# Fluorescent Fixture Wiring From Outlet Box



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

I do the same thing. It's ok as long as you can access the taps without remvoing the fixture. I think that article is more for the chain hung fixtures and the like.


----------



## RIVETER (Sep 26, 2009)

*flourescent fixture*

Yes, that is correct.


----------



## josh5879 (Sep 21, 2009)

Yeah, you guys must be right about the intent of the code, I'm just bothered that the fact of the matter is that the actual text is technicly talking about all types of fixtures, including surface mounted.


----------



## manchestersparky (Mar 25, 2007)

Josh-
Read the Entire article section not just the first part.

410.24 (B)- Access to Boxes- Electric-Discharge Luminaires surface mounted over concealed outlet,pull or junction boxes and designed not to be supported solely by the outlet boxe shall be provided with suitable openings in the back of the luminaire to provide access to the wiring in the box

So your boss is correct in the way he tells you to do it.
Keep in mind that you must read the entire section of a code article. You can't stop when you think you have the answer. You need to read the entire code section and reference those articles that are referred to in the original code section


----------



## RIVETER (Sep 26, 2009)

*Flourescent*



manchestersparky said:


> Josh-
> Read the Entire article section not just the first part.
> 
> 410.24 (B)- Access to Boxes- Electric-Discharge Luminaires surface mounted over concealed outlet,pull or junction boxes and designed not to be supported solely by the outlet boxe shall be provided with suitable openings in the back of the luminaire to provide access to the wiring in the box
> ...


In the orignial post, is just knocking out the large KO in the back of the fixture satisfy the code as far as Approved for the Purpose?


----------



## Jim Port (Oct 1, 2007)

If the fixture is mounted over a junction box the large KO must be removed to allow access to the JB. Just passing the circuit conductors thru a 1/2" KO from the JB will not cut it.


----------



## Mike Guile (Jan 14, 2010)

*cut*

I used to pop the 1/2 ko out then use sheet metal cutters and expose the whole box. Most guys I knew did the above. It just makes it harder for the next guy.


----------



## manchestersparky (Mar 25, 2007)

What I used to do was to take out the 1/2 ko then use a knockout cutter to cut a larger hole. 
The hole must be large enough to allow access to all the wiring in the box behind the fixture.


----------



## TOOL_5150 (Aug 27, 2007)

You guys who knock out the KO and mount it over a box, do you use a snap in bushing?

~Matt


----------



## SparkYZ (Jan 20, 2010)

When I mount a strip light over a 3/o or 4/o box, I usually use a holesaw and cut a big hole so it is accessible. If I cheat and just use a KO (sometimes I dont have the time), I like to use a conduit connector for a smooth edge.


----------



## Wireless (Jan 22, 2007)

TOOL_5150 said:


> You guys who knock out the KO and mount it over a box, do you use a snap in bushing?
> 
> ~Matt


Romex connector


----------



## josh5879 (Sep 21, 2009)

manchestersparky said:


> Josh-
> Read the Entire article section not just the first part.
> 
> 410.24 (B)- Access to Boxes- Electric-Discharge Luminaires surface mounted over concealed outlet,pull or junction boxes and designed not to be supported solely by the outlet boxe shall be provided with suitable openings in the back of the luminaire to provide access to the wiring in the box
> ...


These two rules are talking about two completly different things:
410.24(B) has nothing to do with the isssue of the wiring method to the fixture, it concerns one thing: allowing access to the wiring in the outlet box, it doesn't say you can go ahead and wire the fixture directly from the conductors in that outlet box.
410.24(A) does talk about the wiring to the fixture, and it only lists a couple of specific methods metal raceway, NM raceway, MC, AC, MI, NM, or flexible cord. It doesn't seem to allow individual conductors from an outlet box.


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

You are way over-thinking this.


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

NolaTigaBait said:


> You are way over-thinking this.


Josh, I agree you are over-thinking it.

Just slap the damn fixture up over the box once you punch out the big KOs that allow box access. That is all the code requires.


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

If the Badger ok's the install, you are good to go:thumbsup:


----------



## JackBoot (Feb 14, 2010)

Wireless said:


> Romex connector


I've always used a 7/8" rubber bushing. But they are saying that you need to knock it out to a large size so I don't know of any bushings that big. I wonder if my 1 3/8" Unibit would be considered big enough for access to the box? :whistling2:


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

JackBoot said:


> I've always used a 7/8" rubber bushing. But they are saying that you need to knock it out to a large size so I don't know of any bushings that big. I wonder if my 1 3/8" Unibit would be considered big enough for access to the box? :whistling2:


You need to use a fully dressed malleable steel 4" chase nipple


----------



## JayH (Nov 13, 2009)

JackBoot said:


> I've always used a 7/8" rubber bushing. But they are saying that you need to knock it out to a large size so I don't know of any bushings that big. I wonder if my 1 3/8" Unibit would be considered big enough for access to the box? :whistling2:


http://www.asihome.com/ASIshop/index.php?cPath=40_172_232


----------



## ralpha494 (Oct 29, 2008)

Bob Badger said:


> You need to use a fully dressed malleable steel 4" chase nipple


And 4" chase locknut with 4" chase bushing. :laughing:


----------



## jw0445 (Oct 9, 2009)

Which would have to be non metallic of course......


