Hi,

I have an old-work 20 cu in junction box. It has two sets of 14-2 cables
spliced: two sets of travelers weren't long enough and had to be lengthened.

The box uses Ideal connectors which take very little space. All and all,
the wires already in there take about 1/4 of the available space.

I need to add an outlet to that box (same circuit) which I'm technically
not allowed to do. However, practically speaking, the box will hardly be
half full if I do this.

What would you do in this situation?

Thanks!

Sam

On 09/26/2010 02:56 AM, Sam Takoy wrote:
Hi,

I have an old-work 20 cu in junction box. It has two sets of 14-2 cables
spliced: two sets of travelers weren't long enough and had to be
lengthened.

The box uses Ideal connectors which take very little space. All and all,
the wires already in there take about 1/4 of the available space.

I need to add an outlet to that box (same circuit) which I'm technically
not allowed to do. However, practically speaking, the box will hardly be
half full if I do this.

What would you do in this situation?

Thanks!

Sam

If it's an old work box why not take it out and use a deeper one?

you say "travelers" but then you mention 14/2... is this a 3-way switch
circuit?

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

On 9/26/2010 9:29 AM, Nate Nagel wrote:
On 09/26/2010 02:56 AM, Sam Takoy wrote:
Hi,

I have an old-work 20 cu in junction box. It has two sets of 14-2 cables
spliced: two sets of travelers weren't long enough and had to be
lengthened.

The box uses Ideal connectors which take very little space. All and all,
the wires already in there take about 1/4 of the available space.

I need to add an outlet to that box (same circuit) which I'm technically
not allowed to do. However, practically speaking, the box will hardly be
half full if I do this.

What would you do in this situation?

Thanks!

Sam

If it's an old work box why not take it out and use a deeper one?

you say "travelers" but then you mention 14/2... is this a 3-way switch
circuit?

nate


OK, some clarification.

I'm technically not allowed to do this because that would be too many
wires/devices. 20 cu in is the deepest single gang box available. And
with two sets of 14-2 wires spliced, I used up 17 cu in of nominal space
(2x4x2 + 1).

Yes, it's a 3-way/4-way switch circuit, but the neutral is delivered to
the electrical box with the switches by a different cable that does not
pass through this junction box.

So: by adding a 14-2 wire and an outlet to this box, I will technically
be going over the wire limit. But practically, the box will only be
about half full.

On 09/26/2010 09:34 AM, Sam Takoy wrote:
On 9/26/2010 9:29 AM, Nate Nagel wrote:
On 09/26/2010 02:56 AM, Sam Takoy wrote:
Hi,

I have an old-work 20 cu in junction box. It has two sets of 14-2 cables
spliced: two sets of travelers weren't long enough and had to be
lengthened.

The box uses Ideal connectors which take very little space. All and all,
the wires already in there take about 1/4 of the available space.

I need to add an outlet to that box (same circuit) which I'm technically
not allowed to do. However, practically speaking, the box will hardly be
half full if I do this.

What would you do in this situation?

Thanks!

Sam

If it's an old work box why not take it out and use a deeper one?

you say "travelers" but then you mention 14/2... is this a 3-way switch
circuit?

nate


OK, some clarification.

I'm technically not allowed to do this because that would be too many
wires/devices. 20 cu in is the deepest single gang box available. And
with two sets of 14-2 wires spliced, I used up 17 cu in of nominal space
(2x4x2 + 1).

Yes, it's a 3-way/4-way switch circuit, but the neutral is delivered to
the electrical box with the switches by a different cable that does not
pass through this junction box.

So: by adding a 14-2 wire and an outlet to this box, I will technically
be going over the wire limit. But practically, the box will only be
about half full.

Ah, I got you. So you are going to have to pull another cable into the
box, that is what I was missing.

Do you have access to the backside of this wall? could you use a 1900
(4" square) box with a mud ring?

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

On 9/26/2010 9:44 AM, Nate Nagel wrote:
On 09/26/2010 09:34 AM, Sam Takoy wrote:
On 9/26/2010 9:29 AM, Nate Nagel wrote:
On 09/26/2010 02:56 AM, Sam Takoy wrote:
Hi,

I have an old-work 20 cu in junction box. It has two sets of 14-2
cables
spliced: two sets of travelers weren't long enough and had to be
lengthened.

The box uses Ideal connectors which take very little space. All and
all,
the wires already in there take about 1/4 of the available space.

I need to add an outlet to that box (same circuit) which I'm
technically
not allowed to do. However, practically speaking, the box will
hardly be
half full if I do this.

What would you do in this situation?

Thanks!

Sam

If it's an old work box why not take it out and use a deeper one?

you say "travelers" but then you mention 14/2... is this a 3-way switch
circuit?

nate


OK, some clarification.

I'm technically not allowed to do this because that would be too many
wires/devices. 20 cu in is the deepest single gang box available. And
with two sets of 14-2 wires spliced, I used up 17 cu in of nominal space
(2x4x2 + 1).

