie
__________________
Jamie Dolan - Neenah, WI
Jamie Dolan Paw Dogs
Need Help Uploading Photos? Click here.
jamiedolan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2009, 03:03 PM   #12
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 141
Default

Sharing conduit (respect to code)


Quote:
Originally Posted by GoyimPersuasion View Post
Any sources for finding #4/3?
http://www.wesbellwireandcable.com/ROMEXNMB.html
Plumbvoltage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2009, 03:27 PM   #13
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: South of Boston, MA
Posts: 17,248
Default

Sharing conduit (respect to code)


I looked at conduit fill, from what I see a 2" conduit would work

6-3 .3318 (around a #4/0 for fill)
(3) #4
(1) #8 - ground?
Comes out to a 1.5" conduit

I still wouldn't run it, unless maybe I had the wire
With THHN it comes out to 1.25"
The bigger the conduit the more $$ all the fittings are
Scuba_Dave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2009, 04:23 PM   #14
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Iowa
Posts: 1,543
Default

Sharing conduit (respect to code)


What I mean is that, if the conduit only is used lets say, down a concrete wall, from romex to romex than that is sleeving. If it is an actual connection from box to box, than fill does come to play.

I would just pull separate conductors, it is easy as that.
rgsgww is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2009, 04:31 PM   #15
nap
You talking to me?
 
nap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: sw mi
Posts: 5,407
Default

Sharing conduit (respect to code)


Quote:
Originally Posted by rgsgww View Post
What I mean is that, if the conduit only is used lets say, down a concrete wall, from romex to romex than that is sleeving. If it is an actual connection from box to box, than fill does come to play.

I would just pull separate conductors, it is easy as that.
I agree 100%.

nap is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ground wire in rigid conduit measure thrice Electrical 3 02-03-2009 05:25 AM
Distance between Heater & Combustibles DIY_JC Building & Construction 7 01-20-2009 07:52 AM
Conduit, above ground, code question davewest Electrical 6 02-27-2008 03:55 PM
Another Bryant 383KVA with code 31 problems rpgIVguru HVAC 1 02-05-2007 01:47 PM
1950's Roof Framing Strength KempLN Building & Construction 21 06-17-2006 10:06 AM




Top of Page | View New Posts

Copyright © 2003-2014 Escalate Media. All Rights Reserved.