# Overhead line to detached garage



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

Probably the best bet is to use #8 aluminum quad plex. I guess you can get #10 copper quad-plex but I have not seen it here. If the uf looks ugly then that is your best bet other than digging a hole-- great weather for digging-- 95+ today with heat index about 105


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

That sounds reasonable. I wonder if I could find #8 quad-plex around here.

I would assume that #8 AL quad-plex costs less than #10 Cu UF anyway.


----------



## Going_Commando (Oct 1, 2011)

I am picking up some #2 quad tomorrow that is $1/ft, so #8 should be dirt cheap. I think I have enough #6 quad in the shop to do the trick, but shipping would be a bitch.


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

HackWork said:


> I would assume that #8 AL quad-plex costs less than #10 Cu UF anyway.



Probably especially if you got 10/4 uf plus the guy wire, labor etc


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

Dennis Alwon said:


> Probably especially if you got 10/4 uf plus the guy wire, labor etc


Yeah, I am just hoping I can find it.

About the connections, what would you use to connect the solid #10 copper to #8 aluminum?


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

They make split bolts Cu/Al.


----------



## backstay (Feb 3, 2011)

T&B H tap, WR9. It's good for #6 to #14 and cost 85 cents


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

I was hoping for something a little easier that I didn't have to insulate. 

I have a bunch of barrel reducers with set screws that go down to #14 that I may end up using if I have to insulate.


----------



## backstay (Feb 3, 2011)

HackWork said:


> I was hoping for something a little easier that I didn't have to insulate.
> 
> I have a bunch of barrel reducers with set screws that go down to #14 that I may end up using if I have to insulate.


Those will work loose in the wind. I just tape my H taps with 33.


----------



## drewsserviceco (Aug 1, 2014)

Insul-tap or clear-tap, different name by each manufacturer.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

backstay said:


> Those will work loose in the wind. I just tape my H taps with 33.


I never bought a Burndy crimper. I've always been happy using the barrel reducers for splicing in service wires.


----------



## Going_Commando (Oct 1, 2011)

backstay said:


> Those will work loose in the wind. I just tape my H taps with 33.


We do rubber then 33+, and I agree. I'd go crimp over screw like that every day of the week.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

Going_Commando said:


> We do rubber then 33+, and I agree. I'd go crimp over screw like that every day of the week.


You don't even splice, your PoCo does the entire riser for you little girls up there :laughing:

I can't imagine how many spliced services are out there with my barrel reducers and not a single one has complained. I switched over from romex connectors about 10 years ago. :thumbup:

View attachment 87313


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

BTW, I use Burndy "CCO" insulators around the $5 barrel reducers. I find the CCO's for 50 cents each on sale. They go up to $2 each so you have to wait for the sale.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

I have a burndy crimper md-6 I think it is called, but that two screw connector sold at Home Depot is the one I use most often. They work great.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

macmikeman said:


> I have a burndy crimper md-6 I think it is called, but that two screw connector sold at Home Depot is the one I use most often. They work great.


I was about to buy that crimper for like $300. I didn't buy it because it's a lot more work to make the crimps on the top of the ladder, and with the H-taps you have to have both wires laying in there at once while it's energized.

With the set screw barrel reducers, I install them at the end of each conductor on the ground, throw up the service, then I can insert the PoCo's wire into the connector and use my little impact gun to tighten it down quickly and easily.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

HackWork said:


> I was about to buy that crimper for like $300. I didn't buy it because it's a lot more work to make the crimps on the top of the ladder, and with the H-taps you have to have both wires laying in there at once while it's energized.
> 
> With the set screw barrel reducers, I install them at the end of each conductor on the ground, throw up the service, then I can insert the PoCo's wire into the connector and use my little impact gun to tighten it down quickly and easily.


To install the #4 uninsulated ground crimps for PV systems is what I picked mine up for but it took my son holding the barrel while I squeezed the handles or vice versa to get any work out of it, and now he is working for a big city company doing high rise work. I can install the home depot one by my lonesome really easy.


----------



## drewsserviceco (Aug 1, 2014)

I have the MD6 and use the Htaps. It was a little hairy in the beginning. Now I'm more comfortable. I use my channellocks to pinch the crimp closed enough to hold its position before I use the crimper. Cover with the clam shell insulator for Htaps. Done forever. 

Pick up Htaps and clamshells online for just a few bucks for both.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

Dennis Alwon said:


> Probably the best bet is to use #8 aluminum quad plex. I guess you can get #10 copper quad-plex but I have not seen it here. If the uf looks ugly then that is your best bet other than digging a hole-- great weather for digging-- 95+ today with heat index about 105


Dennis, do you know of #8 quad-plex? Southwire's website shows the smallest being #6.


----------



## Going_Commando (Oct 1, 2011)

HackWork said:


> You don't even splice, your PoCo does the entire riser for you little girls up there :laughing:
> 
> I can't imagine how many spliced services are out there with my barrel reducers and not a single one has complained. I switched over from romex connectors about 10 years ago. :thumbup:
> 
> View attachment 87313


1 of them does, the other 2 don't. We also do overhead secondary and whatnot. I'll take pics when I am running the Burndy H-tap tool off my spikes later this week. :whistling2:


----------



## FaultCurrent (May 13, 2014)

Just use 4 individual #10 CU THWN conductors. Twist them together using a drill if you must. If the splices are under tension make a Western Union splice and solder them. No need for crimps and no need to buy triplex-quadplex ACSR garbage.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

FaultCurrent said:


> Just use 4 individual #10 CU THWN conductors. Twist them together using a drill if you must. If the splices are under tension make a Western Union splice and solder them. No need for crimps and no need to buy triplex-quadplex ACSR garbage.