Yes, it's a 3-way/4-way switch circuit, but the neutral is delivered to
the electrical box with the switches by a different cable that does not
pass through this junction box.

So: by adding a 14-2 wire and an outlet to this box, I will technically
be going over the wire limit. But practically, the box will only be
about half full.

Ah, I got you. So you are going to have to pull another cable into the
box, that is what I was missing.

Do you have access to the backside of this wall? could you use a 1900
(4" square) box with a mud ring?

nate


Yes, I have access to the back, but I can't replace the box. It's
tightly between two studs.

Sam Takoy wrote:
On 9/26/2010 9:44 AM, Nate Nagel wrote:
On 09/26/2010 09:34 AM, Sam Takoy wrote:
On 9/26/2010 9:29 AM, Nate Nagel wrote:
On 09/26/2010 02:56 AM, Sam Takoy wrote:
....
I need to add an outlet to that box (same circuit) which I'm
technically
not allowed to do. However, practically speaking, the box will
hardly be
half full if I do this.

....
I'm technically not allowed to do this because that would be too many
wires/devices. 20 cu in is the deepest single gang box available. And
with two sets of 14-2 wires spliced, I used up 17 cu in of nominal space
(2x4x2 + 1).
....
So: by adding a 14-2 wire and an outlet to this box, I will technically
be going over the wire limit. But practically, the box will only be
about half full.

Ah, I got you. So you are going to have to pull another cable into the
box, that is what I was missing.

Do you have access to the backside of this wall? could you use a 1900
(4" square) box with a mud ring?
....
Yes, I have access to the back, but I can't replace the box. It's
tightly between two studs.

As another poster said, given the description and particularly that it's
14-ga wire that is so flexible, I'd in all likelihood go ahead and
stretch the volume limit if it was truly near-impossible to retrofit the
larger box for some reason (other than just not wanting to do so).

While it might not be totally Code-compliant, if the conductors are not
kinked or rubbing on mount screws, etc., it is not going to be a safety
problem.

I've seen many, many boxes over the years that are absolutely crammed to
the limit of what could be gotten into them and none have ever been a
problem owing to that capacity limit.

So, it isn't quite kosher, but sometimes "ya' just gotta' do what ya'
gotta' do" when it isn't really going to be anything but a technical
violation, not a safety one.

$0.02, etc., etc., etc., ...

--

In article , Sam Takoy wrote:

I'm technically not allowed to do this because that would be too many
wires/devices. 20 cu in is the deepest single gang box available. And
with two sets of 14-2 wires spliced, I used up 17 cu in of nominal space
(2x4x2 + 1).

Where does that "+ 1" come from?

Here's what your calculation *should* look like:
4 14ga cables @ 2 conductors each = 8 conductors
add 1 for one or more equipment groundi ng conductors
add 1 for each cable clamp in use (presumably at least 2)

That's what you have *already*: the equivalent of 11 conductors, at 2 in^3
each, which means you're at 22 in^3 *now*. Not 17.

Then add 2 more for the device yoke you're planning to add. That brings the
total to 13 conductors x 2 in^3 each = 26 in^3 minimum.

On 2010-09-26, Sam Takoy wrote:

Yes, it's a 3-way/4-way switch circuit, but the neutral is delivered to
the electrical box with the switches by a different cable that does not
pass through this junction box.

While that is permitted with nonmetallic cable (Romex), it will cause
some EMI when the light on, since the neutral is not routed with the
hot conductors. It is generally a good practice to route your
cables together when the neutral and the hot/travelers are in
different cables.

As to your OP, if I couldn't possibly fit a larger box there, I'd use
an additional box for the receptacle. And I'd feed it with a hot and
neutral together in the same cable.

Cheers, Wayne

On 2010-09-26, Doug Miller wrote:

I'm technically not allowed to do this because that would be too many
wires/devices. 20 cu in is the deepest single gang box available. And
with two sets of 14-2 wires spliced, I used up 17 cu in of nominal space
(2x4x2 + 1).

Where does that "+ 1" come from?

That's his allowance for the EGCs, but it's not quite right. It
should be (2 * 4 + 1) * 2, or 18 in^3.

Here's what your calculation *should* look like:
4 14ga cables @ 2 conductors each = 8 conductors
add 1 for one or more equipment groundi ng conductors
add 1 for each cable clamp in use (presumably at least 2)

You only need to count clamps that extend into the box, so the
integral clamps on a plastic box do not need to be counted. Thus I
assume he's using a plastic box.

Plus, since we are talking about a one-gang box, for a plastic
one-gang and NM cable, you don't need to clamp the wire to the box, as
long as you secure the wire close enough to the box (I forget the
requirement). Single-gang plastic boxes typically don't have cable
clamps at all.

Cheers, Wayne

On 2010-09-26, Sam Takoy wrote:

20 cu in is the deepest single gang box available.

You can definitely get them up to 24 in^3, although they will
obviously be bigger in some dimension and so might not fit in your
space. See, for example, www.aifittings.com. But you need 26 in^3
for what you want to do, and I don't know if those exist.

