# Direct burial wire nuts..



## crazymurph (Aug 19, 2009)

I say "You're NUTS"!


----------



## Jlarson (Jun 28, 2009)

I say, I don't really care. Throw the damn things right into the trench, the longer it takes for me to find the fault down the road means more $$$$$$$$$$$$ for me.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

B4T said:


> OK folks.. here is a great topic to debate..
> 
> I say these wire nuts are made to be used to connect UF conductors in dirt without any kind of box..
> 
> ...



I think you are right.

300.5(E) and 300.15(G) cover it.


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

I agree. Here is a link where you can see the sealant in it. I have used them occasionally on low voltage lights.
Click here


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

B4T said:


> OK folks.. here is a great topic to debate..
> 
> I say these wire nuts are made to be used to connect UF conductors in dirt without any kind of box..
> 
> ...


They might be rated for direct burial, but you won't find anything in the NEC that permits UF cable running greater than 50 volts to be spliced not in a box, handhole, etc.. There are some cable types, like landscape lighting and irrigation cables, that are not required to be spliced in a box, and these wire nuts would be awesome for that. Well, maybe not awesome, but better than some options.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Dennis Alwon said:


> I agree. Here is a link where you can see the sealant in it.
> Click here


The page can't be found.. it is a conspiracy..


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

The conductors inside the UF cable are not rated for direct burial. Using the method that B4T describes without an enclosure of some sort would put the individual conductors in direct contact with the earth. 

I say violation.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

MDShunk said:


> They might be rated for direct burial, but you won't find anything in the NEC that permits UF cable running greater than 50 volts to be spliced not in a box, handhole, etc..


Yeah you can direct bury splices and taps in direct buried conductors.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

MDShunk said:


> They might be rated for direct burial, but you won't find anything in the NEC that permits UF cable running greater than 50 volts to be spliced not in a box, handhole, etc.. There are some cable types, like landscape lighting and irrigation cables, that are not required to be spliced in a box, and these wire nuts would be awesome for that. Well, maybe not awesome, but better than some options.


If that was the rule.. why would the website not mention the" limitations" for their product?


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

B4T said:


> If that was the rule.. why would the website not mention the" limitations" for their product?



Because it's expected that properly trained technicians can apply the proper code rules to their installations. :thumbup:


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

B4T said:


> The page can't be found.. it is a conspiracy..


It works for me....

You cannot direct bury UF and just do an open splice. Low voltage yes and high voltage in a handhole or jb on the ground are fine.


----------



## Jlarson (Jun 28, 2009)

B4T said:


> If that was the rule.. why would the website not mention the" limitations" for their product?


Cause they are a manufacturer out to sell their product, not notify you of whether or not the NEC allows what you want to do with the product.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Dennis Alwon said:


> It works for me....
> 
> You cannot direct bury UF and just do an open splice. Low voltage yes and high voltage in a handhole or jb on the ground are fine.


Dennis.. do you have a code reference where it says I need a box for line voltage?


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Dennis Alwon said:


> You cannot direct bury UF and just do an open splice.



300.5(E) and 300.15(G) say you can, nothing in 
340 says you can't.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Peter D said:


> The conductors inside the UF cable are not rated for direct burial. Using the method that B4T describes without an enclosure of some sort would put the individual conductors in direct contact with the earth.
> 
> I say violation.


As BBQ pointed out..

(E) Splices and Taps. Direct-buried conductors or cables
shall be permitted to be spliced or tapped without the use of
splice boxes. The splices or taps shall be made in accordance
with 110.14(B).


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

UF has thw or something similar. Are you saying we can bury that wire unprotected?


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

BBQ said:


> 300.5(E) and 300.15(G) say you can, nothing in
> 340 says you can't.



Yes, but as I said, the conductors inside the UF are not marked or listed on the package as being suitable for direct burial. Since we don't have that information we can't automatically assume we can direct bury them. Once you remove the outer jacket of the UF cable, you can't treat the inner conductors the same as you would the entire cable. IMO of course.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Dennis Alwon said:


> UF has thw or something similar. Are you saying we can bury that wire unprotected?


I am saying that is what the NEC is saying .... other than the thw part.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

B4T said:


> As BBQ pointed out..
> 
> (E) Splices and Taps. Direct-buried conductors or cables
> shall be permitted to be spliced or tapped without the use of
> ...


Yup. And the heat shrink UF kits meet that requirement. A bunch of individual wire nuts do not for the reason I already mentioned.


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

B4T said:


> Dennis.. do you have a code reference where it says I need a box for line voltage?


Take a look at 300.15.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Dennis Alwon said:


> UF has thw or something similar. Are you saying we can bury that wire unprotected?


They feel just like regular NM conductors..

THW would be noticeable difference..


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

BBQ said:


> 300.5(E) and 300.15(G) say you can, nothing in
> 340 says you can't.


I agree the wording is poor but I disagree with the idea that the individual wires in UF are allowed to be buried without protection. Now an underground splice kit yes but not a wirenut.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

I believe I read on Southwire or Cerro's site that the conductors inside UF are rated THWN. THWN is not suitable for direct burial.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Peter D said:


> Yes, but as I said, the conductors inside the UF are not marked or listed on the package as being suitable for direct burial. Since we don't have that information we can't automatically assume we can direct bury them. Once you remove the outer jacket of the UF cable, you can't treat the inner conductors the same as you would the entire cable. IMO of course.


Please before going on read the code sections given.

It specifically tells us we can direct bury splices in conductors and *cables*. What cable do you think they are including?


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

don_resqcapt19 said:


> Take a look at 300.15.


unfortunately 300.15(G) says the same as 300.5.


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

BBQ said:


> What cable do you think they are including?


 A triplex cable or similar cable.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Peter D said:


> I believe I read on Southwire's site that the conductors inside UF are rated THWN. THWN is not suitable for direct burial.



It does not matter if they are insulated with tissue paper, the NEC tells us we can direct bury the splices.:thumbup:


----------



## Missouri Bound (Aug 30, 2009)

Read 300.50 (c)


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

BBQ said:


> Please before going on read the code sections given.
> 
> It specifically tells us we can direct bury splices in conductors and *cables*. What cable do you think they are including?


I have read them. But I am stating categorically that they are not the only code section that applies here. Surely you know that. You're not suggesting we can direct bury unmarked conductors, are you?


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Dennis Alwon said:


> A triplex cable or similar cable.


It includes UF.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

don_resqcapt19 said:


> Take a look at 300.15.


Wrong section..


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

B4T said:


> They feel just like regular NM conductors..
> 
> THW would be noticeable difference..


Right it must have a W in it thus THWN perhaps not THW but you get my meaning.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Peter D said:


> I have read them. But I am stating categorically that they are not the only code section that applies here. Surely you know that. You're not suggesting we can direct bury unmarked conductors, are you?


YES I AM STATING WE CAN DIRECT BURY SPLICES IN UF

and don't call me Shirley:laughing:.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

BBQ said:


> It includes UF.



Of course it does. But I am saying it's not the only code section that applies here.


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

BBQ said:


> It includes UF.


Yes it does and hence it is poorly worded. If you all want to bury a thwn wire in the ground be my guest. I doubt you will find an inspector to go along with it. Yes , you may have a loophole but I cannot believe that is the intent.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

BBQ said:


> YES I AM STATING WE CAN DIRECT BURY SPLICES IN UF
> 
> and don't call me Shirley:laughing:.



And I'm saying it's wrong, Shirley.

And you would never in a million years employ such a hack method to splice UF cable. :no:


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Missouri Bound said:


> Read 300.50 (c)


That is for over 600 volts.


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

Peter D said:


> And I'm saying it's wrong, Shirley.
> 
> And you would never in a million years employ such a hack method to splice UF cable. :no:


I don't believe Bob would do it either.


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

Here is how I see it. 300.15 (G) states boxes are not required for splices and taps in direct buried cables and conductors.

Now when you strip the UF the wires are no longer in a cable and cannot be spliced without a box.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Dennis Alwon said:


> Yes it does and hence it is poorly worded. If you all want to bury a thwn wire in the ground be my guest. I doubt you will find an inspector to go along with it. Yes , you may have a loophole but I cannot believe that is the intent.


It may be a loop hole.. but code is code and we can't pick the code articles we like and ignore the rest.. :whistling2::laughing:


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Dennis Alwon said:


> Yes it does and hence it is poorly worded. If you all want to bury a thwn wire in the ground be my guest. I doubt you will find an inspector to go along with it. Yes , you may have a loophole but I cannot believe that is the intent.


First off it is not marked so don't call it any type.

Second no one is talking about striping 75' of UF and dropping the result in a trench, we are talking about stripping the cable sheath just like you would at a box except there is no box.

Third it is not a loophole it is the code and an inspector had better go along with it.

Are you going to tell me this http://solutions.3m.com/wps/portal/...RQ50ISL93Q0T24Q5_nid=2QWD15WZ33beQT6SM2Z6BCgl is not desined for direct burial of UF splices?


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Dennis Alwon said:


> Here is how I see it. 300.15 (G) states boxes are not required for splices and taps in direct buried cables and conductors.
> 
> Now when you strip the UF the wires are no longer in a cable and cannot be spliced without a box.


That is a hell of a stretch Dennis but it is not true.

If striping NM means it's no longer a cable we can't install it anywhere.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Dennis Alwon said:


> Here is how I see it. 300.15 (G) states boxes are not required for splices and taps in direct buried cables and conductors.
> 
> Now when you strip the UF the wires are no longer in a cable and cannot be spliced without a box.


How do you splice wires without skinning them back? :blink:


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

BBQ said:


> That is a hell of a stretch Dennis but it is not true.
> 
> If striping NM means it's no longer a cable we can't install it anywhere.


Sure you can-- in a JB. The cable ends at the box.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Dennis Alwon said:


> I don't believe Bob would do it either.


No, I hate digging so it gets pipe if it is up to me.

But you bet I have used direct bury splice kits before.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

BBQ said:


> Are you going to tell me this http://solutions.3m.com/wps/portal/...RQ50ISL93Q0T24Q5_nid=2QWD15WZ33beQT6SM2Z6BCgl is not desined for direct burial of UF splices?


That's not what we are saying at all.

The installation I envision is stripping the UF cable 6" or so. Strip 1/2" of insulation off of each individual conductor, then install the direct burial wire nuts. Then bury the splice, with 5" or so of unmarked conductors in direct contact with the earth. This is a violation.

The listed UF splice kit completely encloses the individual conductors and splice, so it's code compliant.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Dennis Alwon said:


> Sure you can-- in a JB. The cable ends at the box.


Dennis ......... this is a laughable argument.

The code is clear, you just don't like it.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

The better question is this - can individual conductors inside of UF cable be installed in direct contact with the earth?


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Peter D said:


> The installation I envision is stripping the UF cable 6" or so. Strip 1/2" of insulation off of each individual conductor, then install the direct burial wire nuts. Then bury the splice, with 5" or so of unmarked conductors in direct contact with the earth. This is a violation.


Not an NEC violation.




> The listed UF splice kit completely encloses the individual conductors and splice, so it's code compliant.


Both are NEC compliant.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Peter D said:


> That's not what we are saying at all.
> 
> The installation I envision is stripping the UF cable 6" or so. Strip 1/2" of insulation off of each individual conductor, then install the direct burial wire nuts. Then bury the splice, with 5" or so of unmarked conductors in direct contact with the earth. This is a violation.
> 
> The listed UF splice kit completely encloses the individual conductors and splice, so it's code compliant.


Those direct burial wire nuts are just another UL approved splice connector.. 

Just another design.. but code compliant.. :thumbsup:


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Peter D said:


> The better question is this - can individual conductors inside of UF cable be installed in direct contact with the earth?


Yes.

Unless you can find the code section that says otherwise.:thumbup: (Hint ...... you won't)


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

BBQ said:


> Not an NEC violation.


If that's true, then it's legal to direct bury an unmarked conductor. Absurd!


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Peter D said:


> The better question is this - can individual conductors inside of UF cable be installed in direct contact with the earth?



If you can't expose the conductors.. how do you splice the cable using the approved wire nuts.. :blink:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

B4T said:


> If you can't expose the conductors.. how do you splice the cable using the approved wire nuts.. :blink:


*shakes head*

That's not what I am debating at all.


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

B4T said:


> If you can't expose the conductors.. how do you splice the cable using the approved wire nuts.. :blink:


In an underground JB or manhole. I believe, You are not supposed to use standard wirenuts for those situations.


