ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
ShoutChat
Recent Posts
Do You Wrap Your Receptacles?
by gfretwell - 02/20/24 10:48 PM
Cable Chase Code Requirement
by renosteinke - 02/16/24 07:00 PM
Do we need grounding?
by gfretwell - 02/16/24 10:37 AM
Cordless Tools: The Obvious Question
by gfretwell - 02/08/24 07:28 AM
Is this really a thing
by renosteinke - 02/07/24 01:15 PM
New in the Gallery:
This is a new one
This is a new one
by timmp, September 24
Few pics I found
Few pics I found
by timmp, August 15
Who's Online Now
1 members (Scott35), 44 guests, and 19 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
#182079 11/17/08 04:36 PM
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 53
H
Member
What is the correct size of AL SER cable to use a feeder for a 100A subpanel in a residential setting? I seem to be getting different opinions from my two inspectors. I'm using the 2008 code.

Thanks in advance

Stay up to Code with the Latest NEC:


>> 2023 NEC & Related Reference & Exam Prep
2023 NEC & Related Reference & Study Guides

Pass Your Exam the FIRST TIME with the Latest NEC & Exam Prep

>> 2020 NEC & Related Reference & Study Guides
 

highground #182083 11/17/08 05:13 PM
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,507
G
Member
I just read in the '08 NEC Article 3 Section 310.15(B)(6) and as I read it the feeder must be #1 Alm. Unless it carries the entire load of the dwelling and then it can be a #2 Alm.
The Code panel has waffled back and forth and reworded this one many times and now with the '08 I think the aforementioned sizes would be proper. That would be my call Until someone convinces me otherwise.


George Little
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,917
Likes: 29
G
Member
I am with George, The confusion comes when people confuse a "main feeder" with a load side feeder in a residence.


Greg Fretwell
gfretwell #182105 11/18/08 08:04 PM
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,044
Tom Offline
Member
I agree with the above posts. The confusion was even worse until they removed that pesky "s" at the end of feeder(s).

AFAIK, the CMP responsible for this always felt that the feeder was meant to carry the entire load and table 310.15(B)(6) has probably led to a lot of bad language & a few fistfights.


Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example.
Tom #182111 11/18/08 09:08 PM
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,457
E
Member
I see undersized feeders all the time. Seems many mis-apply 310.15 B 6

Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 717
M
Member
Shortly my town will be adopting the 2008, and this will bring about new awareness of the requirements of feeder sizing, due to the fact that the NEC has made it clear that 310.15 B. 6 applies to a single feeder carrying all the load of a dwelling. Couple that with the new temperature rating for ser cable to the 60 deg column in 310.16 and the feeder sizes will increase by an avarage of two sizes on most new dwellings. Stictly my own opinion, but with the proper sized overcurrent protective device ahead of the "sub' feeder, the old sizing standard used for ser cables was already more than adaquate for the real life loads encountered. These new rules are huge overkill, but still it is in the code, so therefore it is just how it is, like it or not.


Link Copied to Clipboard
Featured:

Tools for Electricians
Tools for Electricians
 

* * * * * * *
2023 National Electrical Code (NEC)
2023 NEC + Exam Prep Study Guides Now Available!
 
* * * * * * *

2020 Master Electrician Exam Preparation Combos
2020 NEC Electrician
Exam Prep Combos:
Master / Journeyman

 

Member Spotlight
Attic Rat
Attic Rat
Bergen Co.,N.J. USA
Posts: 524
Joined: December 2003
Top Posters(30 Days)
maxecn 5
Admin 3
Popular Topics(Views)
317,848 Are you busy
242,682 Re: Forum
226,713 Need opinion
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5