Romex in an exposed ceiling

[greenhornet7897]

Can I run romex in my exposed garage ceiling or does the ceiling wiring need to be in a conduit?

 

[Walkers]

No exposed Romeo. Run MC cable or conduit.

 

[Showkey]

Depends on where you live.
Best example of of that some counties in IL dis not allow any use of romex period 100% conduit in all location.

Exposed Romeo is common in garages, attics and basements in many areas.

 

[nadogail]

I have exposed NMC (Romex) in both my garage and workshop, in order to put your hand on the cables you need to be standing on a ladder.

 

[Terry D]

Check with your local codes, I would think it would be fine as long as it is not acceptable to damage. Walls are a little different when exposed, as far as as shovels and rakes getting leaned into the stud space

 

[rabidsquirrel]

Run MC cable

Requires same protection as Romex. Generally, Romex on the ceiling is not subject to physical damage, and that's all that the code requires.

 

[allinon72]

In a garage in Indiana you can leave it exposed all day long.

 

[Stuart in MN]

In the 2017 NEC, accepted installation of exposed nonmetallic cable (Romex) is covered in Article 334.

 

[greenhornet7897]

Here is a picture of the ceiling and I’m in Indiana

 

[sparky 1971]

It's already been stated, but check the local building department if you are concerned about it. I work in about seven different jurisdictions. One says everything in an unfinished has to be in conduit. One says as long as it's run within a foot of the walls when perpendicular to the joists, romex is ok. The rest don't care as long as it's not underneath the joists.

 

[wyliesdiesels]

No exposed Romeo. Run MC cable or conduit.

Please cite the code reference....

BTW MC cable has the same physical protection requirements as NM so i dont understand why youre saying to run exposed MC in place of exposed NM....

In reply to your comment that was deleted, the code is a permissive one, if it doesnt say you cant, then you can. So, there is no code that i can cite for you that says NM can be exposed. It simply doesnt exist... now this doesnt mean you cant run exposed NM however... since there is no code that specifically says "you cannot install exposed NM-b." So you wouldnt be able to cite a code that says that either....

the only code you'll find pertaining to this is that NM and MC cant be subject to damage, which is very open to interpretation and subjective.

 

[ddawg16]

Even here in California....exposed NM is ok as long as it's not subject to damage.

 

[Ryan]

Please cite the code reference....

BTW MC cable has the same physical protection requirements as NM so i dont understand why youre saying to run exposed MC in place of exposed NM....

In reply to your comment that was deleted, the code is a permissive one, if it doesnt say you cant, then you can. So, there is no code that i can cite for you that says NM can be exposed. It simply doesnt exist... now this doesnt mean you cant run exposed NM however... since there is no code that specifically says "you cannot install exposed NM-b." So you wouldnt be able to cite a code that says that either....

the only code you'll find pertaining to this is that NM and MC cant be subject to damage, which is very open to interpretation and subjective.

Much better this time around. Thank you.

 

[Terry D]

In the 2017 NEC, accepted installation of exposed nonmetallic cable (Romex) is covered in Article 334.

Its been allowed to be installed exposed since it came out, per the NEC as long as certain provisions are met. But local AHJ's can always override the NEC.

 

[Innovate1]

They don't allow it on the bottom of joists here but can be exposed if run through drilled holes - it gets back to protection from damage. I believe it is allowed on the bottom if a board is run along side it for protection. Looks like your joists are pretty small so rather than drilling you may want to do the runner board if you need to cross the joists. Or run over to the wall and cross there. You really need to check with the AHJ as this varies from place to place.

 

[Jim greengo]

Please cite the code reference....

BTW MC cable has the same physical protection requirements as NM so i dont understand why youre saying to run exposed MC in place of exposed NM....

In reply to your comment that was deleted, the code is a permissive one, if it doesnt say you cant, then you can. So, there is no code that i can cite for you that says NM can be exposed. It simply doesnt exist... now this doesnt mean you cant run exposed NM however... since there is no code that specifically says "you cannot install exposed NM-b." So you wouldnt be able to cite a code that says that either....

the only code you'll find pertaining to this is that NM and MC cant be subject to damage, which is very open to interpretation and subjective.

We are not allowed to have romex exposed in omaha in unfinished areas,that's been a local code as long as I can remember.
You can go pretty much anywhere else in nebraska and run wild with romex as long as its protected.
The electricians union has a lot of say in local codes around omaha.
Same goes got plumbers union,if the plumbers union had their way we'd still be plumbing houses with cast iron and poured lead joints.
And galvanized water lines,they think we live in Chicago! Hahaha

 

[SlappyWhite]

Here is a picture of the ceiling and I’m in Indiana

Can't say for Indiana specifically but in most cases it can be run along the side of the joists and through holes in the joists. Not on the underside. If the hole through will be close to the edge it will need a metal protection plate just where it does through the hole.

Think of it this way, it is just a ceiling that will have the drywall put up afterwards (or not)....

 

[oldpliers1]

It's already been stated, but check the local building department if you are concerned about it. I work in about seven different jurisdictions. One says everything in an unfinished has to be in conduit. One says as long as it's run within a foot of the walls when perpendicular to the joists, romex is ok. The rest don't care as long as it's not underneath the joists.

Pardon my ignorance, so each jurisdiction has different service rules not a statewide code ?
we used to be that way here in Australia and it differed from one side of the road to the other 7 county councils, with 7 sets of rules . It was scraped in 89 and we went to a state wide uniform set of service rules .
and over here what you call Romex we call TPS , thermoplastic sheathed . And like you we can have clipped exposed in some parts of the shed and conduit for mechanical protection. ( we mainly use pvc conduit over Emt ) Love reading your comments. Regards A

 

[sparky 1971]

Pardon my ignorance, so each jurisdiction has different service rules not a statewide code ?
we used to be that way here in Australia and it differed from one side of the road to the other 7 county councils, with 7 sets of rules . It was scraped in 89 and we went to a state wide uniform set of service rules .
and over here what you call Romex we call TPS , thermoplastic sheathed . And like you we can have clipped exposed in some parts of the shed and conduit for mechanical protection. ( we mainly use pvc conduit over Emt ) Love reading your comments. Regards A

In this case, it's not really a different set of rules. It's interpretation of the term "protected from damage". It would be another thread, but there are cases of different jurisdictions having a different set of rules that they have adopted as local ordinances that deviate from the norm. The norm being what is required by the NEC, which right now is most of the 2020 NEC.