but for it to be a sleeve it cant be connected to a box at either end (or can it?)
Romex in conduit?
- Thread starter BackAgain
- Start date
but for it to be a sleeve it cant be connected to a box at either end (or can it?)
Charles (in GA)
Well-known member
Which is the point I was concerned with. When does it stop being sleeve for physical protection, and start being a conduit system to which the rules apply???
I was thinking that somewhere in the code something referenced a maximum length of said conduit used for physical protection only, but a search of the code and my other reference books did not turn up anything.
Like mrb, I'd have to say that if the pipe was properly connected to boxes and with clamps/strain reliefs, at one end or the other (or both) then you have a conduit system, no matter how short it might be, and percentages of fill (possibly 60% if a 24" or less ******) come into play.
Charles
Aceman
Well-known member
I can count on one hand how many times I've sleeved Romex. So, I've never ran it by my inspector, it's simply my interpretation.
If a conduit isn't connected to a box on both ends it's not complete IMO.
If a conduit isn't connected to a box on both ends it's not complete IMO.
I just ran across this... perhaps it applies to the questions regarding maximum length of a sleeve / conduit for physical protection?
This is taken from: http://www.ecmag.com/?fa=article&articleID=7958
***
A sleeve is used when a cord, cable or raceway requires protection from physical damage. For example, a cable can be protected from physical damage by routing it through a 10-foot length (short lengths per 300.12, Ex. and 300.18, Ex.) of conduit that is open on each end (not connected to enclosures, etc.).
Chapter 3 of the NEC, outlined below, discusses how short lengths of raceways can be determined. Note that such a sleeve does not have to be bonded to the equipment-grounding conductor in the protected cable as permitted by the provisions of 250.86, Ex. 2, which clearly states short sections of metal enclosures or raceways used to provide support or protection of cable assemblies from physical damage shall not be required to be grounded. A 50-foot sleeve open on both ends can be used to protect a flexible cord from physical damage when run above ground.
The Ex. to 312.5 (C) recognizes a sleeve at least 18 inches to 10 feet in length, open on one end and connected to a panelboard on the other. Such a sleeve must be installed and used in accordance with the requirements listed in the above section.
***
This is taken from: http://www.ecmag.com/?fa=article&articleID=7958
***
A sleeve is used when a cord, cable or raceway requires protection from physical damage. For example, a cable can be protected from physical damage by routing it through a 10-foot length (short lengths per 300.12, Ex. and 300.18, Ex.) of conduit that is open on each end (not connected to enclosures, etc.).
Chapter 3 of the NEC, outlined below, discusses how short lengths of raceways can be determined. Note that such a sleeve does not have to be bonded to the equipment-grounding conductor in the protected cable as permitted by the provisions of 250.86, Ex. 2, which clearly states short sections of metal enclosures or raceways used to provide support or protection of cable assemblies from physical damage shall not be required to be grounded. A 50-foot sleeve open on both ends can be used to protect a flexible cord from physical damage when run above ground.
The Ex. to 312.5 (C) recognizes a sleeve at least 18 inches to 10 feet in length, open on one end and connected to a panelboard on the other. Such a sleeve must be installed and used in accordance with the requirements listed in the above section.
***
I have run ROMEX in conduit. In my opinion, it's safe under some conditions.
However, it is not compliant according to code: NEC 310.120
All conductor and cables shall be marked...
Technically, the ROMEX would need to be stripped AND it would need to be labeled THHN for it to be compliant.
However, it is not compliant according to code: NEC 310.120
All conductor and cables shall be marked...
Technically, the ROMEX would need to be stripped AND it would need to be labeled THHN for it to be compliant.
You cannot strip out the conductors of NM cable & run them in a conduit as the conductors are not labeled.
pattenp
Well-known member
Why would Romex need to be technically stripped to be compliant with 310.120? The outer sheathing of Romex has the proper markings and as Norcal pointed out , if you remove the outer sheathing of Romex the wires become non compliant.
RCStocker
Well-known member
The only time you can run romex in conduit is when you are dropping it from a protected area to a non-protected (but needs to be protected) area. For example, if you had a finished ceiling in your basement but didn't have finished walls, and you were putting in a new hot water heater, code would allow you to run romex in the ceiling, and then into conduit running down to a disconnect. And any time you go from outside of conduit to inside of it you need to make sure you have the proper fittings on the end. In the example above where the transition isn't inside a junction box, there would need to be a fitting with a cable clamp to prevent the cable from rubbing on sharp edges as it transitions into the conduit.
The reason for the code is that Romex has an extra layer of insulation, so the code gods are worried about overheating it in an enclosed space (conduit). If you look at specs though, type NMB Romex (any romex made in the last 15 years) and THHN have the same temperature ratings. Also, romex is run in insulated walls which would lead me to believe the "enclosed space" argument is a moot point. Still, it's a good idea to cover your **** and use THHN.
You are spot on. I just mentioned that in another post.
It is a moot point. The reason they don't let you use it is that they have never tested it. Why??? Who knows. It is just one of those dumb things that falls betweent he cracks. It goes back to the more woven covering on wires from 80 years ago. The old coverings cought on fire when over heated. I guess they just carried it over to the new wiring. I have used romex for 40 years in conduit. I just strip the outer covering way back so no one can see what I have used. I never do that on a job but only in my own shops and barns.
When I sign a contract I don't take any short cuts.
