LFMC rated 60C wet location

Status
Not open for further replies.

don_resqcapt19

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Illinois
Occupation
retired electrician
May the 3/0 Cu in the LFMC be operated continuously at 171.4A, or would that violate 350.10(4)?

If the conductor is disallowed from continuously carrying 171.4A, then its ampacity is below 171.4A. Meaning its ampacity is below MCA, a violation.

Cheers, Wayne
The rule has ZERO to do with the required conductor ampacity. It only has to do with the operating current. The code requires a conductor with an ampacity greater than the operating current. The operating current is what the LFMC rule covers, not the fictictous conductor ampacity required by the code.

We are not going to read this the same way ever, so I am done here. You can read it your way, and I will read and enforce it my way.
 

wwhitney

Senior Member
Location
Berkeley, CA
Occupation
Retired
The rule has ZERO to do with the required conductor ampacity.
OK, we can agree to disagree on the meaning of the current language in 350.10(4).

I'm curious to ask, what language would you see as necessary to mean "treat conductors inside LFMC with a 60C rating for its conditions of use as if they had 60C insulation." 350.10(4) already refers to 110.14(C), which basically can be summarized as above with respect to terminations, but apparently you find that reference insufficient to support my point of view.

Would changing the end of the first sentence of 110.14(C) to "the lowest temperature rating of any connected termination, conductor, or device, or enclosing raceway." do the job? I may make a clarifying PI for 2026 to see if the CMP will come down on one side or the other of the intent of 350.10(4).

Thanks, Wayne
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top