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
Industrail Control Panel bonding per 409.108
by sparkyinak
Yesterday at 06:29 PM
Calling all Non-US members!! (Non-US only)
by aussie240
12/07/16 02:39 AM
Photo Upload Tutorial
by DanK
12/06/16 11:35 PM
Sprinklered equipment 26-008
by bigpapa
12/02/16 04:24 PM
On Delay Relay with Auto Reset
by Potseal
12/01/16 09:59 AM
New in the Gallery:
12.5A through 0.75mm˛ flex (just out of curiosity)
Shout Box

Top Posters (30 Days)
gfretwell 13
HotLine1 10
sparkyinak 9
Texas_Ranger 8
Potseal 6
Who's Online
0 registered (), 194 Guests and 4 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#89457 - 09/16/04 05:31 AM Transformer Overcurrent Protection
mistermike Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 05/17/04
Posts: 3
I'm getting differing opinions on the interpretation of Note 2 to Table 450.3(B). I have a 150 kVA, 480-208Y/120 V indoor dry-type transformer feeding three main breaker panelboards. The question comes from the phrase in Note 2 "shall not exceed the allowed value of a single overcurrent device". Is that value for multiple overcurrent devices (a) strictly a maximum of 125% of transformer rated current, or (b) permitted to be as high as "the next higher standard rating" of Note 1 of Table 450.3(B). If "value" means (a), the sum of the three main breakers is limited to 520 A, but if "value" means (b), I can go to 600 A.

Top
2014 / 2011 NEC & Related Books and Study Guides
#89458 - 09/16/04 07:39 AM Re: Transformer Overcurrent Protection
resqcapt19 Offline
Member

Registered: 11/10/00
Posts: 2209
Loc: IL
Mike,
The value is per note 1, in my opinion. This permits the rounding up to a total of 600 amps for the three overcurrent protective devices. Don't forget that the conductors between the transformer and the panles must be protected per 240.21(C).
Don
_________________________
Don(resqcapt19)

Top
#89459 - 09/16/04 09:41 AM Re: Transformer Overcurrent Protection
Ryan_J Offline
Moderator

Registered: 08/19/03
Posts: 1355
Loc: West Jordan, Utah, USA
There is an interesting change to this in the 2005.
_________________________
Ryan Jackson,
Salt Lake City

Top
#89460 - 09/16/04 02:27 PM Re: Transformer Overcurrent Protection
iwire Offline
Moderator

Registered: 01/05/03
Posts: 4343
Loc: North Attleboro, MA USA
 Quote:
There is an interesting change to this in the 2005.


Ryan is such a code teaser.

Come on and give it up.
_________________________
Bob Badger
Construction & Maintenance Electrician
Massachusetts

Top
#89461 - 09/17/04 06:21 AM Re: Transformer Overcurrent Protection
Ryan_J Offline
Moderator

Registered: 08/19/03
Posts: 1355
Loc: West Jordan, Utah, USA
240.21(C) in the 2005 now says that you cannot use 240.4(B) on the secondary side.
_________________________
Ryan Jackson,
Salt Lake City

Top
#89462 - 09/17/04 11:23 AM Re: Transformer Overcurrent Protection
cpal Offline
Member

Registered: 05/17/04
Posts: 165
Loc: Cohasset MA
If I'm reading note two correctly it appears to only apply if the primary overcurrent protection is sized larger than 125% of the pri FLA?? In that are compelled to additionally protect the secondary winding.

If the pri OCPD is sized to protect the transformers pri. per 450.3 (B) [pri protection only} , then OCP for the secondary winding is not required.

You may have multiple taps from the secondary of the transformer (as mentioned 240.21 (C) ) to several loads the secondary conductors must be protected per that section and article 240.
If your pri overcurrent protection exceeds 225 A (480/.83)I think Note two is applicable.??


RYAN could you indicate the paragraph in the 05 that references 240.4 I'm looking at the pre-print and appear to be missing it!!

charlie

[This message has been edited by cpal (edited 09-17-2004).]

Top
#89463 - 09/17/04 01:24 PM Re: Transformer Overcurrent Protection
mistermike Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 05/17/04
Posts: 3
Thanks for all of the feedback. In the end, the local AHJ said we had to stick strictly with 125%; next larger size denied. Sounds like the 2005 NEC will make all of the discussion go away.

Top
#89464 - 09/19/04 10:52 AM Re: Transformer Overcurrent Protection
Ryan_J Offline
Moderator

Registered: 08/19/03
Posts: 1355
Loc: West Jordan, Utah, USA
From the 2005:

240.21(C) Transfomrer secondary conductors. Each set of conductors feeding seperate loads shall be permitted to be connected to a transformer secondary, without overcurrent protection at the secondary, as specified in 240.21(C)(1) through (C)(6). The provisions of 240.4(B) shall not be permitted for transformer secondary conductors.


*(C)(1)through(C)(6) are the 10', 25', etc., rules, similiar to the 2002.
_________________________
Ryan Jackson,
Salt Lake City

Top
#89465 - 09/19/04 05:29 PM Re: Transformer Overcurrent Protection
cpal Offline
Member

Registered: 05/17/04
Posts: 165
Loc: Cohasset MA
Thanks Ryan

The reference to 240.4 (B) was accepted in Comment stage and not in the pre-print.

charlie

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