DIY Breaker Panel Install - Updated Photos

jamiedolan · 01-07-2009, 12:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J. V.

Looks good Jamie. Just get rid of the plastic covers. No code issue, only appearance. I like your color coding. Make sure you put a note in the legend slot explaining your color scheme. The next guy will really appreciate.

Thanks. :-)

I will have everything printed clearly on the legend for the panel. I plan to live here till I die (I'm 29), so won't have to worry about anyone else working on it anytime soon. But it will help me as I age and forget what I did.

Jamie

Speedy Petey · 01-07-2009, 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamiedolan

Do you know where this is in the code? I am not trying to challenge you at all, I just want to see what I missed.

The way I had read everything was that all current carrying conductors must be included for derating. The neutral on a MWBC ends up carrying current. So there must be some exemption that I missed.

I had been filling to a maximum of 3 MWBC (6 circuits) for a total of 9 CCC, but I included the neutral in my calculations.

Jamie

310.15(B)(4)(a) tells us that the neutral of a single phase multi-wire circuit does not count towards the derating requirements of 310.15(B)(2)(a).

Gigs · 01-07-2009, 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamiedolan

ever since metal flush face plate I have seen has a opening that is too narrow for GFCI outlets.

The raised ones work, but they require a different style box that has the corner screws instead of the device lugs.

Gigs · 01-07-2009, 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamiedolan

The neutral on a MWBC ends up carrying current. So there must be some exemption that I missed.

If the neutral is carrying its full ampacity, that means one of the branches is carrying 0, so it makes sense not to derate against all three wires.

jamiedolan · 01-07-2009, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Speedy Petey

310.15(B)(4)(a) tells us that the neutral of a single phase multi-wire circuit does not count towards the derating requirements of 310.15(B)(2)(a).

EDIT: Scratch that...

I get it now. They all carry current, but it all balances out..

Got it.

Thanks!!

Thanks
Jamie

jamiedolan · 01-07-2009, 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gigs

If the neutral is carrying its full ampacity, that means one of the branches is carrying 0, so it makes sense not to derate against all three wires.

Got it! Just had to think about it for a second. I see how it ends up balancing out.

Jamie

nap · 01-07-2009, 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gigs

The raised ones work, but they require a different style box that has the corner screws instead of the device lugs.

they fit on a 4" square box. Just a standard 4 square box like he has. The devices mount to the cover and the cover mounts to the box, the style of box he has already. Up top, OP was talking of using an 1 1/2" extension ring and a blank cover. No special boxes needed there either.

Stubbie · 01-07-2009, 05:59 PM

I haven't read all the responses here but read 210.4(D) 2008 NEC this is a new requirement that requires your MWBC's that enter a conduit with other MWBC's or other branch circuits to be grouped by using wire ties where they enter the conduit. I'm not sure if that is what your wire ties do or not.

jamiedolan · 01-07-2009, 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stubbie

I haven't read all the responses here but read 210.4(D) 2008 NEC this is a new requirement that requires your MWBC's that enter a conduit with other MWBC's or other branch circuits to be grouped by using wire ties where they enter the conduit. I'm not sure if that is what your wire ties do or not.

HI;
Thanks for the info. I was aware there was some talk about a grouping requirement in 08, but know none of the details. We are still on 2005 until some time this spring. So I have not even seen a copy of the 2008 code yet.

I have been using double pole breakers, I know that was getting added as a requirement in 08.

No, my ties are not in any particular grouping.

So are you suppose to tie all 3 wires of the MWBC together where it leaves the panel? What about at each Jbox and pull box? It seems like this would take up a bunch of fill having to group wires like that in each junction box.

Jamie

InPhase277 · 01-07-2009, 07:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamiedolan

Do you know where this is in the code? I am not trying to challenge you at all, I just want to see what I missed.

The way I had read everything was that all current carrying conductors must be included for derating. The neutral on a MWBC ends up carrying current. So there must be some exemption that I missed.

Oh Jamie, how quickly we forget... On 11-13-2008, in response to your post "Conduit Fill and derating", Chris75 wrote:

Quote:

Originally Posted by chris75

I'm only gonna help with the derating part for now, first off, you would only need 1 ground wire per conduit, 2nd, if you pull all MWBC ( multiwire branch circuits) then you dont count the grounded (aka : neutral) conductor as current carrying. So, if you ran 3 sets of blk, red, wht, and one ground wire, (10 conductors total, but only 6 are current carrying) Just some usefull INFO thats all.

Stubbie · 01-07-2009, 08:34 PM

I think he is doing pretty good with the way we have been overloading his brain....

Sparky8370 · 01-07-2009, 09:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stubbie

I haven't read all the responses here but read 210.4(D) 2008 NEC this is a new requirement that requires your MWBC's that enter a conduit with other MWBC's or other branch circuits to be grouped by using wire ties where they enter the conduit. I'm not sure if that is what your wire ties do or not.

Are you serious? I hadn't heard that one. I think that one is pretty dumb. I bought my 08 code book about 15 minutes before my Master test, by the time I got done putting the tabs in it was time for the test. I'm so glad I passed that, and shocked too. I've had my journeyman's for 5.5 years. I would advise anybody that is going to take that test to take it as soon as you can. Around here it's a 3 part test and it's an 80% failure rate. I failed one of the tests by one question. I had waited an extra year to take it. Then I waited 3 more to take that section again. On top of that, I had a really bad respiratory infection which limited me to 4 hours of sleep combined between the previous two nights.
But anyways, what the hell is the point of this new code? If you can't figure it out, than you shouldn't be in a panel anyways. I know I don't always do it, but a lot of the time I will use wire markers and mark the circuits and mark the neutral. So if 2,4 and 6 were on one neutral I would mark that neutral 2 4 6. If they were going to require us to do something to identify them as a group, that would make a lot more sense. Now people will rely on this new code when going into an existing installation and assume that wires grouped together as such are a mwbc.

Jim Port · 01-07-2009, 10:19 PM

Recent changes seem to be meant to protect people that should not be in panels or don't recognize the dangers associated with MWBCs.

Sparky8370 · 01-07-2009, 11:14 PM

Like the arc flash warning sticker that's been around since the last change. Come on if you don't know that's a danger, than you shouldn't be in a panel. And if you don't know that the coffee is going to be hot, you're probably not smart enough to even drink coffee and should be in a padded room drooling on yourself. Do we really need the warning on the cup? I'm going to tattoo "May cause pregnancy" on my.....

just so I'm not liable.

InPhase277 · 01-08-2009, 12:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sparky8370

I'm going to tattoo "May cause pregnancy" on my.....

just so I'm not liable.

Good one. I think I'll go with "Safety Glasses Must be Worn".