That sounds hack even for me. That will stretch overtime. 

I just bought quadplex number six ACSR for 69 cents per foot.


----------



## FaultCurrent (May 13, 2014)

Copper wires have been run overhead since the beginning of time. From house to garage or from pole to pole overhead by the Power Co. It's a listed wiring method, nothing hack about it. 225.6 NEC

ASCR quadplex is generally not listed which is why some locales won't accept it.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

FaultCurrent said:


> Copper wires have been run overhead since the beginning of time. From house to garage or from pole to pole overhead by the Power Co. It's a listed wiring method, nothing hack about it. 225.6 NEC
> 
> ASCR quadplex is generally not listed which is why some locales won't accept it.


Twisting (4) #10 THHN together and running it 55' between buildings would be pretty hack in my book. Quadplex is made for that and matches all the other overhead wiring that the customer sees. It comes with a messenger wire and the steel conductor will make sure that it doesn't sag. All for a great price.


----------



## Big John (May 23, 2010)

FaultCurrent said:


> Copper wires have been run overhead since the beginning of time. From house to garage or from pole to pole overhead by the Power Co. It's a listed wiring method, nothing hack about it. 225.6 NEC
> 
> ASCR quadplex is generally not listed which is why some locales won't accept it.


Unless you've got THHN listed for sunlight resistance it's a violation of 310.10(D) and definitely will deteriorate.

While I agree ACSR often isn't a recognized wiring method, if I had to pick a violation I'd pick the wire that lasts versus the one that wont.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

Big John said:


> Unless you've got THHN listed for sunlight resistance it's a violation of 310.10(D) and definitely will deteriorate.
> 
> While I agree ACSR often isn't a recognized wiring method, if I had to pick a violation I'd pick the wire that lasts versus the one that wont.


Lets don't forget wet location as well.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

macmikeman said:


> Lets don't forget wet location as well.


He did mention THWN in the original post. I always say THHN because it's all the same now AFAIK.


----------



## FaultCurrent (May 13, 2014)

If I was doing it I wouldn't twist the wires. The OP asked the question. The unlisted ACSR and the crummy AL/CU split bolts suck make quadplex garbage IMHO.

We had a inspector in Glendale who would never let you use THWN/THHN for service conductors because the exposed ends at the drip loop were not listed as sunlight resistant.

FYI read just how nebulous the requirement is.

http://www.stabiloy.com/NR/rdonlyre...stantRequirementsandChoicesforEnforcement.pdf


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

FaultCurrent said:


> If I was doing it I wouldn't twist the wires. The OP asked the question. The unlisted ACSR and the crummy AL/CU split bolts suck make quadplex garbage IMHO.


You're talking about what feeds like 90% of the houses in this country, and many other countries. 

I'm not trying to argue with you or tell you that your opinion is wrong. It just seems odd to me that you would prefer stringing 4 strands of THWN across a 55' yard instead of using the cable that is specifically made for that purpose and has a really good track record.


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

FaultCurrent said:


> Just use 4 individual #10 CU THWN conductors. Twist them together using a drill if you must. If the splices are under tension make a Western Union splice and solder them. No need for crimps and no need to buy triplex-quadplex ACSR garbage.


I bet that #10 Thwn is not sunlight resistant so this is not an option. I believe it is sunlight resistant in sizes #2 and larger


----------



## Going_Commando (Oct 1, 2011)

FaultCurrent said:


> Just use 4 individual #10 CU THWN conductors. Twist them together using a drill if you must. If the splices are under tension make a Western Union splice and solder them. No need for crimps and no need to buy triplex-quadplex ACSR garbage.


So quad with acsr is garbage, but twisting 4 thwns together with a drill is not? Lol. What, does bending the acsr to hit the ground or neutral hurt your wittle fingers?


----------



## telsa (May 22, 2015)

The OP's original tale tells me that this run ought to be underground.

He ditches, but, of course.

Then ANY EC is going to have a 'terrific' price.

TODAY'S ditching machines make easy what used to be a back breaker.

You simply didn't have mini-excavators thirty-years ago. Now they're at every rental yard.

Ditch-Witch and Vermeer have placed gear all over North America.

1) I've never seen a fella fall off a ladder -- while running PVC in a 20" ditch.

2) You have much more freedom of design when you don't have to worry about O/H support, clearances, appearances.

3) You can even roll out UF -- if your THAT cheap.

When the prospect is a farmer -- he's ALREADY got 'ditching gear' in most cases.

Somehow this latter fact eludes countless ECs -- how else to explain the number of fellas that come to this and other forums with O/H issues and the site is a farm ?


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

Yes, you're right telsa. We never, ever thought of going underground lol...


----------



## mitch65 (Mar 26, 2015)

insulinks are good but the smallest they go is #10 stranded or #8 solid. 
http://ecat.burndy.com/Comergent/en...e=SingleLevelCategory&catKey=603027##false


----------



## PlugsAndLights (Jan 19, 2016)

Maybe this will give the op some ideas.....and, THAT'S where my hat is!
P&L


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

HackWork said:


> Dennis, do you know of #8 quad-plex? Southwire's website shows the smallest being #6.



No I don't know -- I assumed that it may be available. Guess #6 aluminum-- not much more money


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

I paid 69 cents per foot for #6. It has a #4 ACSR I believe.


----------



## telsa (May 22, 2015)

HackWork said:


> Yes, you're right telsa. We never, ever thought of going underground lol...


My mind is in the dirt. :laughing:

You've got me, you've got me.


----------



## Jhellwig (Jun 18, 2014)

FaultCurrent said:


> Copper wires have been run overhead since the beginning of time. From house to garage or from pole to pole overhead by the Power Co. It's a listed wiring method, nothing hack about it. 225.6 NEC
> 
> ASCR quadplex is generally not listed which is why some locales won't accept it.