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

B4T said:


> If you can't expose the conductors.. how do you splice the cable using the approved wire nuts.. :blink:


Can you strip NM cable and run the conductors inside the cable exposed thru the wall? Is that any different?


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

BBQ said:


> Yes.
> 
> Unless you can find the code section that says otherwise.:thumbup: (Hint ...... you won't)



So if you find a piece of wire on the job without any labeling or marking on it, you can automatically assume it's listed and suitable for direct burial?

I know you're being a "Code Purist" here but you also have to use common sense sometimes.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Peter D said:


> If that's true, then it's legal to direct bury an unmarked conductor. Absurd!



I have no idea why you are fixated on that, but regardless 300.5(E) and 300.15(G) tell us very clearly we can do it and nothing in the UF Article even hints that we cannot.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

For the record.. I don't like direct burial splices.. I think it is hack..

But it is the main reason I use the PVC boxes that have been mentioned hundreds of times on this forum..


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Peter D said:


> So if you find a piece of wire on the job without any labeling or marking on it, you can automatically assume it's listed and suitable for direct burial?


Now you are being absurd, we are not taking about unmarked conductors off on their own, we are talkning about some striped conductors that if followed back you find the UF sheath with the labeling.

This exactly what you would be dealing with in many hand holes, UF stripped with the markings buried.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

BBQ said:


> I have no idea why you are fixated on that, but regardless 300.5(E) and 300.15(G) tell us very clearly we can do it and nothing in the UF Article even hints that we cannot.


Because UF is listed as a cable assembly for direct burial. Once you remove the outer jacket which is rated for direct burial, you now have unmarked individual conductors. I am saying these individual conductors cannot be in direct contact with the earth, plain and simple. Without any marking or listing telling us they can be directly buried, we can't automatically assume they are rated as such.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

BBQ said:


> Now you are being absurd, we are not taking about unmarked conductors off on their own, we are talkning about some striped conductors that if followed back you find the UF sheath with the labeling.
> 
> This exactly what you would be dealing with in many hand holes, UF stripped with the markings buried.


What we have here is a failure to communicate. I have made my case very clearly (hopefully) and will let the jury decide. Otherwise I am just repeating myself.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Peter D said:


> now have unmarked individual conductors. I am saying these individual conductors cannot be in direct contact with the earth, plain and simple.


I understand what you are saying but I also see you have not backed it with any code so you are playing the 'not in my town card'.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Dennis Alwon said:


> Can you strip NM cable and run the conductors inside the cable exposed thru the wall? Is that any different?


We are specifically talking about dirt.. not walls.. and yes it is different..

There is no fire or shock hazard in dirt when wires are properly spliced..


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

B4T said:


> We are specifically talking about dirt.. not walls.. and yes it is different..
> 
> There is no fire or shock hazard in dirt when wires are properly spliced..


Yes and there is no protection for the conductors. Can I strip UK and lay it in the ground? For that matter why have a UF cable just bury regular THWN and we're good.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Peter D said:


> What we have here is a failure to communicate. I have made my case very clearly (hopefully) and will let the jury decide. Otherwise I am just repeating myself.


Lets see

BBQ .... at least two code sections referenced that are pretty damn clear.

Peter .... no code sections or any references at all.




:laughing:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

BBQ said:


> I understand what you are saying but I also see you have not backed it with any code so you are playing the 'not in my town card'.


Huh? :blink:

We have an entire section of the code telling us various cable insulation types and their permitted uses. If I am not given that information and can't consult the table in article 310 to find a proper application, then I can't make an assumption based on how the wind is blowing that day. It's not a matter of not being able to back it with code, it's not being able to find a code that says "yea" or "nay", so I am erring on the side of caution.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Dennis Alwon said:


> Yes and there is no protection for the conductors. Can I strip UK and lay it in the ground? For that matter why have a UF cable just bury regular THWN and we're good.


That is not what I am looking to do.. the OP was specifically related to splices in dirt without any box or handhole..


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Dennis Alwon said:


> Can I strip UF and lay it in the ground?


IMO yes other than 310.11. 

But we are not talking about that, we are talking about stripping enough to splice which no one seems to apply 310.11 to. 



> For that matter why have a UF cable just bury regular THWN and we're good.


No, that is not a direct bury conductor, UF is.

Have you guys taken the time to read 340?


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

BBQ said:


> Lets see
> 
> BBQ .... at least two code sections referenced that are pretty damn clear.
> 
> Peter .... no code sections or any references at all.


I don't agree they are clear at all with regard to the individual conductors inside the cable. You are making them say what you want them to say, but you know perfectly well that you can't make an assumption about burying a unmarked conductor the way you are.


----------



## Jlarson (Jun 28, 2009)

Dennis Alwon said:


> Can I strip UK


Why and how would you strip the United Kingdom? :blink: :jester:




I agree with BBQ 100%. Not that I would ever use the method I'm not going to say its against code because it isn't.


----------



## oldtimer (Jun 10, 2010)

Peter D said:


> (What we have here is a failure to communicate). I have made my case very clearly (hopefully) and will let the jury decide. Otherwise I am just repeating myself.


 What was the name of the actor that said that? (Movie Trivia!). Cool Hand Luke!


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Peter D said:


> Huh? :blink:
> 
> We have an entire section of the code telling us various cable insulation types and their permitted uses. If I am not given that information and can't consult the table in article 310 to find a proper application, then I can't make an assumption based on how the wind is blowing that day. It's not a matter of not being able to back it with code, it's not being able to find a code that says "yea" or "nay", so I am erring on the side of caution.


Pete, UF is in 'wiring methods' it is specifically allowed to be direct buried.

I suggest reading Article 340.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Peter D said:


> I don't agree they are clear at all.


What part of this is not clear?? 

(E) Splices and Taps. Direct-buried conductors or cables
shall be permitted to be spliced or tapped without the use of
splice boxes. The splices or taps shall be made in accordance
with 110.14(B).


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

BBQ said:


> No, that is not a direct bury conductor, UF is.


UF can be an individual conductor or a cable assembly. I am talking about a cable assembly with individual conductors inside of it. Using your logic, if I strip the jacket off of UF cable to expose the conductors inside I still have UF cable. Wrong. I have unmarked, unknown conductors in my hand.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

BBQ said:


> Pete, UF is in 'wiring methods' it is specifically allowed to be direct buried.



For the last time, that's not what I am talking about. I am perfectly aware that UF is rated to be buried.


----------



## oldtimer (Jun 10, 2010)

Peter D said:


> UF can be an individual conductor or a cable assembly. I am talking about a cable assembly with individual conductors inside of it. Using your logic, if I strip the jacket off of UF cable to expose the conductors inside I still have UF cable. Wrong. I have unmarked, unknown conductors in my hand.


 I believe the outer jacket of the cable, is what determines if it is suitable for different uses.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

This is from Article 340..

II. Installation
340.10 Uses Permitted. Type UF cable shall be permitted
as follows:
(1) For use underground, including direct burial in the
earth. For underground requirements, see 300.5.
(2)* As single-conductor cables*. Where installed as singleconductor
cables, all conductors of the feeder grounded
conductor or branch circuit, including the grounded
conductor and equipment grounding conductor, if any,
shall be installed in accordance with 300.3.


----------



## MF Dagger (Dec 24, 2007)

B4T said:


> This is from Article 340..
> 
> II. Installation
> 340.10 Uses Permitted. Type UF cable shall be permitted
> ...


This is an actual single conductor marked UF I believe. I've seen some in an older residential installation. It was very rubbery.


----------



## Jlarson (Jun 28, 2009)

B4T said:


> This is from Article 340..
> 
> II. Installation
> 340.10 Uses Permitted. Type UF cable shall be permitted
> ...


Actually I think that more is referring to actual single conductor UF. I have a chit ton of it around somewhere for tracer wire and cathodic protection.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

B4T said:


> This is from Article 340..
> 
> II. Installation
> 340.10 Uses Permitted. Type UF cable shall be permitted
> ...




What's your point?

14/2 UF with ground is not a single conductor cable, it's a cable assembly.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Jlarson said:


> Actually I think that more is referring to actual single conductor UF.



I agree with you.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Peter D said:


> For the last time, that's not what I am talking about. I am perfectly aware that UF is rated to be buried.


Right, and other than you instinct where is the NEC section that says it stops being rated for DB with the sheath off?

If I strip UF to enter it into a hand hole, how do I know that exposed section is even wet rated? The labeling has been removed.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Peter D said:


> What's your point?
> 
> 14/2 UF with ground is not a single conductor cable, it's a cable assembly.


One of the posts mentioned just skinning back the UF and throwing the conductors in the trench..

My point was they manufacture single conductors for that exact purpose and the only difference is the UF cable we are talking about is an assembly..


----------



## Mr. Sparkle (Jan 27, 2009)

5 pages on direct burial wire nuts in one night, B4T you are my hero.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

BBQ said:


> Right, and other than you instinct where is the NEC section that says it stops being rated for DB with the sheath off?
> 
> If I strip UF to enter it into a hand hole, how do I know that exposed section is even wet rated? The labeling has been removed.


Agreed. 

Now just admit you would never direct bury the conductors inside of UF and I'll be happy. :laughing:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

B4T said:


> One of the posts mentioned just skinning back the UF and throwing the conductors in the trench..
> 
> My point was they manufacture single conductors for that exact purpose and the only difference is the UF cable we are talking about is an assembly..


And I'd say if you're using real single conductor UF cable, the DB wire nuts are fine. If we are talking about multi conductor UF cable, then I'd say you have to encase the individual conductors with a proper listed splice kit.


----------



## MF Dagger (Dec 24, 2007)

B4T said:


> One of the posts mentioned just skinning back the UF and throwing the conductors in the trench..
> 
> My point was they manufacture single conductors for that exact purpose and the only difference is the UF cable we are talking about is an assembly..


The single conductor UF is much different than the individual conductor you find in a typical UF cable. It's much thicker for one thing.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Mr. Sparkle said:


> 5 pages on direct burial wire nuts in one night, B4T you are my hero.


I'm glad I brought it up.. :thumbup:

Now where is Ken hiding out..


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Peter D said:


> And I'd say if you're using real single conductor UF cable, the DB wire nuts are fine. If we are talking about multi conductor UF cable, then I'd say you have to encase the individual conductors with a proper listed splice kit.


And you would be wrong.. again.. :thumbsup:


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

Mr. Sparkle said:


> 5 pages on direct burial wire nuts in one night, B4T you are my hero.


Not bad for 1hour 29 minuts 92 posts..:laughing:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

B4T said:


> And you would be wrong.. again.. :thumbsup:



If you say so. I'm floored by your logic that showed me I am wrong. :no: :laughing:


----------



## RePhase277 (Feb 5, 2008)

You guys should just get a room already! Are those connectors listed as prophylactics too?:laughing:


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Peter D said:


> If you say so. I'm floored by your logic that showed me I am wrong. :no: :laughing:


It has been proven.. nothing more I can add.. :laughing::thumbup::laughing:


----------



## Jlarson (Jun 28, 2009)

I'm tossing this in. Using the nuts then putting some heat shrink or tape over it. Would that satisfy the "you can't bury an unmarked conductor" crowd?


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

InPhase277 said:


> You guys should just get a room already! Are those connectors listed as prophylactics too?:laughing:


Only when they are used for direct buried:laughing::thumbup::laughing:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

It boils down to this - if you need to splice UF cable and you throw those DB wirenuts on and bury it, I am saying that is hack work, plain and simple. That's the method the sprinkler guys use when they cut through a UF cable with their trencher. A professional would never use a method like that.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

B4T said:


> It has been proven.. nothing more I can add.. :laughing::thumbup::laughing:


Not really. I made my case. Dennis agreed with me. I'm quite happy someone else saw it my way. 

You still believe it's code legal to bury j-boxes in the ground, so your opinion is held on a lower level anyway. :laughing::thumbup::laughing:


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

Peter D said:


> It boils down to this - if you need to splice UF cable and you throw those DB wirenuts on and bury it, I am saying that is hack work, plain and simple. That's the method the sprinkler guys use when they cut through a UF cable with their trencher. A professional would never use a method like that.


Rigid metal conduit would be much better...:thumbup:


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Peter D said:


> It boils down to this - if you need to splice UF cable and you throw those DB wirenuts on and bury it, I am saying that is hack work, plain and simple. That's the method the sprinkler guys use when they cut through a UF cable with their trencher. A professional would never use a method like that.


