# Stapling Romex ?



## Mcswain (Dec 25, 2016)

Romex! Ugh, fat thumbs. Can moderator edit? Please and thank you!


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

This is the way I understand it:

You can secure or support romex with anything, it doesn't have to be a listed means of support. So you can use tywraps or string or duct tape. When doing that, you have to avoid bundling too many together, which is a whole 'nother issue.

When using an item that is listed for supporting romex, then you have to use that item according to it's listing. So if you use a romex staple and the staple says it can support 2 cables, then that's what it can support. A stacker says it can support 4 romex, a CJ says 6. 

Anyone disagree?

What if you use a staple that isn't listed for supporting romex? Does that mean you can staple 4 romexes with it?


----------



## frenchelectrican (Mar 15, 2007)

First of all .,,

I don't disagree with mr Hackwork .,, he did bring up few good points on how to secure it. 

If that staple say it can support two then ya it is no issue at all.

But just becarefull with bundling that can nip ya hard if not watching it. 

spacing of staples on NM/UF cables that will varies depending on how it runs some you will need little more than what you normally do on numbers of staples.


----------



## joebanana (Dec 21, 2010)

HackWork said:


> This is the way I understand it:
> 
> You can secure or support romex with anything, it doesn't have to be a listed means of support. So you can use tywraps or string or duct tape. When doing that, you have to avoid bundling too many together, which is a whole 'nother issue.
> 
> ...


Wouldn't that duct tape, and string have to be UL listed? :yes:


----------



## backstay (Feb 3, 2011)

Mcswain said:


> I don't see in the NEC anything about stapling more than one run of Romex under 1 staple, only distances betweeen and at boxes, etc.
> What's the common practice/rule in the field?


Any more than 9 current carrying conductors and you derate. This picture is of a double. I go up to 4 cables with a staple(special staple) then to five I use 3M cable stackers.


----------



## splatz (May 23, 2015)

HackWork said:


> This is the way I understand it:
> 
> You can secure or support romex with anything, it doesn't have to be a listed means of support. So you can use tywraps or string or duct tape. When doing that, you have to avoid bundling too many together, which is a whole 'nother issue.
> 
> ...


Sounds right to me. Of all of the options listed, I'd say staples are my least favorite.


----------



## Mcswain (Dec 25, 2016)

I want to see pics of the duct tape and zip tie method to make sure I use proper technique!!


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

joebanana said:


> Wouldn't that duct tape, and string have to be UL listed? :yes:


In my post that you quoted I said this:



> You can secure or support romex with anything, it doesn't have to be a listed means of support.


I also mentioned that I am not completely sure about it all, so if you have a code article saying romex support needs to be listed, please post it.


----------



## joebanana (Dec 21, 2010)

HackWork said:


> In my post that you quoted I said this:
> 
> 
> 
> I also mentioned that I am not completely sure about it all, so if you have a code article saying romex support needs to be listed, please post it.


This is first year apprentice stuff.
Article 100 Definitions - "Listed".
110.3 (B) Installation and use.
110.21 (A) Manufacturers marking.
Hope this helps.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

joebanana said:


> This is first year apprentice stuff.
> Article 100 Definitions - "Listed".
> 110.3 (B) Installation and use.
> 110.21 (A) Manufacturers marking.
> Hope this helps.


I am starting to think you are a real dolt, as telsa would say. You keep posting garbage across multiple threads. What you just posted doesn't apply to this conversation at all.

I will ask again, show me where code requires romex to be supported with listed material.

Until you provide that, which you won't, we all know that romex does NOT in fact require listed support and can be supported/secured with the items I mentioned.


----------



## telsa (May 22, 2015)

Mcswain said:


> I don't see in the NEC anything about stapling more than one run of Romex under 1 staple, only distances betweeen and at boxes, etc.
> *What's the common practice/rule in the field?*


That's easy: one or two Romex runs per staple.

It takes TOO MUCH EFFORT to try and get a third cable under the common staple at the same time the common staple is not dimensioned to hold three cables... it's too short.

