ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
Top Posters(30 Days)
dsk 13
doc 3
Admin 3
Recent Posts
Bathroom electrical
by doc. 08/19/17 06:53 AM
electircal ageing test on IPC
by SIAME. 08/15/17 02:43 AM
electrical aging test on IPC
by gfretwell. 08/15/17 12:27 AM
"Line level" audio on Cat 5?
by gfretwell. 08/08/17 10:39 PM
Fire alarm phone lines and color coding
by gfretwell. 08/08/17 10:26 PM
New in the Gallery:
Housebilding DIY wiring
Popular Topics(Views)
239,938 Are you busy
175,524 Re: Forum
167,787 Need opinion
Who's Online Now
1 registered members (doc), 61 guests, and 10 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
#172354 - 12/18/07 02:16 PM Article 408 - Am I missing something?  
sabrown  Offline
Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 302
Ogden, Utah, USA
I just dropped into article 408 looking for 408.34 and it is no where to be seen. Interesting, I tried to find anything like it in 100, 220, or 225, but until I get my electronic version I am giving up.

Anyone know the reasoning or where it may be?


2017 / 2014 NEC & Related Books and Study Guides

#172359 - 12/18/07 03:09 PM Re: Article 408 - Am I missing something? [Re: sabrown]  
ghost307  Offline
Member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 907
Chicago Illinois USA
408.34 and 408.35 have both been deleted in the 2008 NEC.

The original reason that the 42 circuit maximum was written back in the 1930's was to prevent the rubber insulated conductors from being damaged by overcrowding and/or overheating. This is no longer an issue, so the 42 circuit limit is now history.


Ghost307

#172405 - 12/19/07 12:02 AM Re: Article 408 - Am I missing something? [Re: ghost307]  
leland  Offline
Member
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 853
Lowell area, Ma. USA
YIPEEE!!


#172430 - 12/19/07 11:01 AM Re: Article 408 - Am I missing something? [Re: leland]  
sabrown  Offline
Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 302
Ogden, Utah, USA
I was looking for it for the lighting and appliance branch circuit panelboard for the tie in to 408.36 which has been totally rewritten also.

The number of disconnects on my main feeder to a building will total 4 one of which is a 15 amp, 240 VAC dosing station. The main feeder is protected remotely by a single breaker properly sized and even though the job is in California, it's a Federal project that will be built under the 2008. It was OK before, with some exceptions (like a feeder protected higher than the rating of the panel), but I wanted to be sure under the new. See 225.33 and NEC 2005 408.36(A) ex 1 versus 2008 408.36 (exception not required).


#172432 - 12/19/07 11:32 AM Re: Article 408 - Am I missing something? [Re: sabrown]  
Alan Nadon  Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 399
Elkhart, IN. USA
Please remember that just because the 42 circuit restriction has been removed it does not allow you to fill a panel with tandem breakers.
Only if the panel is listed for tandem breakers can you use them.


Alan--
If it was easy, anyone could do it.

#172453 - 12/19/07 06:59 PM Re: Article 408 - Am I missing something? [Re: Alan Nadon]  
sabrown  Offline
Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 302
Ogden, Utah, USA
I agree. In this case here a 42 circuit panel would serve the building, but trying to be considerate to the electrician in getting runs through the stud walls, I am calling out 2 subpanels. It also helps to minimize penetrations through a firewall.



Member Spotlight
Joe Tedesco
Joe Tedesco
Boston, Massachusetts USA
Posts: 2,749
Joined: October 2000
Show All Member Profiles 
Featured:

2017 Master Electrician Exam Preparation Combos
2017 NEC Electrician
Exam Prep Combos:
Master / Journeyman

 

Shout Box
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0
Page Time: 0.012s Queries: 15 (0.002s) Memory: 0.7764 MB (Peak: 0.9225 MB) Zlib enabled. Server Time: 2017-08-19 11:24:40 UTC