NEC issues - Garden Hose as conduit? 1

[rjgoebel]

Is it NEC-acceptable to use common garden hose as electrical conduit? Also, if anyone is a electrical inspector, and has access to good resources on commonly-made NEC violations, or even better, wiring practices that are dangerous and prone to starting fires, please link me up, Scotty!

Jim Goebel
Mid-West Forensics, Inc.

 

[stevenal]

Guess there's always the off chance the manufacturer obtained listing as such....No.

 

[jghrist]

EC&M is a good resource for NEC violations and wiring practices. See

http://www.ecmweb.com/

They have a monthly article on the Code called "What's Wrong Here".

 

[dpc]

http://www.joetedesco.org/favorite_links.html

Look at Violations Photo Forum..

I'm assuming the garden hose question was not a serious one.

 

[rbalex]

This may seem a bit convoluted. You need to have several Sections of the NEC working together to arrive at the correct answer because a garden hose does meet the NEC Article 100 general definition of “raceway” and listing is not a general requirement under the definition.

Section 310.13 identifies the conductor types permitted for general wiring and specifies they must be installed per a wiring method recognized in the rest of Chapter 3.

Of the raceway types recognized in Chapter 3 a garden hose could theoretically meet the requirements of Liquidtight Flexible Nonmetallic Conduit (LFNC) under sections 356.2(1) or (2). However, Section 356.6 states the LFNC must be “listed.” Here is where garden hose falls down for “general” wiring.

If the wiring were installed with the severe power limitations imposed on the circuit by either Article 725 or 727, garden hose may even be a superior raceway

 

[stevenal]

I fail to see how hose meets the article 100 definition, especially if if it isn't listed.

Raceway. An enclosed channel of metal or nonmetallic materials designed expressly for holding wires, cables, or busbars, with additional functions as permitted in this Code.

A garden hose was not designed to hold wires.

 

[dpc]

As a general rule, if it doesn't have a UL-label as a conduit or raceway, it can't legally be used.

 

[rbalex]

As a general rule this is correct, in fact all Chapter 3 racesways are now required to be. Listing simply isn't a requirement of the root definition.

Until it was made a general rule by the restructuring and direct introduction in the various specific Chapter 3 raceway Articles in the 2002 Edition, several classes of raceway, such as Flexible Metal Conduit (Art 348) or Flexible Metal Tubing (Art 360.6), were NOT required to be listed and many manufacturer's products weren't. Look at how many Chapter 3, Section 3xx.6 are "sidebarred" indicating it is a new requirement.

Several States have yet to adopt the 2002 Edition so, techically listing is not yet a requirement in those States.

For Class 2 or 3 wiring there's really no safety or technical reason garden hose couldn't be used as a raceway and, in fact, Art 725 wouldn't prohibit it - even in the 2005 Edition.

 

[rbalex]

As a general rule this is correct, in fact all Chapter 3 racesways are now required to be. Listing simply isn't a requirement of the root definition.

Until it was made a general rule by the restructuring and direct introduction in the various specific Chapter 3 raceway Articles in the 2002 Edition, several classes of raceway, such as Flexible Metal Conduit (Art 348) or Flexible Metal Tubing (Art 360), were NOT required to be listed and many manufacturer's products weren't. Look at how many Chapter 3, Section 3xx.6 are "sidebarred" indicating it is a new requirement.

Several States have yet to adopt the 2002 Edition so, techically listing is not yet a requirement in those States.

For Class 2 or 3 wiring there's really no safety or technical reason garden hose couldn't be used as a raceway and, in fact, Art 725 wouldn't prohibit it - even in the 2005 Edition.

 

[rjgoebel]

Wow, I never realized there was so much legality to all of this. I have some more NEC code violations ( maybe ) if they qualify. Some other stuff I found at the same site were:

1. Electrical Tape was used to connect hot and neutral contacts in pool house panel.

2. We observed an empty raceway above panel in main structure

3. Wires for lights were fed through holes poked in ceiling drywall.

4. Wires were sitting in wet environment – Condensation and watermarks were observed on ceiling drywall, and wires to feed incandescent bulbs ran directly over that part of the garage.

5. A subpanel should have been used with a main disconnect for garage service, and only one panel was found in fire remains, indicating that this precaution was not used.

6. A receptacle was attached to a shelving unit, with exposed feeder wire coming down from ceiling area.


I just started with my NEC experience, but how legit are these complaints?

 

[rbalex]

Other than #3, they are all definitely violations. (And I'm not sure #3 isn't I'd suggest Mike Holt's site for more in depth coverage.

http://www.mikeholt.com/cgi-bin/codeforum/ultimatebb.cgi