There is a big difference between hard drawn copper wire and the soft copper wire. The inspector will eat up your idea of using copper and won't say anything about quad.


----------



## FaultCurrent (May 13, 2014)

Wrong. At least here in the big city ACSR will not pass. It is not listed so they will gig it everytime. They will let it go for temp power poles on a construction site, but permanent installation no way. Been there done that.

Overhead conductors are a listed wiring method. Don't like it. Fine. Still in the code. ACSR is garbage IMHO. 

There are 100,000's of tract homes in LA County built in the 1950's. All of them had 2 or 3 #12 wires feeding the garage overhead. Including my own house. And it was plain old TW not hard drawn. 

I don't think ACSR or THWN is specifically labeled sunlight resistant. Most ACSR has no marking. 

I didn't know so many guys were sensitive and would get butthurt. Next time I will be more discreet.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

FaultCurrent said:


> Wrong. At least here in the big city ACSR will not pass. It is not listed so they will gig it everytime. They will let it go for temp power poles on a construction site, but permanent installation no way. Been there done that.
> 
> Overhead conductors are a listed wiring method. Don't like it. Fine. Still in the code.


 You keep saying this, but your recommendation of stringing 4 separate THWN conductors 55 feet across a backyard isn't code compliant either. So I am missing your point.



> ACSR is garbage IMHO.


 This is the other thing that you keep repeating, but it's actually excellent cable to use for this purpose and it has decades and decades of proof across millions of homes. 

What do you expect me to tell the customer? "_That cable that you have feeding your house and every other house you've ever seen sucks! I will string 4 little wires up, it will be much better_!"? 

Can you actually tell us why you think quadplex so horrible instead of just repeating that you hate it?



> I didn't know so many guys were sensitive and would get butthurt. Next time I will be more discreet.


Honestly, I don't see anyone here who has gotten butthurt except for you. You have this really irrational hatred for quadplex ACSR and I still am not sure why. I am curious, show us on the doll where the evil cable touched you.


----------



## TRurak (Apr 10, 2016)

I've used triplex before for pole mounted parking lot lights and they are basically right on the ocean. Never had a corrosion problem with the connections, the lights themselves are a different story.......


----------



## FaultCurrent (May 13, 2014)

I don't care one way or another about ACSR. It just won't pass inspection because it is not listed. If I need to use that junk I get it from a LADWP guy. But using it on a job for a permanent install won't fly. 

Saying individual copper wires overhead is hack is just as irrational. I hate aluminum wire in general but whatever floats your boat.

If your AHJ buys it have at it. 

OK he may have to use #8 if he's over 50 feet.

225.6 Conductor Size and Support.
(A) Overhead Spans. Open individual conductors shall
not be smaller than the following:
(1) For 1000 volts, nominal, or less, 10 AWG copper or
8 AWG aluminum for spans up to 15 m (50 ft) in
length, and 8 AWG copper or 6 AWG aluminum for a
longer span unless supported by a messenger wire


----------



## Jhellwig (Jun 18, 2014)

FaultCurrent said:


> Wrong. At least here in the big city ACSR will not pass. It is not listed so they will gig it everytime. They will let it go for temp power poles on a construction site, but permanent installation no way. Been there done that.
> 
> Overhead conductors are a listed wiring method. Don't like it. Fine. Still in the code. ACSR is garbage IMHO.
> 
> ...


Show me where triplex or quad if forbidden in the code. Show me where soft copper is permitted run overhead unsupported.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

I'm thinking about the last time I ran an overhead from building to building.

.



.



.


.


.


.



Nope, none in forty yrs. Ran it all underground (in PVC) like a real electrician does.


----------



## sbrn33 (Mar 15, 2007)

HackWork said:


> I am looking for 2 things, the best type of cable and way to hang it for an overhead run to a detached garage, and the best connectors to use to splice #10 solid. I don't want to wirenut it and I never liked butt crimps on solid wire.
> 
> Here's the situation:
> 
> ...


I would use #6 Quad because that is the most common. Wedge clamps and probaly a mast to keep it high. I would use the cheap H crimps since I have the crimper. No way I do that without a permit though.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

macmikeman said:


> I'm thinking about the last time I ran an overhead from building to building.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 That is silly. Walking away from a profitable job because the customer doesn't want to do it your way isn't providing good customer service or value, and will never get you into a high roof van.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

sbrn33 said:


> I would use #6 Quad because that is the most common. Wedge clamps and probaly a mast to keep it high. I would use the cheap H crimps since I have the crimper. No way I do that without a permit though.


 That's exactly what I bought, number six squad and a pair of wedge clamps. 

I will be using mini split bolts to make the connections. It's the best option I found.

This is a repair job, permit not required.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

HackWork said:


> That is silly. Walking away from a profitable job because the customer doesn't want to do it your way isn't providing good customer service or value, and will never get you into a high roof van.


I didn't buy a high roof van because that would mean remodeling my garage. It already allows two one ton vans to park inside with roof racks and ladders stacked two high on top, but your van would probably bang the doors an header on the way in. Incidentally, once inside my garage I designed it to be high enough to put in a hydraulic lift and put the vans all the way up on the lift but I have yet to bother with buying one and installing it. Maybe one of these days....


The customers I serve don't want unsightly ariel cable installed in the beachfront mansions.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

macmikeman said:


> I didn't buy a high roof van because that would mean remodeling my garage. It already allows two one ton vans to park inside with roof racks and ladders stacked two high on top, but your van would probably bang the doors an header on the way in. Incidentally, once inside my garage I designed it to be high enough to put in a hydraulic lift and put the vans all the way up on the lift but I have yet to bother with buying one and installing it. Maybe one of these days....
> 
> 
> The customers I serve don't want unsightly ariel cable installed in the beachfront mansions.