Colorado Jims ( CJ6 ) are popular because they are FACE Fastened to the framing. They also can wrap quite a few cables... and can be re-opened to accept more cables after having been mounted.

The downside is that they're not being given away. ($)

They make sense when your cable count is fat ( like near the panel ) or when getting a staple gun into position will be a &^%^%$. ( This also means that swinging a hammer won't work, either. )

Such decisions make or break the profit point during a build. You can't hardly BELIEVE the amount of labor wasted trying to make the 'wrong' solution 'work.' 

The lowest cost total solution to a given build will show plenty of stapled Romex -- with a staple gun, never a hammer -- and a blend of trick fasteners back towards the panel -- that just fly into the building.

Virtually ALL materials savings efforts blow up -- as they burn up too much labor.

*Trick materials are priced entirely based upon the labor savings they offer.
*
Because staples are so cheap, they are found everywhere in Romex world.*

The only locations that justify anything other than staples are near the panel (or switches) where the cable count rises dramatically -- and in screwy locations that make staple gun application just too difficult.

*As a practical matter, you never see anyone loading anything other than the basic staple -- set to accept one or two Romex runs.

It will also suffice to handle (1) 10-2, etc.*

That's why it's called Romex racing.
*


----------



## joebanana (Dec 21, 2010)

HackWork said:


> I am starting to think you are a real dolt, as telsa would say. You keep posting garbage across multiple threads. What you just posted doesn't apply to this conversation at all.
> 
> I will ask again, show me where code requires romex to be supported with listed material.
> 
> Until you provide that, which you won't, we all know that romex does NOT in fact require listed support and can be supported/secured with the items I mentioned.


I gave you the code sections, they apply to everything, if you can't read, that's not my problem. Maybe you could have someone read it to you.
I'm starting to believe you secure your work with duct tape and string.
In fact I have no doubt.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

joebanana said:


> I gave you the code sections, they apply to everything, if you can't read, that's not my problem. Maybe you could have someone read it to you.
> I'm starting to believe you secure your work with duct tape and string.
> In fact I have no doubt.


You are saying that romex is required to be secured with listed items, but you can't cite the listing requirement for it?

Not only are you wrong, but the code you came up with to substantiate what you said is laughable at best. 

http://forums.mikeholt.com/showthread.php?t=142271


----------



## samgregger (Jan 23, 2013)

334.30 Securing and Supporting
Nonmetallic-sheathed cable shall be supported and secured by staples, cable ties, straps, hangers, or similar fittings *designed* and installed so as not to damage the cable, at intervals not exceeding 1.4 m (4 1/ 2 ft) and within 300 mm (12 in. or 8" using 314.17(C) Ex. if meets allowance) of every outlet box, junction box, cabinet, or fitting. Flat cables shall not be stapled on edge. Sections of cable protected from physical damage by raceway shall not be required to be secured within the raceway.

If it were my job, I would argue duct tape and string were not designed to be used to support NM. Even if not listed, it implies it needs to be a product designed to support NM in such a way to not damage the cable, and to be installed in that manner as well.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

samgregger said:


> 334.30 Securing and Supporting
> Nonmetallic-sheathed cable shall be supported and secured by staples, cable ties, straps, hangers, or similar fittings *designed* and installed so as not to damage the cable, at intervals not exceeding 1.4 m (4 1/ 2 ft) and within 300 mm (12 in. or 8" using 314.17(C) Ex. if meets allowance) of every outlet box, junction box, cabinet, or fitting. Flat cables shall not be stapled on edge. Sections of cable protected from physical damage by raceway shall not be required to be secured within the raceway.
> 
> If it were my job, I would argue duct tape and string were not designed to be used to support NM. Even if not listed, it implies it needs to be a product designed to support NM in such a way to not damage the cable, and to be installed in that manner as well.


 There is no listing requirement. You bring up a completely different topic.

We have known for years that tie wraps have been acceptable to secure romex. Tie wraps aren't designed with any specific link to romex. That alone shows that the design part of it doesn't mean the product has to be made for romex.