I never said it wasn't hack or that it was a wiring method I wanted to use..

YOU are the one who said it needed a box to be code compliant..


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Jlarson said:


> I'm tossing this in. Using the nuts then putting some heat shrink or tape over it. Would that satisfy the "you can't bury an unmarked conductor" crowd?



Yeah, definitely. 

I'm sorry but a single piece of solid piece of #14 or #12 (THWN or whatever it is) directly buried doesn't inspire a great deal of long-term confidence.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

B4T said:


> I never said it wasn't hack or that it was a wiring method I wanted to use..
> 
> YOU are the one who said it needed a box to be code compliant..


A box _or_ a listed splice kit.


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

I say go for it :thumbsup: FTW


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Peter D said:


> A box _or_ a listed splice kit.


DB wire nuts are approved.. I am done with this.. :thumbsup:




Maybe not.. :jester:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

B4T said:


> DB wire nuts are approved.


Sure they are, for _DB rated conductors._


----------



## Mr. Sparkle (Jan 27, 2009)

HARRY304E said:


> Not bad for 1hour 29 minuts 92 posts..:laughing:


And if I know B4T he has 92 emails in his inbox from ET in the same amount of time....:whistling2:


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Mr. Sparkle said:


> And if I know B4T he has 92 emails in his inbox from ET in the same amount of time....:whistling2:


Box is empty.. 

But it is early yet.. :thumbup:


----------



## Jlarson (Jun 28, 2009)

B4T said:


> Box is empty..


Wait for it....


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Jlarson said:


> Wait for it....


Smart ass.. :laughing:


----------



## Robert Redditt (Jan 29, 2011)

Peter D said:


> UF can be an individual conductor or a cable assembly. I am talking about a cable assembly with individual conductors inside of it. Using your logic, if I strip the jacket off of UF cable to expose the conductors inside I still have UF cable. Wrong. I have unmarked, unknown conductors in my hand.


 

Use an approved UF splice kit for direct burial, with heat shrink, good as new, now switch on that irrigation water well.


----------



## DiegoXJ (Jul 29, 2010)

stirring the pot here, but what if you cut the UF down the center ground wire and leave the sheathing on the black and white conductors, then stick those in the direct burial nuts!


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

DiegoXJ said:


> stirring the pot here, but what if you cut the UF down the center ground wire and leave the sheathing on the black and white conductors, then stick those in the direct burial nuts!


You might have trouble seeing the colors and it really isn't necessary when using code compliant DB wire nuts..


----------



## lovethetrade (Apr 12, 2011)

Underground services are spliced underground.........

Not that I would bury a splice but if services are allowed why not with UF?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wN_sy8bzH_Y

1:49 in


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

lovethetrade said:


> Underground services are spliced underground.........
> 
> Not that I would bury a splice but if services are allowed why not with UF?
> 
> ...


I once spliced a swimming pool panel feeder under a koi pond with split bolts that I hand taped. That one haunts me to this day.

Sent from my iPhone using the ElectricianTalk Forum app. Please excuse my brevity.


----------



## Roger123 (Sep 23, 2007)

___________ _______


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

The UL White Book information for underground wire connectors says they can be used with UF only if specifically marked for that use. I don't see anything in the linked information that says that. Are the connectors in question specifically marked for use with UF?


> When so marked, sealed wire-connector systems may also be intended for use with conductors of single- or multiple-conductor underground feeder cable (Type UF), golf course sprinkler cable, underground low-energy cable, irrigation cable, or other cable with insulation acceptable for direct burial, below grade use, or wet locations.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

In my mind, UF is not cable if you haven't repaired the jacket also. It's a hacked up cable. All the listed UF splice kits I've ever seen address the repair of the cable jacket also.


----------



## nrp3 (Jan 24, 2009)

I wondered if it was a UL thing. I went to Cerro and Southwire and didn't find anything on splicing. I went to Ideal and 3m to look at splice kits and didn't find anything either. I wondered if this was one of those things that I was taught and had been doing so long that I thought it was the only way. I still don't buy the wirenut only thing though. It seems once the outer jacket is nicked its going to deteriorate.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

MDShunk said:


> In my mind, UF is not cable if you haven't repaired the jacket also. It's a hacked up cable. All the listed UF splice kits I've ever seen address the repair of the cable jacket also.


That's what I've been saying (in so many words) all along.


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

lovethetrade said:


> Underground services are spliced underground.........
> 
> Not that I would bury a splice but if services are allowed why not with UF?
> 
> ...


Splices are allowed with UF and IMO these connectors can be used. The problem is that the conductor itself must be protected and in a splice kit or jb. I can't believe I am still discussing this.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Dennis Alwon said:


> The problem is that the conductor itself must be protected and in a splice kit or jb.


That is only your opinion, no one has posted any code or any other type of reference to prove that is a fact.

I maintain that we can in fact direct bury UF splices using the wire nuts B4T linked to with out shrink tubing, without a JB.

Both 300.5 and 310.15 tell us we can.



> I can't believe I am still discussing this.


I can't believe you are still believe that 300.5 and 300.15 are wrong. :laughing:


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

I can't believe it's not butter.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

don_resqcapt19 said:


> The UL White Book information for underground wire connectors says they can be used with UF only if specifically marked for that use. I don't see anything in the linked information that says that. Are the connectors in question specifically marked for use with UF?



I think I have some in my office, I will look later.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

MDShunk said:


> I can't believe it's not butter.


It's Parkay! :jester:


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

BBQ said:


> That is only your opinion, no one has posted any code or any other type of reference to prove that is a fact.
> 
> I maintain that we can in fact direct bury UF splices using the wire nuts B4T linked to with out shrink tubing, without a JB.
> 
> ...


I don't believe 300.5 and 300.15 are wrong. I believe your interpretation is wrong. I gave articles to support it. The articles you mention say it is okay to splice underground cables & conductors without a box. 

When you strip UF it is no longer in the cable and thus is not permitted underground. The cable is but the conductors in the cable are not direct burial cables. So I can;t believe that you think this is legal. 

You never answered the question as to whether you would install it the way you described. I find article 300.5 & .15 quite clear so...... Yes my opinion and yes your opinion-- why is yours correct? It is your interpretation and no better than anyone else's.


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

Let me ask you this. Are the conductors in UF suitable for direct burial?


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

BBQ said:


> I maintain that we can in fact direct bury UF splices using the wire nuts B4T linked to with out shrink tubing, without a JB.


And I maintain you are wrong. 

If you had to put your name and warranty on a job, would you do it that way? I never would and I doubt you would either no matter what the code says. 

You can spout "The code says I can" all you want, but sometimes you have to apply common sense too.


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

The reason for 300.5 and 300.15, IMO, is to allow splices without boxes UG. It still must be done to code. Those wirenuts are suitable underground but the conductors inside UF are not- I don't think you need a code reference for that.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Someone should email Southwire, Cerro, Encore or whoever and ask if the conductors inside of typical UF cable can be directly buried.


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

Peter D said:


> Someone should email Southwire, Cerro, Encore or whoever and ask if the conductors inside of typical UF cable can be directly buried.


They cannot unless they are listed as db. otherwise why bother with the UF cable itself. The UF is listed as a cable assembly.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Dennis Alwon said:


> They cannot unless they are listed as db. otherwise why bother with the UF cable itself. The UF is listed as a cable assembly.



I agree, but it would go a long way towards ending this debate.


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

Peter D said:


> I agree, but it would go a long way towards ending this debate.


I would be embarrassed to asked that question.


----------



## Roger123 (Sep 23, 2007)

Dennis Alwon said:


> The reason for 300.5 and 300.15, IMO, is to allow splices without boxes UG. It still must be done to code. Those wirenuts are suitable underground but the conductors inside UF are not


I agree with you here Dennis, but the said wire nuts are listed for direct burial. So, if would seem that the wire nuts can be used for UG splices but the exposed UF Conductors would also have to be protected with a listed cover.


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

Peter D said:


> I agree, but it would go a long way towards ending this debate.


It looks like 300.5 the conductors in the cable must be rated for that use.
*
300.5 Underground Installations.
(A) Minimum Cover Requirements.​*​​​​Direct-buried cable
or conduit or other raceways shall be installed to meet the
minimum cover requirements of Table 300.5.​
*(B) Wet Locations.​*​​​​The interior of enclosures or raceways
installed underground shall be considered to be a wet location.
Insulated conductors and cables installed in these enclosures
or raceways in underground installations shall be listed for use
in wet locations and shall comply with 310.10(C). Any connections
or splices in an underground installation shall be approved​
for wet locations


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

Roger123 said:


> I agree with you here Dennis, but the said wire nuts are listed for direct burial. So, if would seem that the wire nuts can be used for UG splices but the exposed UF Conductors would also have to be protected with a listed cover.


Correct. If I had direct burial conductors, such as USE, then the wire nuts are compliant to splice them. Of course they wouldn't be big enough. A good use for those connectors, but not limited to, are in low voltage wiring to landscape lighting.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

Dennis Alwon said:


> Correct. If I had direct burial conductors, such as USE, then the wire nuts are compliant to splice them. Of course they wouldn't be big enough. A good use for those connectors, but not limited to, are in low voltage wiring to landscape lighting.


Actually, use is cable. Just unjacketed.

Sent from my iPhone using the ElectricianTalk Forum app. Please excuse my brevity.


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

MDShunk said:


> Actually, use is cable. Just unjacketed.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using the ElectricianTalk Forum app. Please excuse my brevity.


I agree and that was my response to BBQ when he asked why is cable used in 300.5. The difference is USE can be direct buried where UF conductors cannot.

Are these connectors listed for aluminum. Personally I would not want to splice aluminum underground with these connectors without another protection on it.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Peter D said:


> Someone should email Southwire, Cerro, Encore or whoever and ask if the conductors inside of typical UF cable can be directly buried.


That is a good idea but Article 340 already tells us that and nothing in 340 says 'as long as the jacket is on'.

It is exactly like the 'wet' requirements, 340 tells us UF is OK for wet environments, it does not say 'only when unstripped'


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Dennis Alwon said:


> The difference is USE can be direct buried where UF conductors cannot.


Dennis, you keep saying that like it is an NEC fact but it is not a fact it is just an opinion.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

HARRY304E said:


> It looks like 300.5 the conductors in the cable must be rated for that use.


No kidding Harry, thanks for coming in today. :laughing:


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

BBQ said:


> No kidding Harry, thanks for coming in today. :laughing:


I love you too....:laughing::laughing:


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

BBQ said:


> Dennis, you keep saying that like it is an NEC fact but it is not a fact it is just an opinion.


300.50(B) 2011 NEC..


*
(B) Wet Locations.​*​​​​The interior of enclosures or raceways
installed underground shall be considered to be a wet location.
Insulated conductors and cables installed in these enclosures
or raceways in underground installations shall be
listed for use in wet locations and shall comply with
310.10(C). Any connections or splices in an underground​
installation shall be approved for wet locations

*
(D) Splices.​*​​​​Direct burial cables shall be permitted to be
spliced or tapped without the use of splice boxes, provided
they are installed using materials suitable for the application.
The taps and splices shall be watertight and protected
from mechanical damage. Where cables are shielded, the​
shielding shall be continuous across the splice or tap.


----------



## Wirenuting (Sep 12, 2010)

B4T said:


> OK folks.. here is a great topic to debate..
> 
> I say these wire nuts are made to be used to connect UF conductors in dirt without any kind of box..
> 
> ...


I used these wirenuts this winter for the first time. Spliced line & low voltage wires in a box set in concrete in the street. It was for pop up bollards. They lasted until last week. Water got in the boxes and one by one the splices are failing. These boxes do have drains in them but you all know water always finds a home. 
I would trust them for direct burial in dry soil. Or use heat shrink around the whole splice.


----------



## lovethetrade (Apr 12, 2011)

BBQ said:


> Dennis, you keep saying that like it is an NEC fact but it is not a fact it is just an opinion.


So your basically saying we can lay THWN #14, #12 etc.. conductors directly in a trench without conduit or any protection? 

If the conductors inside UF are allowed to have direct contact with earth why do they even put a jacket on it then?................................:laughing:


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

Bob how can you say it isn't a fact. Do you really thing I can bury the conductors in UF without the jacket. Do say where does it state you can't. The code says it must be listed for db. It is not listed for db except as the assembly otherwise we wouldn't need to run it in a cable. You still have not answered the question present 3 times. 

