# Max distance without support



## CADPoint (Jul 5, 2007)

Right in Index - Gutters, see _*Auxiliary Gutters, Article 366*_ support depends on the material your using as I'm reading it.


----------



## sparky402 (Oct 15, 2013)

I guess I didnt ask right. The max distance without supporting raceway. A gutter 3' below a panel, does the emt have to be supported? I usually put one in the middle but we werent sure if we had to


----------



## halfamp (Jul 16, 2012)

you don't have to strap 3' of emt between two enclosures or an enclosure and box, aux gutter etc

358.30(A)


----------



## 360max (Jun 10, 2011)

halfamp said:


> you don't have to strap 3' of emt between two enclosures or an enclosure and box, aux gutter etc
> 
> 358.30(A)


I disagree, 358.30(A) states it shall need a support *within* 3' of the box.




p.s.; 2014 NEC eliminated 358.30(C)(which allowed no support if less than 18" long), , which means a 7" piece of EMT between boxes now needs a support, which is ridiculous.


----------



## halfamp (Jul 16, 2012)

So it's not supported by the connection to the other box? 

At any rate of your inspector calls you out on anything 3' or less I think he's reaching


----------



## 360max (Jun 10, 2011)

halfamp said:


> So it's not supported by the connection to the other box?
> 
> At any rate of your inspector calls you out on anything 3' or less I think he's reaching


no , not supported by box, and inspector not reaching - just enforcing code as written (most won't call you on it).


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

It is reasonable to expect short lengths of conduit to be supported by the conduit terminations. That was the intend of the short lived rule that said you don't need support for lengths of 18" or less ( the proposal was for lengths of 36" or less). 

The current code rules do not have any provision that permits the use of the conduit terminations to serve as the requires supports. The actual code rule requires a support for any length of conduit, no matter how short it is. Most code authorities are reasonable and permit 18" to 36" without support. 

That is also the panel's intent...that this issue be left up to the inspector, but that really puts the inspector into the business of writing his own code as the existing wording clearly requires all lengths of conduit to be supported.
Here is the panel statement on comment 8-10 for the 2011 code cycle.


> Panel Statement: This comment does not address the concern for smaller raceways in exposed locations. These raceways may be susceptible to damage or movement where not securely fastened in place. *Additionally, the raceway terminations are to terminate the raceway, not to provide support.* The number of possible installation scenarios in which a given installation may or may not functionally benefit from being supported within 3’ of the termination is infinite. However, a raceway that is supported within 3’ of the termination has been demonstrated to provide effective support. *Any decision to omit the support required by general rule within 3’ of raceway terminations is a decision best made in the field by the AHJ based on the circumstances of the given installation. *


----------



## philipdybel (Feb 29, 2016)

*Why I Love the NEC / NFPA*

Yeah so now the NFPA is stipulating, and the local jurisdictions & insurance companies are signing onto the local inspector now legally having Master Electrician-level qualification, to make a on-the-spot determination like this.

I don't see how this could possibly go wrong... [where is the <sarcasm> tag?]

Alternatively, a part-time local inspector making $20 per job may just choose to avoid liability, and mandate securing even 1/2" x close nipples.

This is why modern NEC's are rapidly becoming more suitable for kindling than anything else...


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

philipdybel said:


> Yeah so now the NFPA is stipulating, and the local jurisdictions & insurance companies are signing onto the local inspector now legally having Master Electrician-level qualification, to make a on-the-spot determination like this.
> 
> I don't see how this could possibly go wrong... [where is the <sarcasm> tag?]
> 
> ...


Even though it is not even possible, that is what the code rule requires. This is on the CMP for not understanding the real world. Other CMPs have accepted changes that, in some cases, permit the conduit termination for flexible conduit to serve as the requires support. We need the same time of rule for the non-flexible metallic conduits.


----------



## 360max (Jun 10, 2011)

... please create a scenario where a 4" piece of RGS conduit, installed between two JB's , needs the* code required* support. 

Part (C) of that section should not have been deleted.


----------



## wildleg (Apr 12, 2009)

don_resqcapt19 said:


> Even though it is not even possible, that is what the code rule requires. This is on the CMP for not understanding the real world. Other CMPs have accepted changes that, in some cases, permit the conduit termination for flexible conduit to serve as the requires support. We need the same time of rule for the non-flexible metallic conduits.


how come mike holt hasn't fixed this !