You don't have a high roof van because you aren't good enough.

The ghetto slums you serve do just fine with overhead lines. $$$


----------



## Jhellwig (Jun 18, 2014)

FaultCurrent said:


> I don't care one way or another about ACSR. It just won't pass inspection because it is not listed. If I need to use that junk I get it from a LADWP guy. But using it on a job for a permanent install won't fly.
> 
> Saying individual copper wires overhead is hack is just as irrational. I hate aluminum wire in general but whatever floats your boat.
> 
> ...


You don't even know acsr is do you? It is clear your inspector doesn't either.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

Jhellwig said:


> You don't even know acsr is do you? It is clear your inspector doesn't either.


He is being really irrational about it and he keeps ignoring the fact that his own method is also not code compliant since THWN isn't sunlight resistant.

To me, stringing conductors across a backyard that are supposed to be installed in a raceway is silly and hack. Quadplex is made for that purpose and has a pretty damn good track record considering the fact that it feeds most houses.


----------



## Jhellwig (Jun 18, 2014)

Quad and h taps will outlast you or me.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

hackwork said:


> he is being really irrational about it and he keeps ignoring the fact that his own method is also not code compliant since thwn isn't sunlight resistant.
> 
> *to me, stringing conductors across a backyard that are supposed to be installed in a raceway is silly and hack*. Trench installed pvc is made for that purpose and has a pretty damn good track record considering the fact that it feeds most houses.



fify....


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)




----------



## Jhellwig (Jun 18, 2014)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium-conductor_steel-reinforced_cable


----------



## FaultCurrent (May 13, 2014)

UG is the preferred method but not always practical or wanted by the customer.

Why is everyone's panties in a wad because I think ACSR sucks? I use it when I have to. I hate rhubarb pie also.

Plenty of garages around supplied with copper wire strung overhead, they have been working fine since the 50's.

I don't do much residential work. I am thinking about runs to a parking lot booth in an existing concrete paved lot. Owner wants overhead circuit. Put in ACSR is OK by me, but LA city and County won't accept it. Put in THWN done. What's wrong with that?

In reality, I agree that neither wire is marked sunlight resistant. What to do? ACSR is not listed at all so local AHJ won't accept it. They will accept THWN strung overhead per Article 225. Code does not say it has to be hard drawn. 

FYI

225.6 Conductor Size and Support.
(A) Overhead Spans. Open individual conductors shall
not be smaller than the following:
(1) For 1000 volts, nominal, or less, 10 AWG copper or
8 AWG aluminum for spans up to 15 m (50 ft) in
length, and 8 AWG copper or 6 AWG aluminum for a
longer span unless supported by a messenger wire.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

Insert the 15 pictures of ugly overhead services doosh bagel of the year has installed. With crappy blue and green Home Depot ladders.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

FaultCurrent said:


> UG is the preferred method but not always practical or wanted by the customer.
> 
> Why is everyone's panties in a wad because I think ACSR sucks?


 The only panties that are in a wad are your's. You keep saying that ACSR sucks, but you won't give a single valid reason. Saying "It sucks!" "It's garbage" over and over isn't the opposite of what you should be doing. If you have good reason to say that it's garbage, please let us know. 



> Plenty of garages around supplied with copper wire strung overhead, they have been working fine since the 50's.


 So what? Those same houses are filled with California 3-ways, flying splices, switched neutrals, knob and tube, no EGC's, no GFCI's, etc. etc.



> In reality, I agree that neither wire is marked sunlight resistant. What to do?


 Use the better cable for the job, ACSR.



> ACSR is not listed at all so local AHJ won't accept it.


 There is no AHJ, that has been specified since the first post. It makes no difference, both methods are against code.


----------



## FaultCurrent (May 13, 2014)

Jhellwig said:


> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium-conductor_steel-reinforced_cable


You want to know why I think it sucks. It's not listed. Aluminum but that's just personal preference.

You missed the point. It is not listed. Show a manufacturer that makes a listed ACSR cable and i'll get my supplier to order it. It's certainly easier to install. Still junk IMHO, but hey who let's pride get in the way of making work easier and making more money.

I'm not wanting to get in a pissing contest over this silly subject. But I am repeating once again. Local AHJ's won't accept ACSR. If they did I would use it.

But if the tree trimmers knocked down the 2 #12's feeding the garage what's wrong with putting 2 #10's back up?

http://nehringwire.com/copper/covered-copper/copper-service-drop-pe-and-xlp


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

FaultCurrent said:


> Still junk IMHO, but hey who let's pride get in the way of making work easier and making more money.


 Yet again, you have called it junk and patted yourself on the back for not using it like us horrible people. But you haven't give a single reason why it's junk.

How many more times do I need to ask you this simple question?




> But if the tree trimmers knocked down the 2 #12's feeding the garage what's wrong with putting 2 #10's back up?


A tree knocked down the existing wires. I have to replace it. Using quad-plex is a step up from the hack individual wires they had strung across. It's the same way as their house is fed with power, which is the selling point that I used. 

Tell me why it's perfectly OK for every house to be fed with ACSR but then running a secondary line out to the garage is just so horrible to do with the same exact type of cable?


----------



## Jhellwig (Jun 18, 2014)

FaultCurrent said:


> You want to know why I think it sucks. It's not listed. Aluminum but that's just personal preference.
> 
> You missed the point. It is not listed. Show a manufacturer that makes a listed ACSR cable and i'll get my supplier to order it. It's certainly easier to install. Still junk IMHO, but hey who let's pride get in the way of making work easier and making more money.
> 
> ...