How do I know it isn't listed for db-- it does not have any markings on it. That's how I know.


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

HARRY304E said:


> 300.50(B) 2011 NEC..


That's for over 600V


----------



## Mike_586 (Mar 24, 2009)

MDShunk said:


> In my mind, UF is not cable if you haven't repaired the jacket also. It's a hacked up cable. All the listed UF splice kits I've ever seen address the repair of the cable jacket also.





Peter D said:


> That's what I've been saying (in so many words) all along.


We've got the same...gap...in our code when it comes to this situation, but I agree with Pete and Dennis.

As for Harry's post, the conductors inside the cables have to be wet rated, it says nothing about DB ratings for the inner conductors.

Personally I'd use a listed splice kit, but if I was stuck and all I had were those DB rated wire nuts, I'd use them along with heat shrink and tape to protect the conductors. While the conductors are certainly wet rated, I highly doubt that they are rated for direct burial. The mechanical protection given by the cable jacket is what gives the whole assembly its direct burial rating.

The answer to that question won't be found in the NEC or CEC. It will be in the UL or CSA standards which both codes demand we abide by. 

Just a quick FYI to a lot of you guys in the US, there are dozens and dozens of UL/CSA standards that are identical articles part of either bi-national standards or tri-national standards that include Mexico. Depending on the CSA/UL standard, the CSA copy of the same document often costs about half what the American counterpart does.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Mike_586 said:


> The answer to that question won't be found in the NEC or CEC. It will be in the UL or CSA standards which both codes demand we abide by.



I have the UL standards, they do not clear it up.


----------



## lovethetrade (Apr 12, 2011)

BBQ said:


> I have the UL standards, they do not clear it up.


At least 4 other electricians say it's not allowed and not right so why keep talking about it?

If you wanna be a hack and bury exposed UF conductors and splices go for it:laughing:


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

Dennis Alwon said:


> That's for over 600V


Woops 

I see that now thanks Dennis..:thumbsup:


----------



## hotwire1955 (Jan 27, 2009)

Direct bury connectors need to be sealed, wire nuts are not ( White book)
(ZMWQ sealed wire -connector systems.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Dennis Alwon said:


> Bob how can you say it isn't a fact.


Because there is nothing in the NEC or UL that says it is a fact. That makes it an assumption,.



> Do you really thing I can bury the conductors in UF without the jacket.


Yes, I really think that for splices and taps the NEC allows exactly that per the code sections that I have quoted.

_I really think that._




> The code says it must be listed for db. It is not listed for db except as the assembly otherwise we wouldn't need to run it in a cable.


In my _opinion_ Article 340 tells us that UF is listed for DB.





> You still have not answered the question present 3 times.


Pretty sure I have at least a couple of times but again ...

How do I know it isn't listed for db-- it does not have any markings on it. That's how I know.[/QUOTE]

When I enter UF in the normal fashion into, ... lets say a PVC splice box located at grade. How do I know the stripped conductors in that box are listed for wet locations as the NEC requires? 

It does not have any markings on it.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

hotwire1955 said:


> Direct bury connectors need to be sealed, wire nuts are not ( White book)
> (ZMWQ sealed wire -connector systems.


The wire nuts we are talking about are sealed, they are UL listed for direct burial.


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

BBQ said:


> Because there is nothing in the NEC or UL that says it is a fact. That makes it an assumption,.{/quote]
> I disagree
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## 220/221 (Sep 25, 2007)

I only made it to page 4.

You guys have a lot of time on your hands today (yesterday?).

I'm not going to waste any more time by picking apart the exact wording in the NEC. 

*I know* that direct burying a uf splice with silicone filled wirenuts is completely unacceptabe hack work. I don't need any authority telling me otherwise.

There are several cases where the NEC is wrong. If they say it's right, it's still wrong.


----------



## Magnettica (Jan 23, 2007)

B4T said:


> OK folks.. here is a great topic to debate..
> 
> I say these wire nuts are made to be used to connect UF conductors in dirt without any kind of box..
> 
> ...


Ideal is crap. I bet these wire nuts are intended for use in a buried PVC box :thumbup:


----------



## Magnettica (Jan 23, 2007)

B4T said:


> OK folks.. here is a great topic to debate..
> 
> I say these wire nuts are made to be used to connect UF conductors in dirt without any kind of box..
> 
> ...


Ideal is crap. I bet these wire nuts are intended for use in a buried PVC box but NOT for direct contact with the dirt and scotchkote. dirt. Landscape LV :no: :thumbup:


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Dennis Alwon said:


> Right, listed for wet location. Now how is that DB.



We know that UF is listed for DB the same way we know UF is listed for wet locations. Article 340 tells us so.


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

Art. 340.12 Uses not permitted-- where subject to physical damage.

334.116 Sheath The overall sheath shall be flame retardant,: moisture, fungus and corrosive resistant; and suitable for direct burial. Remove it and then it is a guess if it is suitable for db. Without marking, NG. We know that uf is listed for wet location and the conductors inside are moisture resistant-- 340.112.

So 300.5 says we can splice without a box but does it say we can ignore all other requirements of the code. This is specifically stated in 340.10(3).

An underground wire nut is not a listed splice kit but an approved connection of conductors underground.


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

BBQ said:


> We know that UF is listed for DB the same way we know UF is listed for wet locations. Article 340 tells us so.


Yes it is list as an assembly not as individual conductors. There is nothiong in 340 that says the conductors are rated for DB but you keep saying they are.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

You never answered my question.

_Once we strip UF how do we know it is still listed for a wet location?_

And please don't tell me we know because the wire inside is type W because we don't know that. 



BTW, the NECH for 2011 tends to support your view BUT goes on to say that is the wire connectors are listed for the product (As Don asked above) then you can splice UF without a box.

So we need to get the wirenuts, I looked for a box here at my office but it is not here. 

When I get a box i will let you know either way what it says.


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

BBQ said:


> You never answered my question.
> 
> _Once we strip UF how do we know it is still listed for a wet location?_
> 
> And please don't tell me we know because the wire inside is type W because we don't know that.


I did answer that. Article 340.112 states the conductors must be moisture-resistant.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Dennis Alwon said:


> I did answer that. Article 340.112 states the conductors must be moisture-resistant.




Thanks, I did not see you post that.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Dennis Alwon said:


> Yes it is list as an assembly not as individual conductors. There is nothiong in 340 that says the conductors are rated for DB but you keep saying they are.


Whatever, you are going in circles now.

As I said, the NECH seems to support your view, but they also tell us if the connectors are listed for the product it is OK.

So maybe we will find it has to be the kit with the shrink tubing OR maybe we will see that the wire nuts linked to are listed for UF cable.

Until we get some more info on the wirenuts we are just spinning our wheels.


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

Well I am tired of spinning my wheels.:thumbsup: I called Southwire- lets see if they call back.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Dennis Alwon said:


> Well I am tired of spinning my wheels.:thumbsup: I called Southwire- lets see if they call back.


IMO it has nothing to do with Southwire, they cannot re-write the NEC.

Here are all the on line links for the connectors, unfortunately they do not mention any type of wiring method so we may not be able to use them at all.



WeatherProof™ and UnderGround™ Wire Connectors Brochure(PDF - 1782K)
 *Documentation*



UnderGround MSDS(PDF - 200K)
IDEAL Connector UL Listed Wire Combinations(PDF - 378K)
UnderGround™ Wire Connectors Spec Sheet(PDF - 36K)


----------



## nitro71 (Sep 17, 2009)

BBQ said:


> IMO it has nothing to do with Southwire, they cannot re-write the NEC.


I agree but Southwire is probably going to say that once you remove the outer sheathing the wire is no longer suitable for direct burial. That'd be my guess.


----------



## nrp3 (Jan 24, 2009)

No, but you have to use their product as they intend it to be used. I just couldn't find anything on either brands website that dictates how underground splicing is to be done with their products.


----------



## Shockdoc (Mar 4, 2010)

So what insulates the conductors from the earth now that the wirenut only insulates the splice? I wouldn't waste 2 cents on that junk, I'll stick to the old way of an epoxy kit and a 8" stub of 3/4 PVC.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

The real question in my mind is - even if the NEC allows the DB wire nuts without a sheath - would you actually use this method as a professional electrician? My guess is the vast majority would say no.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Peter D said:


> The real question in my mind is - even if the NEC allows the DB wire nuts without a sheath - would you actually use this method as a professional electrician? My guess is the vast majority would say no.


That has never been the issue.. now you are steering off course.. :no:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

B4T said:


> That has never been the issue.. now you are steering off course.. :no:


Please report back when you have something useful to contribute. :laughing::thumbup::laughing:


----------



## nrp3 (Jan 24, 2009)

So, if not in the code, not in the UL book, and apparently not from the manufacturers either, what next?


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

B4T said:


> That has never been the issue.. now you are steering off course.. :no:


I stand by everything I have said. I will state it once again - the conductors inside UF are not suitable for direct burial and cannot be directly buried without additional repair or extension of the outer jacket. 

That would seem like common sense to me, but this thread has proved that wrong.


----------



## RePhase277 (Feb 5, 2008)

Find Fault. Dig Hole.
Cut UF Cable. Expose Conductors.
Twist Wires. Install Direct Burial Connector.
Fill Hole with ScotchKote, Covering Splice.
Take Lunch, Having a Nice 12" SubWay Sandwich.
Fill ScotchKote Tar Pit with Dirt.
Make Map.
Go Home, Kick Dog.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Peter D said:


> I stand by everything I have said. I will state it once again - the conductors inside UF are not suitable for direct burial and cannot be directly buried without additional repair or extension of the outer jacket.
> 
> That would seem like common sense to me, but this thread has proved that wrong.


So the manufactures got it wrong when they say DB wire nuts.. UL approved.. for direct contact with dirt..

You still have not produced anything that says the conductors in UF are not suitable to be terminated in this way..

Why would a company like Ideal spend many thousands getting a product listed and approved if it was not up to NEC standards.. :blink:


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

nrp3 said:


> So, if not in the code, not in the UL book, and apparently not from the manufacturers either, what next?


It is in the code.. plain as day..

(E) Splices and Taps. Direct-buried conductors or cables
shall be permitted to be spliced or tapped without the use of
splice boxes. The splices or taps shall be made in accordance
with 110.14(B).


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

B4T said:


> So the manufactures got it wrong when they say DB wire nuts.. UL approved.. for direct contact with dirt..


This is how you usually argue. You set up a straw man that has nothing to do with the issue at hand. Not even worthy to refute. 



> You still have not produced anything that says the conductors in UF are not suitable to be terminated in this way..


Yes I did. We don't know what the conductors inside UF are rated for, so we can't automatically assume they are rated for DB. As Bob pointed out, we can't assume they are wet rated either. 



> Why would a company like Ideal spend many thousands getting a product listed and approved if it was not up to NEC standards.. :blink:


This is another nonsense question that has nothing to do with the issue at hand.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

B4T said:


> It is in the code.. plain as day..
> 
> (E) Splices and Taps. Direct-buried conductors or cables
> shall be permitted to be spliced or tapped without the use of
> ...



If you don't use a listed DB splice kit or other approved method, then you have to use a box.


----------



## lovethetrade (Apr 12, 2011)

i feel like this guy in the middle reading this thread:laughing:


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Peter D said:


> This is another nonsense question that has nothing to do with the issue at hand.


It has everything to do with the issue at hand..

The product is designed to allow me to splice conductors in dirt.. 

UF is a cable assembly that is allowed to be buried in dirt..

The conductors in UF are part of the assembly called UF..

I want a way of splicing UF conductors.. so I use DB wire nuts.. 

Why would they manufacture a cable called UF if the conductors were not suitable to be in contact with dirt?? :blink::blink:


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Peter D said:


> If you don't use a listed DB splice kit or other approved method, then you have to use a box.


Not what it says.. :no:

I don't need a box..


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

This answers the question about the conductors in UF..


340.112 Insulation. The conductors of Type UF shall be
one of the *moisture-resistant types* listed in Table
310.13(A) that is suitable for branch-circuit wiring or one
that is identified for such use. Where installed as a substitute
wiring method for NM cable, the conductor insulation
shall be rated 90°C (194°F).


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

B4T, with all due respect, as long as you continue to insist that your buried boxes are a legal method, I'm going to hold your interpretations of the NEC at arms length. If you can't discern that it's a code violation to bury junction boxes, how do you expect me to take this issue seriously from you?


