Should this be RMC?

[jar546]

This is subject to physical damage because it is accessible on a walkway to the public and pedestrians. Do you think this should be in RMC? I found this on the Riverwalk in San Antonio Texas.

 

[fatboy]

I would say yes.

 

[e hilton]

When you go on vacation, you’re supposed to relax and not think about work.

 

[BN4537]

Maybe it should be RMC, but I would accept it as legal to be EMT per code. EMT is legal where subject to physical damage in the 2020 code, but not where subject to "severe physical damage". Obviously the difference between physical damage and severe physical damage is a judgement call that will vary inspector to inspector.

In my mind, you can vandalize RMC too if you want to bad enough.

If they had made an effort to secure it closer to the box, I think it would have been fine.

 

[fatboy]

OK, tit for tat, what about this installation? Schedule 40 pvc, residential pole barn, used as personal woodshop.

 

[BN4537]

Me personally, I don't think any of the above are "subject to physical damage". All of the conduit is tight against the wall, hopefully no one is using a weed eater in there, and the only damage I could see is maybe a vehicle crashing into them, in which case you have bigger problems to deal with. I really doubt that someone can break them by accidentally kicking them in the location that they are in.

All of these are assumptions I made without seeing the environment around it, of course.

In my opinion, "subject to physical damage" is a phrase that depends heavily on interpretation and the feelings of the inspector. Which kinda sucks for the contractor, since they have no way to predict what the inspector will say (although a good contractor will call and ask if he's gonna do something that seems a little sketchy.)

 

[ICE]

OK, tit for tat, what about this installation? Schedule 40 pvc, residential pole barn, used as personal woodshop.View attachment 8605

Schedule 80 where it comes out of the concrete? Treated lumber against the concrete?

 

[Mr. Inspector]

2015 IRC
E3802.3.2 Protection from physical damage. Where
subject to physical damage, cables shall be protected by
rigid metal conduit, intermediate metal conduit, electrical
metallic tubing, Schedule 80 PVC rigid nonmetallic conduit,
or other approved means. Where passing through a
floor, the cable shall be enclosed in rigid metal conduit,
intermediate metal conduit, electrical metallic tubing,
Schedule 80 PVC rigid nonmetallic conduit or other
approved means extending not less than 6 inches (152
mm) above the floor. [334.15(B)]

 

[BN4537]

2015 IRC
E3802.3.2 Protection from physical damage. Where
subject to physical damage, cables shall be protected by
rigid metal conduit, intermediate metal conduit, electrical
metallic tubing, Schedule 80 PVC rigid nonmetallic conduit,
or other approved means. Where passing through a
floor, the cable shall be enclosed in rigid metal conduit,
intermediate metal conduit, electrical metallic tubing,
Schedule 80 PVC rigid nonmetallic conduit or other
approved means extending not less than 6 inches (152
mm) above the floor. [334.15(B)]

This is refers to NM cable, which cannot be run beneath a slab anyway because any conduit underground is considered a wet location per 300.5(B), and NM cable cannot be used in a wet location.

Does Schedule 40 PVC conduit have to be protected where it leaves the concrete? I can't think of a code section for that off the top of my head.

 

[ICE]

352.10(F) Exposed. PVC conduit shall be permitted for exposed work. PVC conduit used exposed in areas of physical damage shall be identified for the use.
Informational Note: PVC Conduit, Type Schedule 80, is identified for areas of physical damage.

Is the exposed conduit subject to physical contact where it exits concrete? I understand the difference between physical contact and physical damage. If contact is possible, damage is likely.

A PVC conduit trapped at floor level is subject to physical damage. This is borne out by the article quoted by Beniah Naylor. That it is not so stated in Article 352 is an oversight.

 

[Mr. Inspector]

oes Schedule 40 PVC conduit have to be protected where it leaves the concrete? I can't think of a code section for that off the top of my head.

2015 IRC
E3803.3 Protection from damage. Direct buried conductors
and cables emerging from the ground shall be protected by
enclosures or raceways extending from the minimum cover
distance below grade required by Section E3803.1 to a point
at least 8 feet (2438 mm) above finished grade. In no case
shall the protection be required to exceed 18 inches (457 mm)
below finished grade. Conductors entering a building shall be
protected to the point of entrance. Where the enclosure or
raceway is subject to physical damage, the conductors shall
be installed in rigid metal conduit, intermediate metal conduit,
Schedule 80 rigid nonmetallic conduit or the equivalent.
[300.5(D)(1)]

So if you want an outlet on the end of this conduit it needs to be at least 8' high?

 

[Genduct]

Seems that without a couple of simple anchor straps, all the stress was on the fitting that the Cowboy's horse kicked on the Texas Riverwalk

 

[jar546]

Seems that without a couple of simple anchor straps, all the stress was on the fitting that the Cowboy's horse kicked on the Texas Riverwalk

If I took a wider shot, you will see that the unistrut was properly placed but that too was damaged.

 

[SCBO1]

Is that under a bridge? Would vibration be an issue?

 

[ICE]

Is that under a bridge?

He spent all of his money getting there.

 

[jar546]

Is that under a bridge? Would vibration be an issue?

Yes, the side of a bridge which is where the stairwell comes up to.

 

[SCBO1]

He spent all of his money getting there.

And he's looking for code violations?

 

[Genduct]

although you could make the case for threaded connections being more Beefy ( Ha Cowboy joke) but even that level of construction can't guard against mis adventure or whatever hit the assembly to knock it off its pins

Do we know what did the damage? Doesn't ;look like normal wear or tear if they had unistrut supporting the assembly

 

[SCBO1]

Do we know what did the damage? Doesn't ;look like normal wear or tear if they had unistrut supporting the assembly

I suspect something out of view caused the damage.

Jar can you to go back and investigate the crime scene and provide additional pics!

Gondola oars don't stick up that high off the boat, so I don't think that's what caused the damage.