# EMT passing through a line gutter



## Southeast Power (Jan 18, 2009)

I had a situation where I needed to re-feed a fused disconnect that was originally a service disconnect. It is directly below a line gutter where it was nippled into and fed from a Polaris tap.
This might be a bit hack but, I have seen it more than a few times.
We passed a piece of EMT through the line gutter and into the now feeder disconnect.
The engineer wants me to remove it.
He can’t site a code section.
I want to wait until an inspector turns it down.
Should I be worried?


----------



## gpop (May 14, 2018)

Might be able to gig you on a modification that voids the listed cubic inch markings. Ive seen it done more than once especially with network cables.


----------



## MotoGP1199 (Aug 11, 2014)

I've seen it done before and always thought to myself that it didn't look right but I cant figure out what code it would be violating. I mean you are allowed to drill holes in the gutter, its not a combustible material. Depending on circumstances it wouldn't make the panel unsafe (unless it was touching a lug or something). Im curious to see where this goes. I like that you want to have the inspector fail it before you change it. Like gpop said, maybe modifying the enclosure, but you would have the same/similar modifications if you just ran a conduit in the top and one in the bottom. The conductors are not in the same raceway, sorta?, lol.


----------



## splatz (May 23, 2015)

I don't think there's a rule that flat out prohibits running a conduit through an enclosure. 

You could easily calculate the volume of the conduit and deduct it from the volume of the enclosure so I think that would determine if fill was the issue. 

I think 300.10 would prohibit running EMT straight through, but, you could use a full thread nipples and some hodgepodge to comply with 300.10. This will be even more hack than what you already did but you have to commit to your hack. Of course if you were going to change it I guess you could switch to PVC and then you're clear of 300.10

Would there be a rule to prohibit running water, sewer, or natural gas through an enclosure housing service conductors? 


```
300.10 Electrical Continuity of Metal Raceways and
Enclosures. Metal raceways, cable armor, and other metal
enclosures for conductors shall be metallically joined together
into a continuous electrical conductor and shall be connected 
to all boxes, fittings, and cabinets so as to provide effective 
electrical continuity. Unless specifically permitted elsewhere 
in this Code, raceways and cable assemblies shall be 
mechanically secured to boxes, fittings, cabinets, and other 
enclosures.
```


----------



## Southeast Power (Jan 18, 2009)

The gutter is 10' x 10" by 60" long.
the service conductors from the meter are parallel 3/0.
We removed two sets of #3 and added one set of 3/0, there are two other sets of 1/0 in the gutter. 
12- 3/0 copper 12 x .4072 = 4.8864
8-1/0 copper 8 x .3039 = 2.4312
Total = 7.31
Assume 30% gutter fill. 70 sq inches
It would be very easy to observe that the gutter has plenty of empty space even in the section with the highest cross-section of conductors. 
18 small conductors in a 100 sq inch cross-section of the gutter. 

The EMT is 1-1/2" trade size the table 4 in article 358, EMT shows the ID of as 2.036
The OD is 1.740 x 3.14 = 5.4636


----------



## splatz (May 23, 2015)

The formula for the volume of the EMT would be pi times the radius squared times the height

pi*(2.036/2)^2*10 = 32.56 cubic inches

The area of the cross section that's occluded by the EMT would be just the diameter times the height, so 2.036 * 10 = 20.36 square inches, leaving 79.64 square inches unobstructed in the gutter where the service conductors go by the EMT

If they scorched you on 300.10 you could put a pipe clamp and bond jumper on it but in a situation like this, the gutter is bonded, the EMT is bonded on its own without the gutter, is it necessary to bond them together? 



Southeast Power said:


> The EMT is 1-1/2" trade size the table 4 in article 358, EMT shows the ID of as 2.036
> The OD is 1.740 x 3.14 = 5.4636


----------



## Navyguy (Mar 15, 2010)

I have never seen a situation where a conduit runs "through" a box before. I have seen lots of time where a gutter is used as a raceway, where conductors pass through the gutter / box.

