1 members (Scott35),
539
guests, and
15
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 840
OP
Member
|
Does table 310.15 B6 allow #2 Aluminum SER cable to be protected by a 100 amp breaker to feed a subpanel? (common practice around here) By "subpanel", I mean a panel that is fed from the panel that contains the main disconnect. I can't figure out if this table only applies to feeders between the main disconnect(s) and panelboard(s), or all feeders in a dwelling. Feeder: "All circuit conductors between the service equipment....and the final branch circuit overcurrent device." (NFPA 70, 2002 Article 100 definition) Peter
Peter
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,391
Moderator
|
Peter I will say yes to your question, but wait for other replies as this one confuses me too and I do not use this table at my work. I base my answer on this part of 310.15(B)(6) For application of this section, the main power feeder shall be the feeder(s) between the main disconnect and the lighting and appliance branch-circuit panelboard(s). Notice the (s) on feeder and panelboard. Bob
Bob Badger Construction & Maintenance Electrician Massachusetts
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,374
Moderator
|
In my opinion, you are correct (as is Bob).
I, like Bob, think the "main power feeder" must originate at the service equipment and end at a lighting and appliance panel. If you had a 200 amp panel (outside service equipment), it would be legal to feed an indoor panel with 4/0 AL, but it would be a violation to leave the interior panel and feed another panel with 2 AWG (unless the terminals were rated 75 degrees and you use the round-up rule). Once you have a feeder that originates outside of the service equipment, you are in the land of 310.16, not 310.15(B)(6).
Ryan Jackson, Salt Lake City
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,716
Member
|
Anything; be it a device, appliance, down stream panel, etc... fed from the lighting and appliance branch-circuit panelboard(s), will fall under "other" articles, and can not use 310.15(B)(6). Here we go. Roger
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,391
Moderator
|
I say just remove Table 310.15(B)(6) and have us all use 310.16. Bob
Bob Badger Construction & Maintenance Electrician Massachusetts
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,374
Moderator
|
Ryan Jackson, Salt Lake City
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,391
Moderator
|
You can not round up 90 amp rated 2 AWG AL to 100 amps as 90 amps is a standard size OCPD.
Bob Badger Construction & Maintenance Electrician Massachusetts
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,391
Moderator
|
Now I feel bad for my last post.:O
Bob
Bob Badger Construction & Maintenance Electrician Massachusetts
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,716
Member
|
Bob, Now I feel bad for my last post.:O the truth hurts. I'm sure Ryan will still vote for you (maybe ), I know if you get 310.15(B)(6) removed (or my preference, have it reworded) I will. Roger [This message has been edited by Roger (edited 04-08-2004).]
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,374
Moderator
|
You can not round up 90 amp rated 2 AWG AL to 100 amps as 90 amps is a standard size OCPD. I didn't even look at 240.6, just assuming that 90 is an off the wall number and wouldn't be considered standard. One of these days I'm gonna stop shooting from the lip and start looking in the code before I post :0
Ryan Jackson, Salt Lake City
|
|
|
Posts: 1,158
Joined: May 2003
|
|
|
|