The fact that you keep saying acsr is not listed means that neither you nor your inspector know what it is. It is not a cable. It is one wire in an assembly of wires. It has an aluminum conducyor equivalent size. There is no wire gauge for acsr either. Read the wiki I posted. It is perfectly fine by code. There is no definition in the code about how a conductor has to be constructed. Thwn outside in free air is a clear 110.3(B) violation.

You also need to figure out the difference between something being listed and wiring method it. Site code or stop saying it is a violation.

And if you have two wires feeding a garage and replace it with only two wires it is a code violation.


----------



## ponyboy (Nov 18, 2012)

Jhellwigs putting on a clinic! Tractor factory electricians don't fool around


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

faultcurrent said:


> http://nehringwire.com/copper/covered-copper/copper-service-drop-pe-and-xlp



View attachment 87409


----------



## Big John (May 23, 2010)

Eh, I think we're swinging too far the other direction: Most messenger cable has XLP insulated conductors. I like the stuff, it's simple with a proven track record.

But unless you can find some that's dual listed as XHHW or RHW then an inspector could gig it because it's not a wiring method descriped in 310.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

Big John said:


> Eh, I think we're swinging too far the other direction: Most messenger cable has XLP insulated conductors. I like the stuff, it's simple with a proven track record.
> 
> But unless you can find some that's dual listed as XHHW or RHW then an inspector could gig it because it's not a wiring method descriped in 310.


Yes, this is true. But this job is not getting inspected, the NEC has never mattered in this discussion. 

In your opinion, what is better to do? Run Quadplex cable with ACSR messenger made for this purpose? Or run 4 separate #10 THWN conductors? Both are against code, but we are ignoring code here.

Which method is better?


----------



## Going_Commando (Oct 1, 2011)

Big John said:


> Eh, I think we're swinging too far the other direction: Most messenger cable has XLP insulated conductors. I like the stuff, it's simple with a proven track record.
> 
> But unless you can find some that's dual listed as XHHW or RHW then an inspector could gig it because it's not a wiring method descriped in 310.


Yeah, but the inspector would have to climb an extension ladder to check the wire out. Of course your insurance company won't let non-employees climb your ladders, so the inspector would have to bring their own. 

I have met some hard ass inspectors in my time (thankfully very few), and I don't know of one that was so much of a **** they would fail you for stringing triplex or quad between buildings when the utility uses the same damn thing.


----------



## FaultCurrent (May 13, 2014)

I call bullshiite. So unlisted wire or cable is Ok for your jobs. Maybe out in podunk it's OK. But around here we do not use and they won't accept MSHA, DLO, China Machinery Institute, Marine wiring, Boat cable or any unmarked materials. I know what it is, it is ACSR made for utility use. You can use it for general purpose if nobody cares in your turf.

There is no NEC Article recognizing ACSR as a wiring method. The closest thing is Article 225.

Since you are not the AHJ you are entitled to your opinion and Wikipedia don't count for a code book around her. I just called the Principal Inspector in LA City and he said, " Triplex or quadplex ACSR - It is not recognized as a wiring method in the NEC. It is not marked or listed so no good. It's fine for temp power but permanent installation will be rejected."

As for 2 #12 TW's in the air, it is fine as a non-conforming use. So is the 2 wire romex and the 60 amp service in the house.


Show me a listed and marked ACSR and I'm good, I'll buy some.

Does this cut sheet say it is a listed product? 

http://www.southwire.com/ProductCatalog/XTEInterfaceServletcontentKey=prodcatsheet16

This whole discussion started over what to do and I suggested just use copper wires. Some said it was hack and though ASCR was ok. And asked why I wouldn't use that junk. I gave my reasons. Use it if you can. You can put SO cord in the walls too if it makes you feel good and there's no inspection.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

FaultCurrent, I have to ask, is there something wrong with you? Some type of developmental disability? 

Is there a valid reason why I asked you a simple and topical question 5+ times now and you refuse to answer it?

In this thread you have called ACSR/quadplex garbage, junk, crummy, and said that it sucks multiple times each. Yet you ignore everyone's question when asking you why.

Why? Just answer it.

Second, you keep bringing up code. Yes, we know that it is not code compliant to install quadplex since it's not listed in the NEC as a wiring method. But it has been explained to you many times (at least 5 or 6 times now) that *YOUR* proposed method of stringing up #10 THWN conductors for 55' is not code compliant either, both for the distance AND for not being sunlight rated.

So the fact that you are still ranting and raving about code is simply nonsensical.


----------



## Big John (May 23, 2010)

HackWork said:


> ....Which method is better?


 Quad/triplex is always gonna be better because it was A) designed for the application and B) prefabed as a cable assembly so you save time stringing it.

My only issue was how we started going down the "Triplex is code compliant" road. It may be really stupid that it's not, but I'd hate to see someone get the wrong idea.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

Big John said:


> Quad/triplex is always gonna be better because it was A) designed for the application and B) prefabed as a cable assembly so you save time stringing it.
> 
> My only issue was how we started going down the "Triplex is code compliant" road. It may be really stupid that it's not, but I'd hate to see someone get the wrong idea.


I agree that it is not code complaint. 

About it being sunlight resistant, take a look at this:

Here is the cable that I bought, specifically the "Chola" model.

http://www.southwire.com/ProductCatalog/XTEInterfaceServlet?contentKey=prodcatsheet35

In this documentation, it clearly says "_Used to supply 3-phase power, usually from a pole-mounted transformer, to the user's service head where connection to the service entrance cable is made._" so they know it's going to be used outdoors in the sun.

