The Electrical Contractor Network

ECN Electrical Forum
Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals

Books, Tools and Test Equipment for Electrical and Construction Trades

Register Now!

Register Now!

We want your input!

Featured:
   

2017 NEC and Related
2017 NEC
Now Available!

   
Recent Posts
breaker meltdown
by sparky
Yesterday at 07:30 PM
230 or 345 kV transmission lines?
by Vlado
09/24/16 09:33 AM
Electrical mast flashing product
by ThomasWinfrey
09/22/16 12:14 AM
What estimating software do you recommend?
by sparky
09/21/16 07:20 PM
"Dry Run" Inspection goes awry
by HotLine1
09/20/16 07:39 PM
New in the Gallery:
12.5A through 0.75mm˛ flex (just out of curiosity)
Shout Box

Top Posters (30 Days)
HotLine1 13
sparky 10
sparky66wv 8
gfretwell 8
Vlado 6
Who's Online
1 registered (HotLine1), 259 Guests and 4 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#201260 - 05/23/11 08:22 AM NEC Art 240.4(B)
Bravo Offline
Member

Registered: 05/04/10
Posts: 30
Loc: NY, USA
I have a situation where I client wants to use 500-kcmil THWN copper conductors, 75deg (380A) protected by a 400A OCPD. Please correct me if I am wrong but in accordance to 240.4 this is allowed as long as the calculated load does not exceed the ampacity of the conductors (380A)?

I need help clarifying part (B). The OCPD is 100% rated with adjustable trip unit. Our firms's licensed engineer will not stamp dwgs if the breaker is 100% rated and does not trust that the trip will be adjusted in the field.

again I need understanding what part (B) is stating.

Thanks in advance.

I have in the process of updating my profile.
My email is dean.vanetten@mwgroup.net.

Top
2014 / 2011 NEC & Related Books and Study Guides
#201261 - 05/23/11 09:02 AM Re: NEC Art 240.4(B) [Re: Bravo]
sabrown Offline
Member

Registered: 12/12/02
Posts: 297
Loc: Ogden, Utah, USA
According to your reference in 240.4B yes it is allowed. As an Engineer, he has the final say as to what he will stamp and what he won't, whether it meets code or not. Good design may have other reasons may preclude the use of the 400 amp, 100% rated breaker. Anyway, it is his choice to stamp or not, right or perceived wrong.

Look for options acceptable to him, such as a 100% rated braker with (I guess they may be called) replacable current modules. Or a permanent plaque stating maximum rating the breaker may be adjusted to.

Top
#201262 - 05/23/11 09:03 AM Re: NEC Art 240.4(B) [Re: Bravo]
sabrown Offline
Member

Registered: 12/12/02
Posts: 297
Loc: Ogden, Utah, USA
AND or her.

Top
#201266 - 05/23/11 11:45 AM Re: NEC Art 240.4(B) [Re: Bravo]
HotLine1 Online   content

Member

Registered: 04/03/02
Posts: 6785
Loc: Brick, NJ USA
Dean:
Did you read 240.6 (C)from 2008, that may be an acceptable option to present to the Engineer.

As Sabrown said, the Engineer of record has the ultimate & final say.
_________________________
John

Top
#201268 - 05/23/11 02:05 PM Re: NEC Art 240.4(B) [Re: sabrown]
Bravo Offline
Member

Registered: 05/04/10
Posts: 30
Loc: NY, USA
Sabrown,

Good point, but even a plaque indicating max rated adjustment cant stop someone from setting trip higher than ampacity.

Dean

Top
#201269 - 05/23/11 02:08 PM Re: NEC Art 240.4(B) [Re: HotLine1]
Bravo Offline
Member

Registered: 05/04/10
Posts: 30
Loc: NY, USA
That is also a valid point. Restricting the access to adjusting the trip unit helps along with a plaque indicating max trip setting allowed. Thank you

Top



ECN Electrical Forums - sponsored by Electrical Contractor Network - Electrical and Code Related Discussion for Electrical Contractors, Electricians, Inspectors, Instructors, Engineers and other related Professionals