You can always cut all the outer covering off and use the wires without it.
I figure if the outlet matches the breaker and you have the right size wire for the run the breaker will over heat and trip. The wire should not catch fire unless the breaker does not trip. Bad breakers don't always trip.
Remember that the codes are only a minimum standard. There is no reason to go over board when it comes to electical. Just follow the charts and you will be just fine.
wyliesdiesels
Well-known member
What's funny about this 2 year old thread is that despite NORCAL stating the correct answer about half way down the first page, people continued to ask 'why it is against code to run romex in conduit?'
The correct answer is that conduit, when used outside and underground, is considered a wet location and Romex is not rated for wet locations. Running romex through conduit inside a building is another story!
The correct answer is that conduit, when used outside and underground, is considered a wet location and Romex is not rated for wet locations. Running romex through conduit inside a building is another story!
Speedy Petey
Well-known member
Sorry, but you and jkeyser14 ARE NOT "spot on". You are both incorrect.
I'd REALLY like to know where you guys are getting all this false information. Obviously not from the NEC.
pattenp
Well-known member
Being from Australia it's the down under version of our NEC.
Sorry, but you and jkeyser14 ARE NOT "spot on". You are both incorrect.
I'd REALLY like to know where you guys are getting all this false information. Obviously not from the NEC.
Greatbear
Well-known member
I use these little puppies when pulling Romex into conduit.
Perfect for the top of a run of conduit such as a basement wall for cable protection for wall switches, outlets, etc.
Perfect for the top of a run of conduit such as a basement wall for cable protection for wall switches, outlets, etc.
Charles (in GA)
Well-known member
I use these little puppies when pulling Romex into conduit.
Perfect for the top of a run of conduit such as a basement wall for cable protection for wall switches, outlets, etc.
This is a case (in my non professional opinion) where the romex becomes a system and not a protective sleeve. You have properly terminated the conduit on both ends, a box and receptacle or switch on one end, and the conduit to romex clamp on the other, thus a complete "system".
Charles
Greatbear
Well-known member
Indeed. The combination of the clamp, the length of conduit and the device box is more like a single "unit." It's like buying a device box with a nice, long telescopic "clamp" at the other end.
Another aspect not touched upon, if running wire (Romex or individual conductors) through a long vertical run of conduit, There is a certain point at where the wires have to be clamped at the upper end. The weight of the wiring can pull and strain the splices or junctions at the top of the run. I'm not sure at what length this comes into play, but it is an aspect to high-rise and tower wiring standards. It's a good idea to put a clamp like this when running Romex down a long run of conduit to save the weight of the cable itself from causing the cable to catch the edge of the conduit or fitting.
A friend of mine that used to be a site engineer for a few radio stations had climbed up a tower to refit the beacon lighting there. When he opened up the junction box and began to fiddlefuss with the wiring inside, the wiring coming up through the conduit below suddenly disappeared. The weight of the wires (which were probably nothing more than 14 or 12ga. THHN) caused them to slip a good distance down the conduit and birdnested in the big junction box below.
Teken
Well-known member
Indeed. The combination of the clamp, the length of conduit and the device box is more like a single "unit." It's like buying a device box with a nice, long telescopic "clamp" at the other end.
Another aspect not touched upon, if running wire (Romex or individual conductors) through a long vertical run of conduit, There is a certain point at where the wires have to be clamped at the upper end. The weight of the wiring can pull and strain the splices or junctions at the top of the run. I'm not sure at what length this comes into play, but it is an aspect to high-rise and tower wiring standards. It's a good idea to put a clamp like this when running Romex down a long run of conduit to save the weight of the cable itself from causing the cable to catch the edge of the conduit or fitting.
A friend of mine that used to be a site engineer for a few radio stations had climbed up a tower to refit the beacon lighting there. When he opened up the junction box and began to fiddlefuss with the wiring inside, the wiring coming up through the conduit below suddenly disappeared. The weight of the wires (which were probably nothing more than 14 or 12ga. THHN) caused them to slip a good distance down the conduit and birdnested in the big junction box below.
After reading this reply from Greatbear. I thought he was describing my life almost 5 years ago when I was on top of a 800 foot comm tower.
Went up to replace a relay and had to unplug a few wires. No sooner when I disconnected the blasted thing the wire just went ****!
I was right pissed!
Teken . . .
buzz4041
Well-known member
Someone forgot the wedge relief. Been there to on a flare stack with the thermocouples. Oh **** comes to mind.
Alchymist
Well-known member
After reading this reply from Greatbear. I thought he was describing my life almost 5 years ago when I was on top of a 800 foot comm tower.
Went up to replace a relay and had to unplug a few wires. No sooner when I disconnected the blasted thing the wire just went ****!
I was right pissed!
Teken . . .
Ya deserved it - no one in his right mind would be on the top of an 800 foot tower!
Teken
Well-known member
Ya deserved it - no one in his right mind would be on the top of an 800 foot tower!
Ya, I know . . .
Imagine, its clear blue skies, not a worry in the world. 
Until you realize you're 800 feet above the ground, -46'C in the dead of winter.You need to take a piss, only to find out the only reason you were up there, just didn't really matter anymore!
It took three guys to figure out how to get that cable out of the 400 drop.
Teken . . .
wyliesdiesels
Well-known member
O man! That must have sucked. That must have been fun getting it back up the conduit in those conditions! :'(