It also directly mentioned the sun when talking about a different spec: "_+Conductor temperature of 90°C for XLP, 75°C for Poly; ambient temperature of 40°C; emissivity 0.9; 2 ft./sec. wind in *sun*._"

With those two things in the documentation, would that be enough to assume that it is sunlight resistant?


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

macmikeman said:


> I'm thinking about the last time I ran an overhead from building to building.
> 
> Nope, none in forty yrs. Ran it all underground (in PVC) like a real electrician does.


Last overhead job I did had concrete and paving stones. Plus I went over the dog run so I didn't get bit.


----------



## Big John (May 23, 2010)

HackWork said:


> ...With those two things in the documentation, would that be enough to assume that it is sunlight resistant?


 Look at the cut sheet where it lists the standards that cable meets: ANSI S-76-474 sets the endurance tests for drop conductors, which includes sunlight resistance.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

Big John said:


> Look at the cut sheet where it lists the standards that cable meets: ANSI S-76-474 sets the endurance tests for drop conductors, which includes sunlight resistance.


I'm not seeing ANSI, but I see ICEA S-76-474.

Are you saying that it is sunlight resistant?


----------



## Big John (May 23, 2010)

HackWork said:


> I'm not seeing ANSI, but I see ICEA S-76-474.
> 
> Are you saying that it is sunlight resistant?


Yeah, they're the same standard, and yes, it is.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

Big John said:


> Yeah, they're the same standard, and yes, it is.


Awesome, even better.


----------



## emtnut (Mar 1, 2015)

I'd have to say this post is epic :laughing:

Since your customer TOLD you no permit ... why not ask him if it's sunlight resistant 


What a fawkin joke .... and you argue with others, not having a clue.


----------



## Big John (May 23, 2010)

Eh? It's aerial cable, it's a pretty safe bet. It'd be like checking whether down-hole pump cable was water resistant.


----------



## emtnut (Mar 1, 2015)

Big John said:


> Eh? It's aerial cable, it's a pretty safe bet. It'd be like checking whether down-hole pump cable was water resistant.


The fact that he asked here ..... :laughing:


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

Big John said:


> Eh? It's aerial cable, it's a pretty safe bet. It'd be like checking whether down-hole pump cable was water resistant.


I was only curious because someone mentioned earlier that it wasn't. Not that it makes any difference, we know it's the best cable for the purpose.


----------



## emtnut (Mar 1, 2015)

Yeah .. .I believe ya :thumbsup:


----------



## Jhellwig (Jun 18, 2014)

For the love of God. ACSR IS NOT A WIRING METHOD IT IS A FREAKING WIRE!!!!!!! Quadruplex is not against the code. Quadruplex is merely a trade name. It is not a cable. It is an assembly of three rubber or xlp insulated wires wrapped around an bare ACSR messenger wire that also doubles as being an acceptable grounding conductor because ACSR is an alluminum conductor wrapped around a steel core. It consists of four free air conductors that are bundled. Read article 225 and 310.


----------



## emtnut (Mar 1, 2015)

Not sure if that was at me :blink: :laughing:

I KNOW ... the OP seems to be in DIY land .... without a permit :whistling2:


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

Jhellwig said:


> For the love of God. ACSR IS NOT A WIRING METHOD IT IS A FREAKING WIRE!!!!!!! Quadruplex is not against the code. It is not a cable. It is an assembly of three rubber or xlp insulated wires wrapped around an bare ACSR messenger wire that also doubles as being an acceptable grounding conductor because ACSR is an alluminum conductor wrapped around a steel core. It consists of four free air conductors that are bundled. Read article 225 and 310.


Either way, it doesn't matter. It's already purchased and ready to go up.

I just want to hear that guy's reasoning on why quadplex/ACSR is such "garbage". I assume it's a really silly reason, which is why he refuses to explain himself.


----------



## Jhellwig (Jun 18, 2014)

emtnut said:


> Not sure if that was at me :blink: :laughing:
> 
> I KNOW ... the OP seems to be in DIY land .... without a permit :whistling2:


No it wasn't at you. This thread is lacking in anything close to being right.


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

I'm with emtnut. Guys arguing over code and product suitability on an unpermitted, uninspected job. May as well staple NMD to the fence.


----------



## Jhellwig (Jun 18, 2014)

FaultCurrent said:


> I call bullshiite. So unlisted wire or cable is Ok for your jobs. Maybe out in podunk it's OK. But around here we do not use and they won't accept MSHA, DLO, China Machinery Institute, Marine wiring, Boat cable or any unmarked materials. I know what it is, it is ACSR made for utility use. You can use it for general purpose if nobody cares in your turf.
> 
> There is no NEC Article recognizing ACSR as a wiring method. The closest thing is Article 225.
> 
> ...


As I have already stated you and your inspector clearly do not know the code nor do you know what listed means. I posted the wiki article because you have no idea what ACSR is. You also have no idea what listing and wiring method mean.

Save face and take your lumps. You and your inspector are wrong. Try learning from this.


----------



## Big John (May 23, 2010)

Jhellwig said:


> ...It is an assembly of three rubber or xlp insulated wires....


 Right, but where in the code do you see XLP discussed as an accepted low voltage conductor? What's the ampacity?


----------



## Jhellwig (Jun 18, 2014)

99cents said:


> I'm with emtnut. Guys arguing over code and product suitability on an unpermitted, uninspected job. May as well staple NMD to the fence.


It hasn't degraded to name calling and politics so it is fine so far.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

99cents said:


> I'm with emtnut. Guys arguing over code and product suitability on an unpermitted, uninspected job. May as well staple NMD to the fence.


I barely ever pull permits. Mainly only on service or main panel upgrades or standby generator installations.

