|
1 members (gfretwell),
139
guests, and
9
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,056
Member
|
Boy,
Only one response to my survey.(Thanks, Eagle).
I'm heartbroken.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 375
Member
|
Electric Eagle ---
After reading all of the discussion, there is no reason for the limitation.
If the code wants to solve a problem, such as too much heat generated in the panel, it should tate the goal and let people solve the problem according to the particular circumstances.
According to the code I could put a 60amp service in and have 42 circuits in the panel. Or I could put a 200amp service in and have the same restriction.
There is something wrong with the code when those two situations are both limited to 42 circuits.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 642
Member
|
I have used tandem breakers. I only use them after an amp reading with all loads on in the building. If the actual load will allow the main to still be under 80% of rated capacity, I do not see a safety issue.
I have also turned down jobs were continual additions have maxed out the main panel and the owner would not go for a new upgraded service.
This is a judgement call based on the actual load possible. I think that our training and professionalism can allow us to make those calls. I also get the local AHJ involved when necessary and when he is compentent to help.
(We still have a few grandfathered all in ones around here, some of whom have never opened a NEC code book. Fortunatly almost all will retire soon.)
Lets face it, a major part of our job is to be THE electrical expert for our customers. We owe our customers our livelihood and our business sucess. Thier lives and property depend on our work. A fire or shock caused by something we did is a violation of that trust they have in us. Knowing and using the CODE is our responsibility.
Make your own judgements and good luck
ed
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 4,116 Likes: 4
Member
|
The way I've always looked at it is if the labeling instructions say not to do something I won't do it. I don't understand all the reasons why, but just don't want the potential liability.
My understanding is that if anything ever goes wrong with an Electrical system someone has worked on and they see one thing done against code or UL Listing that person will be on the short list when Ins. Companies go looking to recover for damages. Remember, even if you're innocent it costs money to defend yourself. Why open yourself up to that?
Bill
Bill
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 31
Member
|
My answer to customers when they ask "What would it hurt?"<
I tell them straight........"If anything happens, like a fire, overload,damaged equipment,electrocution, ............the LAWYERS are going to come after ME"......
I don't need the Liability.
[This message has been edited by rowd (edited 09-04-2003).]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,749
Member
|
Liability?? 90.7 Examination of Equipment for Safety.
For specific items of equipment and materials referred to in this Code, examinations for safety made under standard conditions provide a basis for approval where the record is made generally available through promulgation by organizations properly equipped and qualified for experimental testing, inspections of the run of goods at factories, and service-value determination through field inspections.
This avoids the necessity for repetition of examinations by different examiners, frequently with inadequate facilities for such work, and the confusion that would result from conflicting reports on the suitability of devices and materials examined for a given purpose.
It is the intent of this Code that factory-installed internal wiring or the construction of equipment need not be inspected at the time of installation of the equipment, except to detect alterations or damage, if the equipment has been listed by a qualified electrical testing laboratory that is recognized as having the facilities described in the preceding paragraph and that requires suitability for installation in accordance with this Code.
FPN No. 1: See requirements in 110.3.
FPN No. 2: Listed is defined in Article 100.
FPN No. 3: Annex A contains an informative list of product safety standards for electrical equipment.
Joe Tedesco, NEC Consultant
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 18
Member
|
If a panel is full it is full. To install a tandem is not only against code but a denial of the problem at hand. If you had seen a receptical with a broken top would you have fixed it or just told them to use the bottom? If the panel is so full that you could not fit another in it, it's time to upgrade or expand the service. If the client wants a reason why it is for their own safety, the safety of the property and your peace of mind that you did not add to the problem most of us are faced with daily. I would not want to imagine the world without the nec and even if I do not personally agree with each one of them, I do have to take my hat of to them for what they stand for.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 55
Member
|
i didnt read every reply so this may have been covered already:
i have added a tandem breaker or two and exceeded the limit. nothing negative will probably ever happen as a result. but that was back when i was naive and un-defiled by genuine meaness.
nowdays, instead of giving the standard answer, 'because the code says so' i say 'because if anything EVER goes wrong i'll be liable'. that usually ends the discussion. lol
(i should add, there are people who will ask for work done without inspection and not up to code and when a money dipute arises, use that fact against you. in a nutshell, it aint worth it.)
[This message has been edited by targetshootr (edited 09-05-2003).]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 558
Member
|
That's also my standard response targetshtr.My home area has no inspections so it's not umcommon to see strange things here.Oftentimes the NEC must be"sold" to gc and homeowner alike to justify things like no porceline lampholders in closets,gfci receps etc.
Russell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 45
Member
|
I thought by Section 384-20 that you can only put one neutral conductor per set screw on the neutral bar and no more than three equipment grounding conductors per set screw on the ground bar.
Maybe we could use this to limit the number of circuits in a panel.
|
|
|
|
Posts: 2,723
Joined: October 2000
|
|
|
|