I just read a post in which Dennis Alwon said he could bend a nail over to secure romex and it would be code compliant. Another guy said he has stapled a piece of romex sheath around 3 cables to secure them to the stud and the inspector knew it was compliant.

While I don't agree with your assessment on the "designed" thing, at least you posted a valid argument. What joebanana said about 110.3B and 110.21A is inexcusable for someone who is bragging about his superior code knowledge in another thread.


----------



## frenchelectrican (Mar 15, 2007)

HackWork said:


> There is no listing requirement. You bring up a completely different topic.
> 
> We have known for years that tie wraps have been acceptable to secure romex. Tie wraps aren't designed with any specific link to romex. That alone shows that the design part of it doesn't mean the product has to be made for romex.


I have seen couple inspectors just bat the eyes and say not much with tiewraps straps for NM's and one did look at me but never say a word as long it is used for support.,,


----------



## mdnitedrftr (Aug 21, 2013)

What are these Colorado Jim things you guys are talking about? Am I on the wrong forum again?...


----------



## trentonmakes (Mar 21, 2017)

mdnitedrftr said:


> What are these Colorado Jim things you guys are talking about? Am I on the wrong forum again?...


Its those cheesy knock offs of the original slim jim








lol

Actually it may be those bendable metal straps??? Cant say ive seen any for bundling romex though




HackWork said:


> I was about to answer you about how there is no "outside", but this fu*ktarded crap I have to scroll past at the bottom of every post one of your posts is making me hope for your demise.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

mdnitedrftr said:


> What are these Colorado Jim things you guys are talking about? Am I on the wrong forum again?...


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

My rule of thumb is that I'll install as many cables per staple as will fit.


----------



## trentonmakes (Mar 21, 2017)

MTW said:


> My rule of thumb is that I'll install as many cables per staple as will fit.


I usually just end up smashing my thumb! Lol




HackWork said:


> I was about to answer you about how there is no "outside", but this fu*ktarded crap I have to scroll past at the bottom of every post one of your posts is making me hope for your demise.


----------



## mdnitedrftr (Aug 21, 2013)

HackWork said:


>


In our neck of the woods, we call those stand offs.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

mdnitedrftr said:


> In our neck of the woods, we call those stand offs.


It's not just slang, Erico calls them Colorado Jims too. 

https://www.erico.com/category.asp?category=R928&applications=,&exp=full


----------



## manchestersparky (Mar 25, 2007)

Not NM cable , but an interesting approach


----------



## Mcswain (Dec 25, 2016)

Can I just crimp the hell out of several cables and staple? Derating factor? Lol


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

manchestersparky said:


> Not NM cable , but an interesting approach
> 
> View attachment 107970


 That is like what I mentioned earlier about stapling Romex sheath to hold a few romexes. Completely code compliant.


----------



## Wiresmith (Feb 9, 2013)

334.80 last paragraph, de-rate if no spacing and in contact with insulation(or going to be, like in an insulated wall).


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

Stapling is over rated....


----------



## Wiresmith (Feb 9, 2013)

hd13 said:


> 334.80 last paragraph, de-rate if no spacing and in contact with insulation(or going to be, like in an insulated wall).


though you will usually still not have to up-size cable, since you de-rate the 90*c ampacity on nm-b.


----------



## Signal1 (Feb 10, 2016)

HackWork said:


> It's not just slang, Erico calls them Colorado Jims too.
> 
> https://www.erico.com/category.asp?category=R928&applications=,&exp=full


I like Caddy/Erico products, but I don't like that web site.

Why is the US and Canada way down the bottom


----------



## Jarp Habib (May 18, 2014)

Nail a 10p nail right between the ground and neutral  XD

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

Jarp Habib said:


> Nail a 10p nail right between the ground and neutral  XD
> 
> Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk


'Professional HO'!!!