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Peter D said:


> B4T, with all due respect, as long as you continue to insist that your buried boxes are a legal method, I'm going to hold your interpretations of the NEC at arms length. If you can't discern that it's a code violation to bury junction boxes, how do you expect me to take this issue seriously from you?


That has never been the issue.. now you are steering off course.. again.. :no:

You have been ranting about the conductors in UF and I posted the code article related to their specifications..

Now you bring PVC boxes into the conversation.. nice try at creating a diversion from the truth.. which is.. 

DB wire nuts don't need a box and can be in direct contact with dirt.. :thumbup:


----------



## Robert Redditt (Jan 29, 2011)

lovethetrade said:


> i feel like this guy in the middle reading this thread:laughing:


 
LOL, I got to ride in that van when part of that movie was filmed in Fort Morgan, Colorado.


----------



## hotwire1955 (Jan 27, 2009)

You all can go round and round on this but when it's inspected I bet 99% of inspectors will fail the use of sealed wire nuts splicing for branch circuits or feeders using type UF cable in direct contact :thumbdown:


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

hotwire1955 said:


> You all can go round and round on this but when it's inspected I bet 99% of inspectors will fail the use of sealed wire nuts splicing for branch circuits or feeders using type UF cable in direct contact :thumbdown:


And I will ask what code article are you basing your decision to fail my inspection.. 

Just because you don't like it doesn't count..


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

B4T said:


> That has never been the issue.. now you are steering off course.. again.. :no:
> 
> You have been ranting about the conductors in UF and I posted the code article related to their specifications..


You're just repeating everything BBQ has said. The code section you provided said moisture resistant. There is a world of difference between that and direct burial rated. So we know for certain they are wet rated, but we do not know if they are DB rated. I will bet you a can of Schotchkote that they are not. 




> Now you bring PVC boxes into the conversation.. nice try at creating a diversion from the truth.. which is..


It wasn't a diversion. I'm pointing out that you aren't able to interpret the code correctly, certainly not on this issue of buried boxes. Therefore I don't take your opinions on NEC matters as seriously as I would Dennis, BBQ, etc. 



> DB wire nuts don't need a box and can be in direct contact with dirt.. :thumbup:


I agree. It's the conductors they are connected to that is the problem.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

hotwire1955 said:


> You all can go round and round on this but when it's inspected I bet 99% of inspectors will fail the use of sealed wire nuts splicing for branch circuits or feeders using type UF cable in direct contact :thumbdown:



As they should because it's a hack job. :thumbup:


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Peter D said:


> You're just repeating everything BBQ has said. The code section you provided said moisture resistant. There is a world of difference between that and direct burial rated. So we know for certain they are wet rated, but we do not know if they are DB rated. I will bet you a can of Schotchkote that they are not.
> 
> It wasn't a diversion. I'm pointing out that you aren't able to interpret the code correctly, certainly not on this issue of buried boxes. Therefore I don't take your opinions on NEC matters as seriously as I would Dennis, BBQ, etc.
> 
> ...


You refuse to accept the truth and I can't help you.. :no:

I am still waiting for you to show me where I need a box to splice UF conductors if using DB wire nuts..

You don't like the way I interpret the code.. fine.. but you have STILL failed to show me where I am wrong..


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Peter D said:


> As they should because it's a hack job. :thumbup:


I agree it is a hack job... BUT still code compliant and nothing you have said in the past (2) days has changed that.. :thumbup:


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

InPhase277 said:


> Find Fault. Dig Hole.
> Cut UF Cable. Expose Conductors.
> Twist Wires. Install Direct Burial Connector.
> Fill Hole with ScotchKote, Covering Splice.
> ...



Hey no kicking Dogs...:laughing:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

B4T said:


> You refuse to accept the truth and I can't help you.. :no:
> 
> I am still waiting for you to show me where I need a box to splice UF conductors if using DB wire nuts..


Oh my word are you being dense right now. I never said you needed a box.


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

B4T said:


> You refuse to accept the truth and I can't help you.. :no:
> 
> I am still waiting for you to show me where I need a box to splice UF conductors if using DB wire nuts..
> 
> You don't like the way I interpret the code.. fine.. but you have STILL failed to show me where I am wrong..


Show me the marking on the wirenut box that says you can splice multiconductor UF with just those connectors and nothing else.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

B4T said:


> nothing you have said in the past (2) days has changed that.. :thumbup:


I'm ok with that. Dennis agrees with me as well as a few others I respect, so it's all good.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

don_resqcapt19 said:


> Show me the marking on the wirenut box that says you can splice multiconductor UF with just those connectors and nothing else.


All the information about this product can be found here..

http://www.idealindustries.com/products/wire_termination/twist-on/underground.jsp


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

B4T said:


> All the information about this product can be found here..
> 
> http://www.idealindustries.com/products/wire_termination/twist-on/underground.jsp



Which doesn't answer the question he asked at all. :no:


----------



## nrp3 (Jan 24, 2009)

They talk about people needed to use resin packs etc normally, but don't come out and say that this would legally ok to use. Nothing specifically says do it. Doesn't say don't either.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Peter D said:


> Which doesn't answer the question he asked at all. :no:


I don't have a box of these wire nuts in front of me.. 

The web site is a great place to find the answer to your questions..


----------



## nrp3 (Jan 24, 2009)

I don't see any answers there either.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Peter D said:


> Oh my word are you being dense right now. *I never* *said you needed a box*.


How fast you forget the truth.. :no:

You told me in a PM I needed a box.. we went in circles over it and you suggested I start a thread..

Read post #1.. is says right there about a member of this forum saying I needed a box for DB wire nuts.. :no:

You really like to twist the truth don't you.. nice try..


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

nrp3 said:


> I don't see any answers there either.


Any answers for what question??


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

B4T said:


> How fast you forget the truth.. :no:
> 
> You told me in a PM I needed a box.. we went in circles over it and you suggested I start a thread..
> 
> ...


OK, let me state it again, so you get it this time - if you don't use a listed direct burial method to splice UF cable, then you need to use a box. 

So far nobody has been able to prove that these wire nuts are listed for direct burial use with UF cable. Therefore, you need to use a box. 

Is that clear enough for you?


----------



## nrp3 (Jan 24, 2009)

What we've been arguing over for two days. It just tap dances around the subject. Neither proves or disproves whether you can use it for uf or not.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

B4T said:


> Any answers for what question??


----------



## nrp3 (Jan 24, 2009)

Did anyone ask Ideal for a clarification?


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Peter D said:


> OK, let me state it again, so you get it this time - if you don't use a listed direct burial method to splice UF cable, then you need to use a box.
> 
> So far nobody has been able to prove that these wire nuts are listed for direct burial use with UF cable. Therefore, you need to use a box.
> 
> Is that clear enough for you?


From the website... "•*UL listed to 486D for use for direct burial"*
Is that clear enough for you?... :blink::blink:


----------



## nrp3 (Jan 24, 2009)

Not really.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

nrp3 said:


> Did anyone ask Ideal for a clarification?


Read the webpage.. it is clear as a bell what the product is designed for..

There really is no mystery here.. just a bunch of guy who can't accept the fact that this product is code compliant..


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

B4T said:


> From the website... "•*UL listed to 486D for use for direct burial"*
> Is that clear enough for you?... :blink::blink:



*shakes head*

I never once said they aren't rated for direct burial, but you keep bringing that up. The question is, are they rated for use with UF cable. And if you use them with UF cable, how do you bury an unmarked, unlisted conductor legally?


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

B4T said:


> There really is no mystery here.. just a bunch of guy who can't accept the fact that this product is code compliant..


It's code compliant. Just not for UF cable.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Peter D said:


> It's code compliant. Just not for UF cable.


According to you, but not Ideal Industries..


----------



## hotwire1955 (Jan 27, 2009)

B4T said:


> And I will ask what code article are you basing your decision to fail my inspection..
> 
> Just because you don't like it doesn't count..


 That would be 110.2 Approval Show me something from the cable manufacturer that says you can remove the jacket and have the exposed conductors in direct contact with earth then ok if not I would say fail.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

B4T said:


> According to you, but not Ideal Industries..



You've provided no evidence from Ideal that they are listed and approved for splicing UF cable, so don't give me that nonsense.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

hotwire1955 said:


> That would be 110.2 Approval Show me something from the cable manufacturer that says you can remove the jacket and have the *exposed conductors *in direct contact with earth then ok if not I would say fail.


I would say this answers your question..


340.112 Insulation. The conductors of Type UF shall be
one of the* moisture-resistant types *listed in Table
310.13(A) that is suitable for branch-circuit wiring or one
that is identified for such use. Where installed as a substitute
wiring method for NM cable, the conductor insulation
shall be rated 90°C (194°F).


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

B4T said:


> I would say this answers your question..
> 
> 
> 340.112 Insulation. The conductors of Type UF shall be
> ...


Nope, doesn't answer it at all. "Moisture resistant" doesn't tell me it's good for direct burial. THWN is moisture resistant but not rated for DB.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Peter D said:


> Nope, doesn't answer it at all. "Moisture resistant" doesn't tell me it's good for direct burial. THWN is moisture resistant but not rated for DB.


UF cable is rated for direct burial.. the conductors inside of the cable have to be rated for the same environment.. 

You can't get to the conductors without removing the outer covering and IMO it has to be the same construction material that makes up the cable assembly itself.. 

THWN would be rated for direct burial if it was part of a cable assembly labeled UF.. since it is moisture resistant


----------



## hotwire1955 (Jan 27, 2009)

B4T said:


> I would say this answers your question..
> 
> 
> 340.112 Insulation. The conductors of Type UF shall be
> ...


 Like I said show me ! Moisture-resistant and direct contact are not the same. Fail:thumbdown:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

B4T said:


> UF cable is rated for direct burial.. the conductors inside of the cable have to be rated for the same environment..


That's absurd. If I bury PVC conduit, which is rated for DB, do I need to install direct burial conductors in it as well? Of course not. 



> You can't get to the conductors without removing the outer covering and IMO it has to be the same construction material that makes up the cable assembly itself..


Again this is absurd. 



> THWN would be rated for direct burial if it was part of a cable assembly labeled UF.. since it is moisture resistant


If you say so. :laughing: THWN is not listed or rated for direct burial.


----------



## Magnettica (Jan 23, 2007)

Peter D said:


> OK, let me state it again, so you get it this time - if you don't use a listed direct burial method to splice UF cable, then you need to use a box.
> 
> So far nobody has been able to prove that these wire nuts are listed for direct burial use with UF cable. Therefore, you need to use a box.
> 
> Is that clear enough for you?


The question is does the box need to be listed for use with fertilizer.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Magnettica said:


> The question is does the box need to be listed for use with fertilizer.


:laughing:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

I'm out. Time for bed. :yawn:


----------



## Big John (May 23, 2010)

B4T said:


> ....THWN would be rated for direct burial if it was part of a cable assembly labeled UF.. since it is moisture resistant


 I haven't been following this whole thing, but I will say that a water-resistant rating is totally different than direct-burial rating.

Very often SJ and SO cords are type "W" water resistant and without a doubt if you bury that cord it will rot away in pretty short order.

I don't know what has to be done to make insulated DB rated, but it's more than just a water proofing.

-John


----------



## Magnettica (Jan 23, 2007)

^^

"Carlon box expert" :laughing:


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

Peter D said:


> I'm out. Time for bed. :yawn:


Don't go to bed..


----------



## nrp3 (Jan 24, 2009)

Beat this horse some more tomorrow?


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

nrp3 said:


> Beat this horse some more tomorrow?



What type of horse is it..:laughing:


----------



## Mike_586 (Mar 24, 2009)

B4T said:


> DB wire nuts don't need a box and can be in direct contact with dirt.. :thumbup:


Let me see if I got this straight. Your saying that since UF-B is listed for direct burial, so are all the THHN conductors contained inside.

Then by your logic it would be absolutely no different to take a piece of PVC jacketed MC rated for direct burial and making splices to the THHN/THWN conductors using those DB wire nuts. Because the jacketed MC assembly is UL rated for direct burial, then by extension so are the inner THNN conductors that magically maintain the direct burial rating when they extend past the protective jacket/armor.

Am I following your logic correctly?


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

From UL White Book



> CONDUCTOR TYPES
> Sealed wire-connector systems are intended for use with Types USE,
> RHW, XHHW, RW90 EP, RW90 XLPE or TWU, 30 AWG through 2000 kcmil
> copper or aluminum conductors with currents not exceeding the ampacity
> ...


