Sounds like you are referring to what we refer to around here as teck cable.
Very common stuff for industrial applications.
Here, pretty much any electrical wholesaler has stock in several
configurations.
Can be ordered in 2,3,4,5,6... (Not sure the limit extent) number of conductors
and in
Hilton:
This is an intriguing concept: The universal PV AC/DC cable. It has a
red, black and white #10, a green #8, it's rated for 600 V AC or DC and for
wet locations with a metallic cover. I'd buy a roll. Where do we get it?
William Miller
At 11:54 AM 11/9/2012, you wrote:
This subje
This subject interests me as I had been considering using waterproof
metallic armored cable. I can get pre-made cable with just about any
number of conductors of any size, sheathed in a flexible metallic layer
and then a UV resistant waterproof layer. The stuff is direct burial as
well. Buying
+1. John Wiles is awesome—and he would never mistake PV source or array
circuits for a service. Not only are PV power circuits not a service, but PV
systems (inverter output circuits) are not a service. The NEC defines all of
this as power production equipment (705.2).
By definition a service
Dave,
You are on to something that has been on my mind for years. I believe
that FMC inside the building before a disconnect with DC conductors
above 250V is allowed by the Code.
And I believe the requirement for bonding in 250 applies regardless of
whether or not a separate EGC is run in th
Nick, what the AHJ is telling you may actually be in reference to
250.97; for most PV output circuits (yes these are necessarily dc) this
bonding requirement applies since array VOC > 250 VDC. As Kent just
pointed out, these dc conductors clearly don't meet the NEC definition
of a service.
"2
Article 100 has a definition for service. It doesn't seem like a PV
system or a battery based inverter for off-grid fit the definition.
Kent Osterberg
Blue Mountain Solar, Inc.
www.bluemountainsolar.com
On 11/8/2012 8:22 PM, Nick Vida wrote:
Hi Wrenches,
Thanks for you comments. Fun for the d
Hi Wrenches,
Thanks for you comments. Fun for the day is hearing they want to apply section
230 about service conductors and say that flex is not a metallic raceway
because it is no good for bonding. They are defining the pv source circuits as
a service.
I am getting a distinct Wiles vibe here
There is no need for an exception. Even in the 2008 NEC, 690.31(E) is
clearly about the dc wiring. The proposed informational note adds
nothing except to explain that ac isn't dc.
Kent Osterberg
Blue Mountain Solar, Inc.
www.bluemountainsolar.com
On 11/3/2012 11:09 AM, Dan Fink wrote:
There
There is an proposal in the pipeline for NEC 2014 that makes an exception
for AC PV modules after the wiring enters the building. See:
http://www.solarabcs.org/codes-standards/NFPA/pdfs/2014NEC%20690.31(E).pdf
--
Dan Fink,
Executive Director;
Otherpower
Buckville Energy Consulting
Buckville Public
Sorry, per the OP this appears in 690.31(E)...
On Nov 3, 2012, at 11:19 AM, David Brearley wrote:
> FWIW: In the 2011 Code, Section 690.31(D) is changed to include the following:
>
> "Where dc photovoltaic source or output circuits…are run inside a building or
> restructure, they shall be conta
FWIW: In the 2011 Code, Section 690.31(D) is changed to include the following:
"Where dc photovoltaic source or output circuits…are run inside a building or
restructure, they shall be contained in metal raceways,Type MC metal-clad cable
that complies with 250.118(10), or metal enclosures…"
On
Hello wrenches,
wondering if any of you are running into inspectors wanting EMT in the attics,
or allowing flex only if there is a fusible disconnect on the roof. We have
heard this a few time lately and havent yet seen a code reference, (except
690.31e saying metal raceways are fine- not speci
13 matches
Mail list logo