----------



## josh5879 (Sep 21, 2009)

Bob Badger said:


> Josh, I agree you are over-thinking it.
> 
> Just slap the damn fixture up over the box once you punch out the big KOs that allow box access. That is all the code requires.


I really don't get you guys. You're basiclly telling me maybe the code allows it maybe not, but don't worry just don't overthink it.
I don't think my point was overly technical, or based on somthing purely textual when it was obvious the intent was contrary to the point. So if you would tell me a differnt way to intrerpet or explain the code, fine, but without an explaination you're basicly saying yeah just make the code say whatever you want it to say.
Doesn't sound right to me.


----------



## Jim Port (Oct 1, 2007)

Perhaps this will clear this up









courtesy of Mike Holt.


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

josh5879 said:


> I really don't get you guys. You're basiclly telling me maybe the code allows it maybe not,


No I am not saying maybe, I am telling you with 100% certainty that the code allows it.



> but don't worry just don't overthink it.


I was just being polite, I should have just said your interpretation is wrong.


----------



## josh5879 (Sep 21, 2009)

Bob Badger said:


> No I am not saying maybe, I am telling you with 100% certainty that the code allows it.
> 
> 
> 
> I was just being polite, I should have just said your interpretation is wrong.


Go right ahead tell me I'm wrong I'm listening. Just answer the question how is it allowed under the following rule
410.24 Connection of Electric-Discharge Luminaire.
(A) Independent of the Outlet Box. Electric-discharge luminaires supported independently of the outlet box shall be connected to the branch circuit through metal raceway, nonmetallic raceway, Type MC cable, Type AC cable, Type MI cable, nonmetallic sheathed cable, or by flexible cord as permitted in 410.62(B) or 410.62(C).

Please don't try to tell me about 410.24(B) I already explained that that is a completely seperate requirment (not an allowance).


----------



## Jim Port (Oct 1, 2007)

410.24(A) has nothing to do with the way your boss is telling you to mount and wire the fixture. It is for when the fixture is not mounted from a box, for example a chain hung strip light.

What is the issue? Two different requirements for two different mounting methods.


----------



## raider1 (Jan 22, 2007)

Josh read 410.24(B)



> 410.24 Connection of Electric-Discharge Luminaire.
> (B) Access to Boxes. Electric-discharge luminaires surface mounted over concealed outlet, pull, or junction boxes and designed not to be supported solely by the outlet box shall be provided with suitable openings in the back of the luminaire to provide access to the wiring in the box.


Chris


----------



## Yeki89 (Feb 17, 2010)

Josh just slap the thing on, thats what i do. As a rule of thumb never argue with your boss.


----------



## josh5879 (Sep 21, 2009)

Jim Port said:


> 410.24(A) has nothing to do with the way your boss is telling you to mount and wire the fixture. It is for when the fixture is not mounted from a box, for example a chain hung strip light.
> 
> What is the issue? Two different requirements for two different mounting methods.


Once again there is nothing in 410.24 (A) that limits or excludes which types of "Electric-discharge luminaires supported independently of the outlet box" it is talking about, that means very simply all *"Electric-discharge luminaires supported independently of the outlet box". Yes it is referring to chain supported fixtures but it is also referring surface mounted fixtures.
So this rule requirs that surface mounted fixtures be wired with one of the wiring methods listed.
Now we have in 410.24(B) a rule that has nothing to do with the wiring method to the fixture, it says one thing, you must allow access to the outlet box through the fixture. In principle this is the same requirment as found in 314.29 for any outlet box.
(314.29 Boxes, Conduit Bodies, and Handhole Enclosures to Be Accessible. Boxes, conduit bodies, and hand-hole enclosures shall be installed so that the wiring contained in them can be rendered accessible without removing any part of the building)
It does not, however allow the fixture to be supplyed from that outlet box, in fact is not disscussing that isssue at all.


----------



## Jim Port (Oct 1, 2007)

A surface mounted fixture is not supported independantly of the box. It is supported from the box.

Again two rules for two mounting methods. If mounted over the box you need access to the JB thru the large KO like the way your boss makes you install. The wiring method would not matter if conduit or NM. If chain hung you need to use one of the methods listed as a wiring method.