----------



## Magnettica_2 (Jun 28, 2011)

We have a company policy of using Colorado Jim's, no more than (2) cables under any (1) staple, and never staple the cable on edge because THAT IS a violation. Secure the wires as if you would do on your own home. Quality is doing it right when no one is looking.


----------



## trentonmakes (Mar 21, 2017)

Doing a rough yesterday running 14/2 and 14/3. Ran 14/3 for the smokes, some switches, and off too a couple outlets.
I was called out for stapling 14/2 and 14/3 together and bringing them through the same hole in the boxes. Was told some inspectors frown on that in NJ area.
Admittedly, I dont know code all that well but was under impression you could bundle wires of same gauge together?


Texting and Driving


----------



## backstay (Feb 3, 2011)

trentonmakes said:


> Doing a rough yesterday running 14/2 and 14/3. Ran 14/3 for the smokes, some switches, and off too a couple outlets.
> I was called out for stapling 14/2 and 14/3 together and bringing them through the same hole in the boxes. Was told some inspectors frown on that in NJ area.
> Admittedly, I dont know code all that well but was under impression you could bundle wires of same gauge together?
> 
> ...


And what code ref did this inspector use to justify his action? Let me guess, none. We have a good system, if it needs correcting, the inspector files a form with the state. The state sends me a fix it ticket that tells me the NEC section that I violated. I have 14 days to correct and send the form back signed.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

backstay said:


> And what code ref did this inspector use to justify his action? Let me guess, none. We have a good system, if it needs correcting, the inspector files a form with the state. The state sends me a fix it ticket that tells me the NEC section that I violated. I have 14 days to correct and send the form back signed.


That only works because there are 37 electrician in your state. In my state they would have to put on 15,000 government workers to handle that system.


----------



## trentonmakes (Mar 21, 2017)

HackWork said:


> That only works because there are 37 electrician in your state. In my state they would have to put on 15,000 government workers to handle that system.


Aint that the truth! Lol

Texting and Driving


----------



## trentonmakes (Mar 21, 2017)

backstay said:


> And what code ref did this inspector use to justify his action? Let me guess, none. We have a good system, if it needs correcting, the inspector files a form with the state. The state sends me a fix it ticket that tells me the NEC section that I violated. I have 14 days to correct and send the form back signed.


I dont think it was code but inspector choice. My foreman/journeyman/lead guy was telling me this. He said because old 14/3 was round some inspectors here still think along them lines and fail it.
I didnt think anything of it because its same gauge and I was only bundling 2 together. Looks neater to me anyways.

I didnt really question him on it, but i was curious about it hence why im asking here. He is much more familair with what is and is not acceptable to inspectors here than I am.

Texting and Driving


----------



## Jlarson (Jun 28, 2009)

I use long leg Staples and go three deep on flat cables, above that staple scrap jacket on and tie the cables off, very common way of doing multi gang switches out here.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

Joebanana needs to see a listing for that scrap jacket Mr Larson.


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

HackWork said:


> Joebanana needs to see a listing for that scrap jacket Mr Larson.


Well it is approved jacket!


----------



## lighterup (Jun 14, 2013)

I actually got red tagged for using stackets by the Summit County
building department (Akron)...they sighted itas "racking".

I use a lot of stackets and this was a 4,000 sq ft home...
Guess what he wanted to know before he inspected....what 
local I was a member of.
I told him I'm not in a local ...bing...bang zip...pow!


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

lighterup said:


> I actually got red tagged for using stackets by the Summit County
> building department (Akron)...they sighted itas "racking".
> 
> I use a lot of stackets and this was a 4,000 sq ft home...
> ...


"Apparently not the local branch of the brotherhood of moron inspectors or I'd a passed"


----------



## nrp3 (Jan 24, 2009)

Really, another, I used a listed product for it's intended use and failed.


----------



## Chris Crawford (Dec 22, 2011)

In Hawaii our inspectors only allow 2 wires under a staple but stackers are ok for multiple runs to a box. Check with your inspector.


----------



## ElectricianISH (Feb 20, 2021)

Mechanically secure...is where I thing string and duct tape get ruled out


----------