----------



## Mshea (Jan 17, 2011)

I look at the minimum distance for the first required support that fits the wiring method. EMT is 3 feet and I am guessing that romex or AC90 is 1 foot? or 1 meter and 300mm for us metric northerners. IF the raceway or cable is shorter than that then no additional support would be required. so 2 boxes with emt in between, that is shorter than 3 feet is fine without a strap, but much better if there is  I heard an argument that a raceway must always be supported independent of the enclosures or boxes but if you take away a box there is no need for an interconnecting raceway. A bit of chicken and egg argument.


----------



## philipdybel (Feb 29, 2016)

*How Do You Deal With This?*



360max said:


> please create a scenario where a 4" piece of RGS conduit, installed between two JB's , needs the* code required* support.


Here's your scenario: Installation must be NEC 2014 compliant. Local AHJ / Inspector says, "Oh yeah I read somewhere where they said: 


360max said:


> 2014 NEC eliminated 358.30(C) (which allowed no support if less than 18" long), which means a 7" piece of EMT between boxes now needs a support...


"And so now as a City Officer of the City of X, I require you to now install a support -- or else I will red tag your job, until you do install it."

Irregardless of "logic", or what I think, or what a "reasonable person" thinks (i.e. if/when it goes to court of law) -- I'm saying: "*what if you & the AHJ follow the NEC to the letter?*"

What do you say to this Inspector?


----------



## philipdybel (Feb 29, 2016)

don_resqcapt19 said:


> Even though it is not even possible, that is what the code rule requires.


don_r, I love your quote -- because it's what keeps me out of the unemployment lines.

Question: What if the NEC were to say conduit straps every 12 inches? What if it were to say use 10 gauge copper for all 20 amp circuits -- unless the AHJ specifically allows otherwise?

If this is where it's going, I predict my civil & criminal lawyers will all dump their existing clientele, and focus exclusively on NFPA / fire related matters.

Because the litigation will open that beautiful "Pandora's Box", which will demonstrate that the NEC has been more or less justifiable for safety reasons until the early 2000's -- and afterward has become more & more of an industrial players' "Bill of Lading".

"The responsibility of each of us -- as qualified electricians -- is to perform our work to our own best standards, including safety; and if any government inspector calls us to task, to be ready with a simple & reasonable explanation why we have not met their 'government' codes; and if a problem remains, to pursue the matter up the governmental chain of command unto resolution -- not only for our own sake, but also for all who will follow in our footsteps..." (You can quote me on that)

Actually maybe you can't quote me on that -- maybe it's word-for-word from Goldstein's "Manifesto" in Orwell's 1984. <sarc?>


----------



## CO Sparky (Mar 14, 2016)

Isn't this question as simple as looking at the nipple rules? 24" or less no support needed. Anything more would be treated as any other run per NEC.


----------



## bobbarker (Aug 6, 2015)

CO Sparky said:


> Isn't this question as simple as looking at the nipple rules? 24" or less no support needed. Anything more would be treated as any other run per NEC.



Nipple rules? Only conduit nipple rule I know of is in Chapter 9 note 4 and that states 
"where conduit or tubing nipples are having a maximum length not to exceed 600mm(24 inches) are installed between boxes, cabinets and similar enclosures, the nipples shall be permitted to be filled to 60 percent of their total cross sectional area, and 310.15(B)(3)(a) adjustment factors need not to comply with this condition" 

Have always done the 18 inch rule in my area and even though its technically illegal now I have never heard of an inspector calling someone on it


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

CO Sparky said:


> Isn't this question as simple as looking at the nipple rules? 24" or less no support needed. Anything more would be treated as any other run per NEC.


Please cite the code section that says that.


----------



## CO Sparky (Mar 14, 2016)

Bob barker cited the only article I'm aware of about nipples specifically. I suppose I'm just programmed to my inepectors not requiring straps on nipples. If I run anything from panel to gutter or gutter to gutter etc that is over two feet and less than six feet I'll hit it in the middle. Otherwise secure within 3ft per NEC. Or 5 ft in certain circumstances.


----------



## 360max (Jun 10, 2011)

philipdybel said:


> Here's your scenario: Installation must be NEC 2014 compliant. Local AHJ / Inspector says, "Oh yeah I read somewhere where they said:
> 
> "And so now as a City Officer of the City of X, I require you to now install a support -- or else I will red tag your job, until you do install it."
> 
> ...


1. I would ask how do I support a conduit between 2 panels that only has 1/4" of conduit showing (the rest is in the connectors)?


----------