----------



## josh5879 (Sep 21, 2009)

Jim Port said:


> A surface mounted fixture is not supported independantly of the box. It is supported from the box.
> 
> Again two rules for two mounting methods. If mounted over the box you need access to the JB thru the large KO like the way your boss makes you install. The wiring method would not matter if conduit or NM. If chain hung you need to use one of the methods listed as a wiring method.


Okay if your talking about a small fixture that your supporting from the box your right. I was talking about the whole time a fixture that is too big to be supported just from the box, for example a 8ft fixture.


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

josh5879 said:


> Okay if your talking about a small fixture that your supporting from the box your right. I was talking about the whole time a fixture that is too big to be supported just from the box, for example a 8ft fixture.


Josh, just so I have things straight.

1) Your boss with unknown years of experience

2) raider 1 who is an inspector, a leader in the IAEI and likely to be on an NEC code making panel

3) Myself with 25 + years experience with about 10 of them being heavily involved in the NEC

4) Mike Holt, one of the countries leading NEC consultants.

5) And every other person responding to this post.


Are all wrong yet a student / apprentice is correct?

Something seems odd with that. 

410.24(A) has nothing to do with the fixture secured over a box no matter what size.


----------



## josh5879 (Sep 21, 2009)

Bob Badger said:


> 410.24(A) has nothing to do with the fixture secured over a box no matter what size.


I'm just trying to understand the reasoning for what you guys are telling me.
Are you saying that when 410.24(A) says not supported from the outlet box, it really means not secured to the box at all?
I can sort of hear that but it still doesn't sound that great, it used the word supported, which sounds like it's actually holding it up.
Let me know if I'm this is what you mean or if not please explain.


----------



## Jim Port (Oct 1, 2007)

josh5879 said:


> I'm just trying to understand the reasoning for what you guys are telling me.
> Are you saying that when 410.24(A) says not supported from the outlet box, it really means not secured to the box at all?
> I can sort of hear that but it still doesn't sound that great, it used the word supported, which sounds like it's actually holding it up.
> Let me know if I'm this is what you mean or if not please explain.


Correct, (A) would be a fixture wired using the internal wiring compartment and no additional junction box. This could be a chain hung fixture.

(B) would apply if the fixture is mounted over a box like shown in the graphic above. This applies regardless of additional support like toggle bolts in addition to being secured to the junction box.


----------



## josh5879 (Sep 21, 2009)

Jim Port said:


> Correct, (A) would be a fixture wired using the internal wiring compartment and no additional junction box. This could be a chain hung fixture.
> 
> (B) would apply if the fixture is mounted over a box like shown in the graphic above. This applies regardless of additional support like toggle bolts in addition to being secured to the junction box.


I'm sorry, I don't think (A) is only talking about where there is no JB, I think the text clearly indicates it is also referring to a situation where there is a JB but the fixture is not supported from the JB. Here is the quote from (A) " ...luminaires supported independently of the outlet box shall be connected...". It doesn't say luminaires not connected or luminaires not secured or something like that, no it says any "luminaires supported independently", that is any fixture that is not being held up from the outlet box, it makes no mention whether it is connected to an outlet box or not.
I looked up the definition of the word support on dictionary.com and this is what I got:
sup⋅port  [suh-pawrt, -pohrt]
–verb (used with object)
1.	to bear or hold up (a load, mass, structure, part, etc.); serve as a foundation for.
2.	to sustain or withstand (weight, pressure, strain, etc.) without giving way; serve as a prop for.

The key words there are bear, hold up, withstand, all meaning that a outlet box that is just sitting behind a 8' fluorecent fixture, would not be considered to be supporting the fixture. Rather the screws, anchors, toggle bolts or whatever would be considered to be supporting the box. The reason being that the screws are "bearing" the fixture, not the outlet box. I never seen anyone even connect the fixture to the box.

And once again (B) is only talking about requiring access to the outlet box it doesn't say anything whatsoever about wiring the fixture from that outlet box.


----------



## Jim Port (Oct 1, 2007)

I surrender, except to say once again that your journeyman is correct.

Josh, don't focus on the independent mounting. Think of (A) referring to fixtures without a separate junction box. 

The focus should be on whether a junction box is involved in addition to the fixture, not the mounting method like toggle bolts or anchors.


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

josh5879 said:


> I'm sorry, I don't think (A) is only talking about where there is no JB,


You can think anything you would like, if you want to know what the code requires listen to the other members here.


----------



## Toronto Sparky (Apr 12, 2009)

I used to just mount a cover onto the fixture with a 1/2" chase nipple then screw the fixture to the structure while running tails though the nipple.


----------



## josh5879 (Sep 21, 2009)

Bob Badger said:


> You can think anything you would like, if you want to know what the code requires listen to the other members here.