From Ideal



> Usage
> 
> WARNING:
> One time use only. Do not reuse
> ...


Also From Ideal



> Applications
> 
> Low-voltage landscape lighting
> Lawn-sprinkler control systems
> ...


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

Big John said:


> I haven't been following this whole thing, but I will say that a water-resistant rating is totally different than direct-burial rating.
> 
> Very often SJ and SO cords are type "W" water resistant and without a doubt if you bury that cord it will rot away in pretty short order.
> 
> ...


300.5 ( E )States that conductors shall permitted to be spliced Direct buried.
So what type of conductors are they if not with the designation "w".?


*
(E) Splices and Taps.​*​​​​Direct-buried conductors or cables
shall be permitted to be spliced or tapped without the use of
splice boxes. The splices or taps shall be made in accordance​
with 110.14(B).


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Mike_586 said:


> Let me see if I got this straight. Your saying that since UF-B is listed for direct burial, so are all the THHN conductors contained inside.
> 
> Then by your logic it would be absolutely no different to take a piece of PVC jacketed MC rated for direct burial and making splices to the THHN/THWN conductors using those DB wire nuts. Because the jacketed MC assembly is UL rated for direct burial, then by extension so are the inner THNN conductors that magically maintain the direct burial rating when they extend past the protective jacket/armor.
> 
> ...


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Dennis Alwon said:


> From UL White Book
> 
> 
> CONDUCTOR TYPES
> ...


Dennis.. so now do you agree that DB wire nuts are code compliant and would pass inspection?


----------



## Mike_586 (Mar 24, 2009)

For some reason this one has me a little engaged. I guess being at home for the last few months, and the weather sucking bad today, I just didn't have much else to do :laughing: (Shoulder is mostly healed up and I'm cleared to go back to work in a couple weeks...I'm looking forward to it.)

Back to the topic at hand.... 

Most of the specs I saw heavily suggest the inner conductors in UF-B are either THHN or THWN, several wholesalers descriptions described it as THHN. Just about every manufacturer listed only the outer jacket as the one with the extra moisture, mildew and sunlight resistant properties.

Comparing THHN or any other wet/dry type of conductor to direct burial conductors like USE-2, RWU, TWU or single conductor UF-B to name a few and there's a pretty massive difference in insulation thickness. A #14 of any of them would look more like a #10 to #8 THNN.

There's just absolutely no way those conductors in UF-B could be mistaken for any single conductors I've ever seen that are direct burial rated.

A dozen pages without straying off topic...

...this has got to be some kind of ET record :laughing:


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

B4T said:


> Dennis.. so know do you agree that DB wire nuts are code compliant and would pass inspection?


Now I agree that are compliant and would pass inspection but not if the uf conductors are exposed.

Look at the applications-- doesn't seem to even allow line voltage underground. Not sure whether they listed all applications or not. Also the usage says to follow all codes. I still say the conductors are not DB so you cannot leave the UF stripped underground without a listed splice kit.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Mike_586 said:


> For some reason this one has me a little engaged. I guess being at home for the last few months, and the weather sucking bad today, I just didn't have much else to do :laughing: (Shoulder is mostly healed up and I'm cleared to go back to work in a couple weeks...I'm looking forward to it.)
> 
> Back to the topic at hand....
> 
> ...


It all goes back to the rating of the conductors inside the UF.. this spells out the requirements for those conductors..

340.112 Insulation. The conductors of Type UF shall be
one of the moisture-resistant types listed in Table
310.13(A) that is suitable for branch-circuit wiring or one
that is identified for such use. Where installed as a substitute
wiring method for NM cable, the conductor insulation
shall be rated 90°C (194°F).


----------



## Jlarson (Jun 28, 2009)

Dennis Alwon said:


> Look at the applications-- doesn't seem to even allow line voltage underground. Not sure whether they listed all applications or not.


I think that applications list is more of a target list. Like hey buy our nuts, they are perfect for applications a, b, and c because of reasons x, y, and z.


----------



## Jlarson (Jun 28, 2009)

B4T said:


> Dennis.. so now do you agree that DB wire nuts are code compliant and would pass inspection?


I'm gonna add some fuel to the fire here. The part in the UL section about multi-conductor UF may actually be referring to un-jacketed multi-conductor. Its separate UF conductors, marked as such twisted together into a cable.


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

Mike_586 said:


> For some reason this one has me a little engaged. I guess being at home for the last few months, and the weather sucking bad today, I just didn't have much else to do :laughing: (Shoulder is mostly healed up and I'm cleared to go back to work in a couple weeks...I'm looking forward to it.)
> 
> Back to the topic at hand....
> 
> ...


This is only page 5 for me , 

I have mine set for 50 posts per page just for major League Threads like this..:thumbup::laughing::laughing:


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

IMO it would place a voltage limitation if line voltage was not included in the applications..

Some of the devices listed are mostly line voltage..


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

Jlarson said:


> I'm gonna add some fuel to the fire here. The part in the UL section about multi-conductor UF may actually be referring to un-jacketed multi-conductor. Its separate UF conductors, marked as such twisted together into a cable.


unjacket uf cable??? I would call that USE cable not UF


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

Jlarson said:


> I think that applications list is more of a target list. Like hey buy our nuts, they are perfect for applications a, b, and c because of reasons z, y, and z.



What happend to "X"..:laughing:


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

I give up- bed time. I don't see how I will change my mind on this, IMO, it is not compliant with the UF conductors exposed. Obviously those that want to believe it is compliant can go ahead and do the install. I expect by now I can't chnage your mind. I would never do it that way.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Jlarson said:


> I'm gonna add some fuel to the fire here. The part in the UL section about multi-conductor UF may actually be referring to un-jacketed multi-conductor. Its separate UF conductors, marked as such twisted together into a cable.


14/2.. 14/3.. 14/4..ETC.. UF are multi-conductor cables.. this is what they are referring too.. IMO


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Dennis Alwon said:


> I would never do it that way.


I would not either and that was never the intent of the OP.. only to debate if DB wire nuts were code compliant and if they needed a box..


----------



## Jlarson (Jun 28, 2009)

Dennis Alwon said:


> unjacket uf cable??? I would call that USE cable not UF


I get twisted well pump cable that is marked UF from time to time.


----------



## Big John (May 23, 2010)

HARRY304E said:


> 300.5 ( E )States that conductors shall permitted to be spliced Direct buried.
> So what type of conductors are they if not with the designation "w"...?


 I think 310.10(F) says conductors used for direct burial shall be identified for that use. The UL Wire and Cable Marking Guide doesn't seem to identify individual conductors for direct burial beyond triplex type USE that's sold that way.

Everything else appears to be listed cable assemblies that would normally be marked for direct burial: Tray cable, fire alarm cable, UF, etc.

-John
*
*


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

Big John said:


> I think 310.10(F) says conductors used for direct burial shall be identified for that use. The UL Wire and Cable Marking Guide doesn't seem to identify individual conductors for direct burial beyond triplex type USE that's sold that way.
> 
> Everything else appears to be listed cable assemblies that would normally be marked for direct burial: Tray cable, fire alarm cable, UF, etc.
> 
> -John


It would help if the wire nut box stated what type of cable you can use for them..


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

HARRY304E said:


> It would help if the wire nut box stated what type of cable you can use for them..


If not marked on the box, the UL listing only permits these wire nuts to be used with


> Sealed wire-connector systems are intended for use with Types USE, RHW, XHHW, RW90 EP, RW90 XLPE or TWU, 30 AWG through 2000 kcmil copper or aluminum conductors with currents not exceeding the ampacity of insulated conductors rated either 75 or 90°C and intended for use at 600 V or less.


If marked on the box they may be used with the following:


> When so marked, sealed wire-connector systems may also be intended for use with conductors of single- or multiple-conductor underground feeder cable (Type UF), golf course sprinkler cable, underground low-energy cable, irrigation cable, or other cable with insulation acceptable for direct burial, below grade use, or wet locations.


Until someone can show me the required marking to permit the use of these wire nuts with UF, I will continue to say such use is a code violation.


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

don_resqcapt19 said:


> If not marked on the box, the UL listing only permits these wire nuts to be used with
> If marked on the box they may be used with the following:
> 
> Until someone can show me the required marking to permit the use of these wire nuts with UF, I will continue to say such use is a code violation.



I agree i have never been a fan of using Type UF cable anyway.

I just run pipe for my under ground at least you can make changes if something goes wrong.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

don_resqcapt19 said:


> Until someone can show me the required marking to permit the use of these wire nuts with UF, I will continue to say such use is a code violation.


Dennis posted this #231..

CONDUCTOR TYPES
Sealed wire-connector systems are intended for use with Types USE,
RHW, XHHW, RW90 EP, RW90 XLPE or TWU, 30 AWG through 2000 kcmil
copper or aluminum conductors with currents not exceeding the ampacity
of insulated conductors rated either 75 or 90°C and intended for use at 600
V or less.
When so marked, sealed wire-connector systems may also be intended for
use with conductors of single- or multiple-conductor underground feeder
cable (*Type UF*), golf course sprinkler cable, underground low-energy cable,
irrigation cable, or other cable with insulation acceptable for direct burial,
below grade use, or wet locations.


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

B4T said:


> Dennis posted this #231..
> 
> CONDUCTOR TYPES
> Sealed wire-connector systems are intended for use with Types USE,
> ...



That is exactly what Don was saying. Unless the connector is marked for UF then it is a no go.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Dennis Alwon said:


> That is exactly what Don was saying. Unless the connector is marked for UF then it is a no go.


They are UL approved for DB applications.. that is type UF.. :blink:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

B4T said:


> They are UL approved for DB applications.. that is type UF.. :blink:


You don't understand listing and labeling. That is why you keep saying that.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

B4T said:


> They are UL approved for DB applications.. that is type UF.. :blink:


But the listing, which was quoted for you, specifically says that type UF cable must be specifically called out by name on the product packaging for it to be compliantly used on type UF cable.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

B4T said:


> It all goes back to the rating of the conductors inside the UF.. this spells out the requirements for those conductors..
> 
> 340.112 Insulation. The conductors of Type UF shall be
> one of the moisture-resistant types listed in Table
> ...


And once again, it says nothing about the conductors inside of UF being suitable for DB. The cable assembly itself is rated for DB. 

The very section you quote disproves your assertion. The conductors inside are only required to be moisture resistant, not DB. The DB rating comes from the solid plastic sheath over the conductors.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

I just sent an e-mail and link to Ideal for someone in the company to chime in on the debate..


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Just got a reply from Ideal:

"Yes, the "DB" and all Direct Burial connectors can be used on "UF" type
cable. However, a heat shrink tubing or similar material must be used to
complete the over jack on the "UF" cable.

Typically the conductor in type UF cable is insulated with a THHN or
similar type insulation. Then the THHN insulated wires are covered with a
moisture resistant covering. It is this covering that must be reinstated
with the heat shrink tubing or similar material."


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

B4T said:


> Just got a reply from Ideal:
> 
> "Yes, the "DB" and all Direct Burial connectors can be used on "UF" type
> cable. However, a heat shrink tubing or similar material must be used to
> ...


Oh gee what a surprise. :laughing: Too me that was obvious


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

B4T said:


> Just got a reply from Ideal:
> 
> "Yes, the "DB" and all Direct Burial connectors can be used on "UF" type
> cable. However, a heat shrink tubing or similar material must be used to
> ...


 Without a marking on the package that says you can use these connectors with UF, such use is a 110.3(B) violation. It doesn't matter what Ideal says in an e-mail or on their website. The listing requires that it be spelled out on the connector package.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

don_resqcapt19 said:


> Without a marking on the package that says you can use these connectors with UF, such use is a 110.3(B) violation. It doesn't matter what Ideal says in an e-mail or on their website. The listing requires that it be spelled out on the connector package.


I agree. It would seem the only compliant way to splice UF cable is with a listed splice kit or an above ground junction box.


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

Peter D said:


> I agree. It would seem the only compliant way to splice UF cable is with a listed splice kit or an above ground junction box.


They do make below ground JB's so I believe that would be compliant also.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Dennis Alwon said:


> Oh gee what a surprise. :laughing: Too me that was obvious


But you don't work for Ideal..


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

B4T said:


> But you don't work for Ideal..