Customers don't want permits and they certainly don't want to pay me to obtain them. I will put my guy on this job and he will take an hour and a half to do it. But for me to pull a permit I will have to spend around 2 hours of my own time doing the applications and going to the building department twice. And that's not counting if the inspector wants me there for the inspection, he gives a 4 hour window of when he arrives lol.

It's a repair job anyway :whistling2:

Remember one thing, I have been clear since the first post that I wasn't pulling a permit and code isn't the most important thing here. It's the other people who can't understand that.

Stapling NM to a fence wouldn't be the type of job that I could make good profit off of, or else I would entertain that idea.


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

HackWork said:


> I barely ever pull permits. Mainly only on service or main panel upgrades or standby generator installations.
> 
> Customers don't want permits and they certainly don't want to pay me to obtain them. I will put my guy on this job and he will take an hour and a half to do it. But for me to pull a permit I will have to spend around 2 hours of my own time doing the applications and going to the building department twice. And that's not counting if the inspector wants me there for the inspection, he gives a 4 hour window of when he arrives lol.
> 
> ...


That's ridiculous. I pull my permits online. If I apply at 7:00 a.m., it's usually in my mailbox by 10:00.


----------



## FaultCurrent (May 13, 2014)

HackWork said:


> FaultCurrent, I have to ask, is there something wrong with you? Some type of developmental disability?
> 
> Is there a valid reason why I asked you a simple and topical question 5+ times now and you refuse to answer it?
> 
> ...


I have answered you 5 times. You just have trouble with reading comprehension.

Why I don't use it.
1. I hate aluminum wire (personal preference) 
2. It will not pass inspection in this area.
3. It is not code compliant. You cannot find it's ampacity in Article 310.
4. You may not like Article 225 but overhead individual conductors is a NEC recognized wiring method. 
5. ACSR is made for utility use, one expects it to be made Sunlight Resistant but CA GO 95 has no requirement. 
6. It is fine for temp power.
7. If you can use it in your turf have at it.
8. Strictly speaking if sunlight resistant is a hang up, than you need a wiring method per Art 225 and is marked as Sunlight Resistant.
9. UG is the answer but not always possible.
10.Why not XHHW Overhead?

Southwire - Conductor shall be UL-listed Type XHHW-2 rated for cable tray use and sunlight resistance.


Here's what UL says:

12. SUNLIGHT RESISTANCE indicates that the outer nonmetallic covering of the product has been evaluated for direct
exposure to ultraviolet (UV) radiation from the sun. This coverage is not generally marked on the product. Cables with an overall metallic covering are always considered suitable for exposure to sunlight. The use limitations and associated markings are specified in the tables by the following:

(35) A product evaluated for sunlight resistance is marked ―SUNLIGHT RESISTANT, ―SUN. RES. or "SR."
(36) A product evaluated for sunlight resistance is marked ―SUNLIGHT RESISTANT, ―SUN.
RES., or "W."
(37) Cords with the W‘ suffix are suitable for use in wet locations and are sunlight resistant
(38), (39) Notes not used.

Says generally not marked on the product...

Interestingly enough, it appears looking at several manufacturers that #2 and larger THWN conductor are available marked SUN. RES.

Got it?

It's all good, I've been around long enough not to let any rookies rock my world. Want to use ACSR? Have at it.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

99cents said:


> That's ridiculous. I pull my permits online. If I apply at 7:00 a.m., it's usually in my mailbox by 10:00.


We don't have that luxury. After filling out paperwork (actual paper) and signing and sealing it, I have to drive to the center of their town, 25 minutes away, look for parking, pay a meter, then walk back to put the ticket in my truck window. Walk to town hall, find the basement that houses the building department, then wait on line for 10-25 minutes while homeowners complain that their deck built with 2x4's shouldn't have failed inspection.

When I turn in the permit application, I will ask if I could leave a blank check so they could mail me the permit, but most of the time they tell me I have to come back to sign for it. So I have to do it all over again.

It usually takes 2 weeks for a permit. But it can often take longer. Right now I am waiting for 2 permits for service upgrades for over 3 weeks now.


----------



## FaultCurrent (May 13, 2014)

Jhellwig said:


> As I have already stated you and your inspector clearly do not know the code nor do you know what listed means. I posted the wiki article because you have no idea what ACSR is. You also have no idea what listing and wiring method mean.
> 
> Save face and take your lumps. You and your inspector are wrong. Try learning from this.


We know what the terms mean. We know the code better than you. I can look out the window and see racks of ACSR on reels out back. 

What you think the code means, or listing for that matter is fine. Arguing about who is wrong is pointless. If Wiki is how you do your job have at it.

Peace my friend...all is still right with the world.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

FaultCurrent said:


> I have answered you 5 times. You just have trouble with reading comprehension.


 Bologna, you STILL haven't answered.



> Why I don't use it.


 No, the question is why you keep saying that it's "garbage, junk, crummy, and sucks".


> 1. I hate aluminum wire (personal preference)
> 2. It will not pass inspection in this area.
> 3. It is not code compliant. You cannot find it's ampacity in Article 310.
> 4. You may not like Article 225 but overhead individual conductors is a NEC recognized wiring method.
> ...


Most of this is about code, listings, or markings, which isn't the question.

The only thing you posted that can even remotely explain why you think it's garbage is this:

"1. I hate aluminum wire (personal preference)"

That's fine if it's your preference. But to factually state it's garbage based on your irrational hatred of aluminum wire is absurd. It's stupid. 

As for all your complaining about sunlight resistance, we already found out that the quadplex I am using IS sunlight resistant. You know what isn't sunlight resistant? The THWN that YOU recommend to use!!!!

Talk about being ass backwards!