Unless I am not understanding something properly, can you not just connect the two conduits to the gutter and just pass the conductors "through" the gutter? If there are different voltages, then you might need a barrier or something.

Cheers
John


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

If the gutter is meant for unfused service cables and the conduit running thru it is containing fused feeders or branch cable, it is a prescribed method. I say fused rather loosely . Proper bonding is a must however, and accomplishing that is not so easy without proper hubs at each end of the inside conduit run.


----------



## Gnome (Dec 25, 2013)

macmikeman said:


> If the gutter is meant for unfused service cables and the conduit running thru it is containing fused feeders or branch cable, it is a prescribed method. I say fused rather loosely . Proper bonding is a must however, and accomplishing that is not so easy without proper hubs at each end of the inside conduit run.


I agree that the thru conduit needs to be mechanically connected/bonded to the gutter.

I've done this once to "fix" a mistake in an 1 1/2" stub up out of a concrete floor. We used a pair of rigid couplings, and a nipple inside the gutter. Installed a lock ring on the nipple at each end and then threaded on the couplings. Got the assembly in the gutter lined up with the thru holes. Then we threaded a lock ring on a nipple and put the nutted end through the gutter into one end of coupling assembly. Repeated on the other end. Spun the couplings until all the slack was taken up in the gutter. Tightened down the lock rings on the outside of the gutter. Tightened down the lock rings on the inside.

So top to bottom it was nipple, lock ring (facing gutter), gutter, coupling, lock ring (facing coupling), nipple, lock ring (facing coupling), gutter, nipple, lock ring (facing gutter).

Viola. Both penetrations securely mechanically connected and the fused and unfused conductors were separated by a suitable barrier.

We sized the exterior nipples to go directly into JBs top and bottom but a person could use close nipples and additional couplings and transition to EMT or whatever.

As a bonus with the cover on the gutter you couldn't tell anything wasn't business as usual.


----------



## Foolitsdylan (Jul 23, 2021)

Southeast Power said:


> I had a situation where I needed to re-feed a fused disconnect that was originally a service disconnect. It is directly below a line gutter where it was nippled into and fed from a Polaris tap.
> This might be a bit hack but, I have seen it more than a few times.
> We passed a piece of EMT through the line gutter and into the now feeder disconnect.
> The engineer wants me to remove it.
> ...


Article 300.8 states: "300.8 Installation of Conductors with Other Systems. Race‐ways or cable trays containing electrical conductors shall not contain any pipe, tube, or equal for steam, water, air, gas, drain‐age, or any service other than electrical." Of course, the NEC is open to interpretation. Does, "any service other than electrical" qualify EMT passing through a gutter legal according to the NEC?


----------



## oldsparky52 (Feb 25, 2020)

Right or wrong, more than once I ran a conduit from an intrinsically safe circuit through a wireway that contained conductors (not service conductors). I was never gigged for it. 

I also commend you for not changing it until an inspector fails it.


----------



## MotoGP1199 (Aug 11, 2014)

Foolitsdylan said:


> Article 300.8 states: "300.8 Installation of Conductors with Other Systems. Race‐ways or cable trays containing electrical conductors shall not contain any pipe, tube, or equal for steam, water, air, gas, drain‐age, or any service other than electrical." Of course, the NEC is open to interpretation. Does, "any service other than electrical" qualify EMT passing through a gutter legal according to the NEC?


I would classify EMT as electrical.


----------



## SWDweller (Dec 9, 2020)

If this gutter is for POCO and has or should have seals on it. Then NO. 
Like another poster I have never seen this done before (50 years) so maybe I should get out more.
Can not see the whole job so maybe there might be a situation where this makes sense. I just do not understand how anyone would do this. Lazy or lack of planning comes to mind. 
Just a view from the cheap seats.


----------