Is this like some ancient secret knowledge passed down for thousands of years from generation to generation, that you really expect me to just believe you just because you say so?
This isn't rocket science either explain yourself or just don't expect me to just accept what your saying.
I think I made a pretty clear case and I fully explained my reasoning, I would appreciate if you could show me exactly where I'm going wrong. Thanks.


----------



## Jim Port (Oct 1, 2007)

Josh, please refer to any of the 38 posts above that are by people in the trades for years for an explanation of why your interpretation is incorrect. It does not seem like you are reading the posts. The same issue has been addressed multiple ways and you still don't seem to understand any of them. 

Why am I starting to feel like this guy?


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

josh5879 said:


> Is this like some ancient secret knowledge passed down for thousands of years from generation to generation, that you really expect me to just believe you just because you say so?


Well I ain't quite a 1000 years old :laughing: and it is good you do not just believe anything you read on the internet.

That said, when no one at all sees it your way, you really need to rethink your position.

Try this, go to this forum http://forums.mikeholt.com/index.php and ask your question there as well and see how it goes.




> I think I made a pretty clear case and I fully explained my reasoning, I would appreciate if you could show me exactly where I'm going wrong. Thanks.


You are wrong in thinking 410.24(A) has anything at all to do with a light mounted over the box. But that has been said before.


----------



## josh5879 (Sep 21, 2009)

Bob Badger said:


> Well I ain't quite a 1000 years old :laughing: and it is good you do not just believe anything you read on the internet.
> That said, when no one at all sees it your way, you really need to rethink your position.Try this, go to this forum http://forums.mikeholt.com/index.php and ask your question there as well and see how it goes.
> You are wrong in thinking 410.24(A) has anything at all to do with a light mounted over the box. But that has been said before.


It's good you agree that you just have to think for yourself. I do agree with you though that if no one agrees with you, your probaly wrong.
The truth is I started the thread assuming I was wrong. I just wanted to know why/how.
I'll post the question on mike holt we'll see what happens.


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

josh5879 said:


> It's good you agree that you just have to think for yourself. I do agree with you though that if no one agrees with you, your probaly wrong.
> The truth is I started the thread assuming I was wrong. I just wanted to know why/how.
> I'll post the question on mike holt we'll see what happens.


You'll get the same answers. The same guys who post on here post over there as well. The Badger knows all. Do not doubt him!


----------



## Honda Racer (Feb 15, 2010)

josh5879 said:


> It's good you agree that you just have to think for yourself. I do agree with you though that if no one agrees with you, your probaly wrong.
> The truth is I started the thread assuming I was wrong. I just wanted to know why/how.
> I'll post the question on mike holt we'll see what happens.


The problem with posting at mike holts forum is, the same losers who post here, also post there. :laughing:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Honda Racer said:


> The problem with posting at mike holts forum is, the same losers who post here, also post there. :laughing:


:sleep1:


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

Honda Racer said:


> The problem with posting at mike holts forum is, the same losers who post here, also post there. :laughing:


The problem with posting on any forum are the damn Honda owners. They all have a chip on their shoulders because of driving a chicks car. :001_tongue:


----------



## milehiwire (Feb 21, 2010)

Bob Badger said:


> The problem with posting on any forum are the damn Honda owners. They all have a chip on their shoulders because of driving a chicks car. :001_tongue:


Wow, kind of ironic that Bob booted my ass for using "that d word" on MH.


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

milehiwire said:


> Wow, kind of ironic that Bob booted my ass for using "that d word" on MH.



Not strange at all, this is here, there is there. Very easy to understand.:thumbsup:


----------



## milehiwire (Feb 21, 2010)

Bob Badger said:


> Not strange at all, this is here, there is there. Very easy to understand.:thumbsup:


Ironic, Bob, ironic. Not strange, ironic. :laughing:

I'll just have to post here for a week and try to behave. :laughing: :laughing:


----------



## prldrp1 (Jun 1, 2009)

not one mention on bonding though?????I always thought (and may be wrong) that if the fixture was removeable with little effort, mounting over a box just using the knockout opening for the conductors was ok, BUT we also ran an 8/32 screw threw the fixture and into the box to bond it. That drawing only showed 2 wires, not a ground wire if you chose to bond that way also


----------



## david wise (Feb 17, 2010)

Wow, that was great


----------



## Shockdoc (Mar 4, 2010)

josh5879 said:


> While reading through Article 410 I was suprised to read the following rule:
> 
> 
> 410.24 Connection of Electric-Discharge Luminaire.
> ...


I've always taken it a step further by drilling two holes to line up with the ceiling box and securing the pan to it hence eliminating a ground wire(metal box only).


----------