I don't need to work for ideal. I read the NEC and used that as my guide. You all read it differently and quite frankly I don't see it at all. It seems clear to me.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Dennis Alwon said:


> They do make below ground JB's so I believe that would be compliant also.


Agreed.




Dennis Alwon said:


> I don't need to work for ideal. I read the NEC and used that as my guide. You all read it differently and quite frankly I don't see it at all. It seems clear to me.



Agreed X2.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

don_resqcapt19 said:


> Without a marking on the package that says you can use these connectors with UF, such use is a 110.3(B) violation. It doesn't matter what Ideal says in an e-mail or on their website. The listing requires that it be spelled out on the connector package.


I just sent this quote to Ideal..


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Dennis Alwon said:


> Oh gee what a surprise. :laughing: Too me that was obvious


It's obvious to me as well. Directly burying THWN/THHN insulated wires is wrong. But no, we have an entire thread debating that and other points. :blink:


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

Peter D said:


> It's obvious to me as well. Directly burying THWN/THHN insulated wires is wrong. But no, we have an entire thread debating that and other points. :blink:


Only 269 posts.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

OK, so it is settled, these particular underground splices are not rated for UF cable.

Just so no one says I did not admit that, I will repeat it.

*These particular underground splices are not rated for UF cable.
*
But other splices and taps are listed for direct burial of UF without j-boxes.

I will say this, ...... the only person that proved this was Don. Don was the only one that provided a reference. The rest of you were content to use your gut which is exactly what we hate inspectors to do.

So to Don I say thanks, to the others I suggest that you don't take inspection jobs.


----------



## Foestauf (Jan 5, 2011)

BBQ said:


> OK, so it is settled, these particular underground splices are not rated for UF cable.
> 
> Just so no one says I did not admit that, I will repeat it.
> 
> ...


271 posts later.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

BBQ said:


> to the others I suggest that you don't take inspection jobs.


You would have to include yourself in that category since you didn't prove it either. 

Besides the listing and labeling issue, I stand by my belief that the conductors inside UF are not listed or suitable for direct burial, and cannot be directly buried without additional protection. Only a hack would bury UF cable without maintaining integrity of the outer cable jacket. Call me "using my gut" or not being able to make a competent inspection, I'm fine with that. But I would be happy to assume that the vast majority of people here silently agree with me.


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

BBQ said:


> OK, so it is settled, these particular underground splices are not rated for UF cable.
> 
> Just so no one says I did not admit that, I will repeat it.
> 
> ...


*


Can you tell me what reference Don provided that helped?*


----------



## Mike_586 (Mar 24, 2009)

I'm assuming the one that referenced 110.3(B)


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

Mike_586 said:


> I'm assuming the one that referenced 110.3(B)


I don't think so. I was thinking it was the UL info.


----------



## Roger123 (Sep 23, 2007)

BBQ said:


> to the others I suggest that you don't take inspection jobs.


You were one of a few that made a strong argument they were compliant, so take your own advice and "don't take an inspection job."


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

BBQ said:


> OK, so it is settled, these particular underground splices are not rated for UF cable.
> 
> Just so no one says I did not admit that, I will repeat it.
> 
> ...


The man from Ideal said they were rated for UF splices.. are you saying Ideal does not know what they are talking about? :blink:


----------



## Jlarson (Jun 28, 2009)

B4T said:


> The man from Ideal said they were rated for UF splices.. are you saying Ideal does not know what they are talking about? :blink:


Yeah they are good for UF according to Ideal, now is it marked on the package or product? That's whats needed to meet the wording of this:



> CONDUCTOR TYPES
> Sealed wire-connector systems are intended for use with Types USE,
> RHW, XHHW, RW90 EP, RW90 XLPE or TWU, 30 AWG through 2000 kcmil
> copper or aluminum conductors with currents not exceeding the ampacity
> ...


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

B4T said:


> The man from Ideal said they were rated for UF splices.. are you saying Ideal does not know what they are talking about? :blink:


Ideals response was that you have to protect the wire in the UF- which many of us said many times. I also mentioned the UL article long ago. There were reference upon reference but we got no credit but rather get debase for it. Why is that not surprising?

I also called southwire and even though Bob doesn't think it is pertinent it is very much so. Southwire says that UF has THHN/THWN insulation and they are not direct burial conductors. I think that was also mentioned but we better all give up our hopes of inspecting.


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

Jlarson said:


> Yeah they are good for UF according to Ideal, now is it marked on the package or product? That's whats needed to meet the wording of this:


I think the issue is that they are fine to use on UF anytime because they are connectors. They just can't be used without an approved splice kit. IMO, the wirenuts do not need to be rated to splice the conductors in UF.

Oh. no I see another long argument coming.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

B4T said:


> The man from Ideal said they were rated for UF splices.. are you saying Ideal does not know what they are talking about? :blink:


Yes, that's what is being stated. Why do you put such confidence in a manufacturer's rep? They are not infallible and neither is the NEC.

Perhaps now that Ideal is aware of this issue, they will adjust their product specs accordingly. Hint hint to the Ideal rep.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Dennis Alwon said:


> I also called southwire and even though Bob doesn't think it is pertinent it is very much so. Southwire says that UF has THHN/THWN insulation and they are not direct burial conductors. I think that was also mentioned but we better all give up our hopes of inspecting.


I just put my electrical licenses in the shredder. :laughing:


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

Peter D said:


> I just put my electrical licenses in the shredder. :laughing:


I am going to sell my on ebay. :laughing:


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

B4T said:


> The man from Ideal said they were rated for UF splices.. are you saying Ideal does not know what they are talking about? :blink:


That is exactly what I am saying!!! Even with the statement that you have to add heat shrink, the product does not meet the listing requirements. It would need to be a listed tested combination of parts to be compliant with 110.3(B). Remember it is the manufacturer's job to sell product.

I asked a manufacturer of non-listed liquidtight flexible metal conduit, why they still make it as it has been illegal to use since the 1996 code. His reply, it is not illegal to sell it...only illegal to install it and customers what to buy it so we make it and sell it.


----------



## Salvatoreg02 (Feb 26, 2011)

After carefully reading article 340 and 310.13(a) you can not use direct burial wire nuts that Ideal or similar brand. You can use them in a junction box though.

Sent from my iPhone using ET Forum


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Peter D said:


> Why do you put such confidence in a manufacturer's rep? They are not infallible and neither is the NEC.


I gave the Ideal rep a chance to reply.. but I am still waiting for a second reply from them..

Nothing wrong with getting information from the company who manufactured the product and spent the money for UL certification.. 

I would hope my e-mail got sent upstairs and someone from the company would take the time to read this thread..


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

don_resqcapt19 said:


> That is exactly what I am saying!!! Even with the statement that you have to add heat shrink, the product does not meet the listing requirements. It would need to be a listed tested combination of parts to be compliant with 110.3(B). Remember it is the manufacturer's job to sell product.
> 
> I asked a manufacturer of non-listed liquidtight flexible metal conduit, why they still make it as it has been illegal to use since the 1996 code. His reply, it is not illegal to sell it...only illegal to install it and customers what to buy it so we make it and sell it.


I am not sure I agree with this. If the heat shrink or other products are listed for direct burial of UF then I don't believe the connector matters. I have always used stakons with the poured epoxy kits. IMO, the kit complies the wire nut is listed for connecting wires.

The UL statement says underground splicing systems. The connectors are often not part of the underground splicing kit.


----------



## nrp3 (Jan 24, 2009)

Do the epoxy kits have a longer life than the heat shrink kits?


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Let me also add that the requirement of adding shrink tubing is no where to be found on the Ideal website.. :blink:

Seems there are lots of grey areas with the product.. :no:


----------



## Salvatoreg02 (Feb 26, 2011)

B4T said:


> Let me also add that the requirement of adding shrink tubing is no where to be found on the Ideal website.. :blink:
> 
> Seems there are lots of grey areas with the product.. :no:


I think the term "direct burial" is vague based on Ideals information on their website and after reading the spec sheets and UL listing the wire nuts are just considered direct burial use.

Sent from my iPhone using ET Forum


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

Salvatoreg02 said:


> I think the term "direct burial" is vague based on Ideals information on their website and after reading the spec sheets and UL listing the wire nuts are just considered direct burial use.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using ET Forum


I believe the direct burial is fine when used with USE cable as stated in the UL book. I for one would not be comfortable with it but it appears to be compliant.


----------



## Magnettica (Jan 23, 2007)

:sleep1: > this thread.


----------



## Salvatoreg02 (Feb 26, 2011)

Dennis Alwon said:


> I believe the direct burial is fine when used with USE cable as stated in the UL book. I for one would not be comfortable with it but it appears to be compliant.


Let me express which I did not mention before, as per using them in conjunction with UF cable in direct contact with earth it is not compliant, but the wire nut is. 
As per OP ?

Sent from my iPhone using ET Forum


----------



## Bama (Dec 17, 2010)

To quote Tool5150....This thread is dildos...:laughing: I've been reading of course and it's crazy this thread is nearly 300 posts long...:sleep1::hammer: It's almost as bad as the grounds up vs. grounds down threads.:jester:


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Magnettica said:


> :sleep1: > this thread.


Some people with dots are looking for you.. :laughing:


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Bama said:


> To quote Tool5150....This thread is dildos...:laughing: I've been reading of course and it's crazy this thread is nearly 300 posts long...:sleep1::hammer: It's almost as bad as the grounds up vs. grounds down threads.:jester:


I do not agree with that.. :no:

Next time you are in HD, look at a packet of these wire nuts and you will understand why this thread is so long.. 

What the packet says and what you can use it for a two greatly different things.. 

At the very least you can see how we can pick things apart with great success.. :thumbup:


----------



## lovethetrade (Apr 12, 2011)

Geez can someone direct bury this thread!


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

lovethetrade said:


> Geez can someone direct bury this thread!


I can but I wont. :laughing: B4T is trying to go for the longest thread about electrical products


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

lovethetrade said:


> Geez can someone direct bury this thread!


Why can't you just not read it if it bothers you.. :no:


----------



## nrp3 (Jan 24, 2009)

Success would be to get them to change their packaging and I like Ideal stuff.


----------



## lovethetrade (Apr 12, 2011)

B4T said:


> Why can't you just not read it if it bothers you.. :no:


Because every night i log on after work it's the most active thread and it's GETTING REALLLLLLLL OLDDDDDDDDDDDDDD.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Dennis Alwon said:


> I can but I wont. :laughing: B4T is trying to go for the longest thread about electrical products


Seriously.. I want to get Ideal to join the debate..

IMO it is not asking very much since it directly relates to people buying their product and using it as it is listed and intended.. :thumbsup:


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

B4T said:


> Seriously.. I want to get Ideal to join the debate..
> 
> IMO it is not asking very much since it directly relates to people buying their product and using it as it is listed and intended.. :thumbsup:


I think it would be great. We had a manufacturer over a MH join in about their product. It went on for days and days.


----------



## Bama (Dec 17, 2010)

Ok, here's my trade school contribution to this thread, and I already know I'm gonna regret this...How do you make a splice on a UF without stripping back the conductors in the cable assembly? I'll already apologize for my newbie ignorance.:blink:


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Dennis Alwon said:


> I think it would be great. We had a manufacturer over a MH join in about their product. It went on for days and days.


I am making Ideal aware of this forum and it would be great if others did the same thing..


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

Bama said:


> Ok, here's my trade school contribution to this thread, and I already know I'm gonna regret this...How do you make a splice on a UF without stripping back the conductors in the cable assembly? I'll already apologize for my newbie ignorance.:blink:


You splice by stripping back and then use a heat shrink or other approved underground splice kit.


----------



## nrp3 (Jan 24, 2009)

Its ok, you don't without stripping it.


----------



## Bama (Dec 17, 2010)

So once you strip back the outer covering on the UF cable assembly, it negates the rating for underground burial?


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

Bama said:


> So once you strip back the outer covering on the UF cable assembly, it negates the rating for underground burial?


Unless you use an approved underground splice kit.


----------



## Bama (Dec 17, 2010)

So if said wire nuts are not part if a UL approved underground splice kit, they're just hack job accessories?:001_unsure:


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Bama said:


> So if said wire nuts are not part if a UL approved underground splice kit, they're just hack job accessories?:001_unsure:


If you go the post #1.. there is a link there for Ideal..

Read it and all the PDF files on the web site and you would think the product is rated for the intended purpose.. it is not according to the posts on this thread.. 