----------



## Jhellwig (Jun 18, 2014)

Big John said:


> Right, but where in the code do you see XLP discussed as an accepted low voltage conductor? What's the ampacity?


I took the insulated with xlp part from south wires specs on Quadruplex. The code merely requires the conductors be covered OR insulated. And xhhw-2 is xlp.


----------



## Jhellwig (Jun 18, 2014)

FaultCurrent said:


> We know what the terms mean. We know the code better than you. I can look out the window and see racks of ACSR on reels out back.
> 
> What you think the code means, or listing for that matter is fine. Arguing about who is wrong is pointless. If Wiki is how you do your job have at it.
> 
> Peace my friend...all is still right with the world.


You have yet to cite a code article where ACSR is not permitted to use. Code only states that conductors be made of copper or alluminum. It says nothing about how a conductor can be reinforced. If you would read the wiki I posted you would know what ACSR is.

If you know what the terms mean then stop using them wrong.


----------



## Big John (May 23, 2010)

Jhellwig said:


> I took the insulated with xlp part from south wires specs on Quadruplex. The code merely requires the conductors be covered OR insulated. And xhhw is xlp.


But if it ain't stamped XHHW then it becomes a code violation.


----------



## emtnut (Mar 1, 2015)

HackWork said:


> and code isn't the most important thing here.


Oh, we all get that part !


----------



## TRurak (Apr 10, 2016)

I'm the time I have taken reading this thread I bet I could have installed a 1" pvc conduit underground for you. Or at the very least some 10/3 UF ......


----------



## Jhellwig (Jun 18, 2014)

Big John said:


> But if it ain't stamped XHHW then it becomes a code violation.


I haven't seen quad that isn't marked. It is hard to see because they print it.

And now that I think about it quad would have xhh not xhhw. I haven seen a nylon jacket on and wires of quad.

I am going to have to find a roll of quad at work tomorrow.


----------



## Going_Commando (Oct 1, 2011)

I'll check the quad that I should be picking up tomorrow.


----------



## Jhellwig (Jun 18, 2014)

http://www.southwire.com/ProductCatalog/XTEInterfaceServlet?contentKey=prodcatsheet35

They also make quad with an all aluminum support wire or a higher corrosion resistance alluminum support wire. The more I read I guess I am wrong about not being able to use soft copper free spanned. I imagine there is a distance limit somewhere though.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

The Quadplex that I have has writing on it, but I'm not going out to the van now.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

TRurak said:


> I'm the time I have taken reading this thread I bet I could have installed a 1" pvc conduit underground for you. Or at the very least some 10/3 UF ......


You would have never gotten the job.


----------



## emtnut (Mar 1, 2015)

It just gets better


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

I wish they made Wago Lever Nuts for #6-10!

View attachment 87473


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

All I know about this whole thread is that Hax is going to be needing one of them Southwire combo kits now, since he has to strip some mysterious wire that hasn't been settled yet by the code nazi's as to whether Hax is a hack or not. Ya hearin me Cricket? I vote for Hackworks to win the prize, he needs it the most.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

I'm not a hack, I'm just here for the profit.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

View attachment 87513


6 AWG BBC + 6 AWG ACSR XLPE

The BBC part isn't clear on any part of the cable, so it could be slightly different letters.


----------



## emtnut (Mar 1, 2015)

HackWork said:


> I wish they made Wago Lever Nuts for #6-10!
> 
> View attachment 87473


Not sure about NEC , but up here, any aerial cable requires a compression connector.

Maybe someone can comment on an NEC section ?


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

emtnut said:


> Not sure about NEC , but up here, any aerial cable requires a compression connector.
> 
> Maybe someone can comment on an NEC section ?


Is there a CEC rule for that? I follow an inspector's advice and use split bolts.


----------



## emtnut (Mar 1, 2015)

99cents said:


> Is there a CEC rule for that? I follow an inspector's advice and use split bolts.


75-504 ... Just looked it up, and they allow wedge type now too.
I think a 2012 code change ... Thanks 99 :thumbsup:


----------



## Roger123 (Sep 23, 2007)

Here Hack, just for the fun of it is a quote from a well respected member:


don_resqcapt19's 


"While most do not agree with me, it is my opinion that the use of triplex or quadplex cables is not prohibited by the NEC. I believe that the following from Table 396.10(A) would permit the use of those cables.

Other factory-assembled, multiconductor control, signal, or power cables that are identified for the use.

Identified (as applied to equipment). Recognizable as suitable for the specific purpose, function, use, environment, application, and so forth, where described in a particular Code requirement.

The very extensive long term use of these cables by utilities makes the "recognizable as suitable for the specific purpose".


----------



## jw0445 (Oct 9, 2009)

HackWork said:


> I wish they made Wago Lever Nuts for #6-10!
> 
> View attachment 87473


Why not use some Burndy #1's or 2 H taps and call it done. You can always put a piece of scrap in it to make the #10 work.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

jw0445 said:


> Why not use some Burndy #1's or 2 H taps and call it done. You can always put a piece of scrap in it to make the #10 work.


I don't have a Burndy crimper. 

I already picked up small split bolts that will work perfectly fine. I'll give my guy some Super 88 and tell him to go to town.


----------



## jw0445 (Oct 9, 2009)

Do you wrap them in rubber tape first?


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

jw0445 said:


> Do you wrap them in rubber tape first?


I always preferred mastic pads to rubber tape, in places where it counts. But for this little job I am just using tape.


----------



## Going_Commando (Oct 1, 2011)

We had too much to do yesterday, and I didn't think to check the #2 quad until it was up in the air and terminated. I did find out our #2 quad URD is cross listed and sunlight resistant though.


----------