Cheers, Wayne

"Wayne Whitney" wrote in message
...
On 2010-09-26, Doug Miller wrote:

I'm technically not allowed to do this because that would be too many
wires/devices. 20 cu in is the deepest single gang box available. And
with two sets of 14-2 wires spliced, I used up 17 cu in of nominal space
(2x4x2 + 1).

Where does that "+ 1" come from?

That's his allowance for the EGCs, but it's not quite right. It
should be (2 * 4 + 1) * 2, or 18 in^3.

Here's what your calculation *should* look like:
4 14ga cables @ 2 conductors each = 8 conductors
add 1 for one or more equipment groundi ng conductors
add 1 for each cable clamp in use (presumably at least 2)

You only need to count clamps that extend into the box, so the
integral clamps on a plastic box do not need to be counted. Thus I
assume he's using a plastic box.

Plus, since we are talking about a one-gang box, for a plastic
one-gang and NM cable, you don't need to clamp the wire to the box, as
long as you secure the wire close enough to the box (I forget the
requirement). Single-gang plastic boxes typically don't have cable
clamps at all.

Cheers, Wayne

Also, there are 22cu. in. plastic single gang boxes, or he could use a deep
plastic 1900 box with single gang reducing cover. Then he can go hog wild.

Wayne Whitney wrote:
On 2010-09-26, Sam Takoy wrote:

Yes, it's a 3-way/4-way switch circuit, but the neutral is delivered to
the electrical box with the switches by a different cable that does not
pass through this junction box.

While that is permitted with nonmetallic cable (Romex), it will cause
some EMI when the light on, since the neutral is not routed with the
hot conductors. It is generally a good practice to route your
cables together when the neutral and the hot/travelers are in
different cables.

I didn't entirely follow that from Sam, but all wires for a circuit need
to appear in the same cable; it seems to violate 310.3-B. I would
consider that more important than too many wires in the box. Sounded
like Sam was also considering adding a romex and an outlet in the box.


As to your OP, if I couldn't possibly fit a larger box there, I'd use
an additional box for the receptacle. And I'd feed it with a hot and
neutral together in the same cable.

Another possible, but ugly, is a wiremold surface extension.

Anonymously ask the inspector his opinion about overfill in this box?

Box now has a blank cover?


Cheers, Wayne

On 2010-09-26, bud-- wrote:

I didn't entirely follow that from Sam, but all wires for a circuit
need to appear in the same cable; it seems to violate 310.3-B.

I assume you mean 300.3(B). In which case see 300.3(B)(3), which
basically says the requirement doesn't apply to cables with a
non-metallic sheath, i.e. Romex. None the less, when circuit
conductors are split between multiple cables, it is a good idea to run
the cables together.

Cheers, Wayne

In article , Wayne Whitney wrote:
On 2010-09-26, Doug Miller wrote:

I'm technically not allowed to do this because that would be too many
wires/devices. 20 cu in is the deepest single gang box available. And
with two sets of 14-2 wires spliced, I used up 17 cu in of nominal space
(2x4x2 + 1).

Where does that "+ 1" come from?

That's his allowance for the EGCs, but it's not quite right. It
should be (2 * 4 + 1) * 2, or 18 in^3.

Here's what your calculation *should* look like:
4 14ga cables @ 2 conductors each = 8 conductors
add 1 for one or more equipment groundi ng conductors
add 1 for each cable clamp in use (presumably at least 2)

You only need to count clamps that extend into the box, so the
integral clamps on a plastic box do not need to be counted. Thus I
assume he's using a plastic box.

I, on the other hand, having observed that he didn't calculate the EGC
requirement correctly, just assumed he didn't know he was supposed to count
the clamps too.

Plus, since we are talking about a one-gang box, for a plastic
one-gang and NM cable, you don't need to clamp the wire to the box, as
long as you secure the wire close enough to the box (I forget the
requirement). Single-gang plastic boxes typically don't have cable
clamps at all.

Right, but I don't think he ever stated explicitly that it's a plastic box.
OTOH, he *did* state explicitly that it's an old work box -- which makes it
*very* unlikely that the cables are secured to the framing at all, let alone
within the required distance (which, BTW, is 8 inches).

Wayne Whitney wrote:
On 2010-09-26, bud-- wrote:

I didn't entirely follow that from Sam, but all wires for a circuit
need to appear in the same cable; it seems to violate 310.3-B.

I assume you mean 300.3(B).

Yes - a typo.

In which case see 300.3(B)(3), which
basically says the requirement doesn't apply to cables with a
non-metallic sheath, i.e. Romex. None the less, when circuit
conductors are split between multiple cables, it is a good idea to run
the cables together.

300.3 was rewritten a few codes ago and I had a distinct recollection
that California 3-ways that used 2 2-wire romexes were prohibited. Looks
like the weren't.

If the conductors are not together and with high current the magnetic
field from the loop can affect CRTs, as in old TVs. I guess CRTs are
rapidly disappearing.

--
bud--