BUT.. the manufacture rep said it is.. :blink:


----------



## ampman (Apr 2, 2009)

16 pages ,damn where was i


----------



## Salvatoreg02 (Feb 26, 2011)

B4T said:


> If you go the post #1.. there is a link there for Ideal..
> 
> Read it and all the PDF files on the web site and you would think the product is rated for the intended purpose.. it is not according to the posts on this thread..
> 
> BUT.. the manufacture rep said it is.. :blink:


Did the rep actually say, that these wire nuts can be used with UF cable from Article 340. Or that the wire nuts are direct burial approved.

Sent from my iPhone using ET Forum


----------



## Bama (Dec 17, 2010)

good grief


----------



## Salvatoreg02 (Feb 26, 2011)

Bama said:


> good grief


LMFAO

Sent from my iPhone using ET Forum


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Salvatoreg02 said:


> Did the rep actually say, that these wire nuts can be used with UF cable from Article 340. Or that the wire nuts are direct burial approved.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using ET Forum


From post #259.. Ideal rep sent me this..

"Yes, the "DB" and all Direct Burial connectors can be used on "UF" type
cable. However, a heat shrink tubing or similar material must be used to
complete the over jack on the "UF" cable.

Typically the conductor in type UF cable is insulated with a THHN or
similar type insulation. Then the THHN insulated wires are covered with a
moisture resistant covering. It is this covering that must be reinstated
with the heat shrink tubing or similar material."


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

B4T said:


> From post #259.. Ideal rep sent me this..
> 
> "Yes, the "DB" and all Direct Burial connectors can be used on "UF" type cable. However, a heat shrink tubing or similar material must be used to complete the over jack on the "UF" cable. ..."


That does not meet the rules as set by the UL listing. To be permitted to be used on UF it must be so marked on the package. Lacking such a marking makes the use of these connectors a 110.3(B) violation no matter what Ideal says.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

don_resqcapt19 said:


> That does not meet the rules as set by the UL listing. To be permitted to be used on UF it must be so marked on the package. Lacking such a marking makes the use of these connectors a 110.3(B) violation no matter what Ideal says.


So then every electrical item should have a listing on the package stating what it can be used for.. this is what you are saying? :blink:


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

B4T said:


> So then every electrical item should have a listing on the package stating what it can be used for.. this is what you are saying? :blink:


I did not say that, but the listing information for this product says that. The listing information specifies conductors that these connectors can be used with and then says it can be used with other conductors and cables if the package is so marked. One of the cables that they can be marked to be used with is UF, however, without that marking the listing says that the connectors are not suitable for use with UF.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

don_resqcapt19 said:


> I did not say that, but the listing information for this product says that. The listing information specifies conductors that these connectors can be used with and then says it can be used with other conductors and cables if the package is so marked. One of the cables that they can be marked to be used with is UF, however, without that marking the listing says that the connectors are not suitable for use with UF.


I really don't know how a company goes about getting UL listed for a product..

But I would think somewhere in the paperwork filed with UL, the information you are talking about has to be there..

Are we able to access the file on record to see this info or is it something only an Ideal rep can access..

Why it is not listed on their website is another question I have for them.. if they ever stop by and say hello..


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

The bottom line for me is these wire nuts have their place and they are good for LV landscape lighting, which I have used them for in the past. Obviously you know where I stand with them on UF cable. :laughing:


----------



## Roger123 (Sep 23, 2007)

Good thread B4T!


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Peter D said:


> Obviously you know where I stand with them on UF cable. :laughing:


That horse is still roaming free eating grass from where I see it..


----------



## Bama (Dec 17, 2010)

:clap:.....:1eye::hammer::cursing:.........
:shutup:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

B4T said:


> That horse is still roaming free eating grass from where I see it..


:sleep1:


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Peter D said:


> :sleep1:


That is OK.. I would expect nothing less from you.. :thumbsup:

I just sent Ideal _another_ e-mail.. stating my case for someone to stop by and answer a few questions..


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

B4T said:


> That is OK.. I would expect nothing less from you.. :thumbsup:
> 
> I just sent Ideal _another_ e-mail.. stating my case for someone to stop by and answer a few questions..


I've been one of the primary contributors to this thread. There is nothing more for me to say. I've said all I need to say and have made my case. Let the jury decide. I'm done now.


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

Roger123 said:


> Good thread B4T!


Excellent..:thumbup:


----------



## thegoldenboy (Aug 15, 2010)

We need a dizzy smiley because WOW, I've been following this thread since the beginning. I have nothing to contribute that hasn't already been contributed, so I'm merely leaving my mark on this informative discussion. And I agree with Harry and Roger, excellent thread.

Carry on. :thumbup:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Roger123 said:


> Good thread B4T!



The funny part is we were having this debate back and forth via PM and I told him to start a thread on it, thinking the issue was cut and dry. Wow. Was I ever wrong.


----------



## Jlarson (Jun 28, 2009)

Who wants to beat up on my non 110.3 (b) compliant UF splice method?

Non insulated butt splices crimped then soldered, then covered in heat shrink and then heat shrink over the whole deal. Bullet proof splice.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Jlarson said:


> Who wants to beat up on my non 110.3 (b) compliant UF splice method?
> 
> Non insulated butt splices crimped then soldered, then covered in heat shrink and then heat shrink over the whole deal. Bullet proof splice.


I think that method is a million times better than DB wirenuts without any other protection over the splice, as some have advocated is fine. 

I just go with the $10 heat shrink splice kits and call it a day.


----------



## Roger123 (Sep 23, 2007)

Peter D said:


> The funny part is we were having this debate back and forth via PM and I told him to start a thread on it, thinking the issue was cut and dry. Wow. Was I ever wrong.


You also did a very good job!


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Roger123 said:


> You also did a very good job!


I have the buyers remorse now. :laughing:


----------



## Roger123 (Sep 23, 2007)

Jlarson said:


> Who wants to beat up on my non 110.3 (b) compliant UF splice method?
> 
> Non insulated butt splices crimped then soldered, then covered in heat shrink and then heat shrink over the whole deal. Bullet proof splice.


If the heat shrink was listed for DB then good to go!!


----------



## Bama (Dec 17, 2010)

still...:sailor::thumbdown::surrender::excl::turned::w00t::boat: yep did all that silly crap on purpose.


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

Peter D said:


> I have the buyers remorse now. :laughing:


You will live think of all the fun you just had..:laughing:


----------



## Bama (Dec 17, 2010)

Bama said:


> still...:sailor::thumbdown::surrender::excl::turned::w00t::boat: yep did all that silly crap on purpose.


going to hide from tornadoes now. Everyone have a good night!


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

HARRY304E said:


> You will live think of all the fun you just had..:laughing:


Hmmm not sure if I'd put it in the category of "fun." Painful, maybe. Fun, no. :laughing:


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

Peter D said:


> The funny part is we were having this debate back and forth via PM and I told him to start a thread on it, thinking the issue was cut and dry. Wow. Was I ever wrong.


Well it is only 340 post's just an average thread...:whistling2::laughing:


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

Peter D said:


> Hmmm not sure if I'd put it in the category of "fun." Painful, maybe. Fun, no. :laughing:


Must be blisters in your typing fingers..:laughing:


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

HARRY304E said:


> Well it is only 340 post's just an average thread...:whistling2::laughing:


And we went in circles like a NASCAR driver on speed.. :laughing:

(336) posts and not one from Ken..


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

Bama said:


> going to hide from tornadoes now. Everyone have a good night!



God speed on those tornado's down there.hide well.:thumbsup:


----------



## Jlarson (Jun 28, 2009)

B4T said:


> And we went in circles like a NASCAR driver on speed..


So if I want to avoid this thread I need to make a right turn somewhere?


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

B4T said:


> And we went in circles like a NASCAR driver on speed.. :laughing:
> 
> (336) posts and not one from Ken..


Well when the thread started he said he was taking a nap.he must have over slept.:laughing:


----------



## Roger123 (Sep 23, 2007)

B4T said:


> And we went in circles like a NASCAR driver on speed.. :laughing:
> 
> (336) posts and not one from Ken..


Yeah, I noticed that also.


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

Jlarson said:


> So if I want to avoid this thread I need to make a right turn somewhere?


Just do some dounuts.,.:laughing:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

B4T said:


> And we went in circles like a NASCAR driver on speed.. :laughing:
> 
> (336) posts and not one from Ken..


I invited Ken to throw in his 2 cents but he said he was too busy to participate. Good for him. :thumbsup:


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

Peter D said:


> I invited Ken to throw in his 2 cents but he said he was too busy to participate. Good for him. :thumbsup:


His green light is on but he is not posting.


----------



## thegoldenboy (Aug 15, 2010)

HARRY304E said:


> His green light is on but he is not posting.


Lights are on, nobodies home. :no:


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

thegoldenboy said:


> Lights are on, nobodies home. :no:


Sleeping at the key board..:laughing:


----------



## Roger123 (Sep 23, 2007)

HARRY304E said:


> His green light is on but he is not posting.


I'll bet someone offended him. We still love you Ken, talk to us!


----------



## thegoldenboy (Aug 15, 2010)

HARRY304E said:


> Sleeping at the key board..:laughing:


I've done that before. :blink: Wake up an hour later and I've got QWERTY stamped backwards across my forehead.


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

thegoldenboy said:


> I've done that before. :blink: Wake up an hour later and I've got QWERTY stamped backwards across my forehead.


 :laughing:


----------



## Mike_586 (Mar 24, 2009)

B4T said:


> If you go the post #1.. there is a link there for Ideal..
> 
> Read it and all the PDF files on the web site and you would think the product is rated for the intended purpose.. it is not according to the posts on this thread..
> 
> BUT.. the manufacture rep said it is.. :blink:


He also said that if you broke the outer jacket, you know the part that gives the cable its DB properties, that you'd have to re-instate it with heat shrink or something similar. It would of course have to be DB rated heat shrink.

So then you'd be ****ing around with heat shrink that has to be big enough to slide over the wire nuts but shrink tight enough to seal the cable jackets.

BUT, at that point anything inside the DB rated heat shrink would only need to be rated for wet locations. So why the F### bother with DB rated wire nuts in the first place when you only need a W rating?

:laughing:


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

B4T said:


> I really don't know how a company goes about getting UL listed for a product..
> 
> But I would think somewhere in the paperwork filed with UL, the information you are talking about has to be there..
> 
> ...


It really doesn't matter if the info is buried somewhere in a file, the UL White book says that information has to be provided with the product. 
There are a number of things like that in the White book. Connectors have to be marked of instructions provided on or with the package if they can be used for more than one conductor or with fine strand conductors. Classified breakers have to ship with a list of panels that they are classified for use in. 
If you have read my posts on other forumsnyou will find that in general I am not a fan of using 110.3(B) as a lot of the instructions are manufacturer's recommendations and not listing and labeling instructions. In this case the information is in the White Book and that clearly makes it a "listing and labeling" instruction and 110.3(B) applies.


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

Mike_586 said:


> He also said that if you broke the outer jacket, you know the part that gives the cable its DB properties, that you'd have to re-instate it with heat shrink or something similar. It would of course have to be DB rated heat shrink.
> 
> So then you'd be ****ing around with heat shrink that has to be big enough to slide over the wire nuts but shrink tight enough to seal the cable jackets.
> 
> ...


It does not really matter just use pipe and boxes.

any other way is asking for trouble.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

I just came back from HD with a package of Ideal_ "Underground Direct Burial Wire Connections"..._

It lists a bunch of uses.. the one I am interested in is "Outdoor power outlets".. that means line voltage.. some of you said low voltage only.. 

_"UL listed as a pressure type wire connector for use in direct burial and grounding & bonding equipment on the following solid and (or) stranded wire combinations"_

Nothing was mentioned on the package instructions about using shrink tubing to protect the cable where the outer covering was removed to expose the conductors..

So.. as a consumer.. I would follow these instructions to the letter without changing a thing.. IF I was a hack using these connectors.. I AM NOT!!!!


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

B4T said:


> IF I was a hack using these connectors.. I AM NOT!!!!


No, you're definitely a hack! 

As for the connectors, it would have to be explicitly stated on the package that they are listed for use with UF cable. Just like your favorite Carlon boxes, or any other non-metallic box, are not listed for use with MC or AC cable.


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

Peter D said:


> non-metallic box, are not listed for use with MC or AC cable.




Nooooooo! Really..:blink::blink:


----------

