ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
Top Posters(30 Days)
Potseal 11
Recent Posts
Electrode boilers question
by annemarie1. 04/27/17 01:40 PM
Why cables look like they do
by LongRunner. 04/26/17 09:36 AM
Dimmable LED 2x4 lay in fixtures
by HotLine1. 04/24/17 05:43 PM
Old decora style outlets
by Lostazhell. 04/22/17 07:59 PM
Permit Snafus...AHJs and Contractors Jump in
by gfretwell. 04/22/17 01:11 PM
New in the Gallery:
SE cable question
Popular Topics(Views)
234,840 Are you busy
169,613 Re: Forum
162,863 Need opinion
Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 52 guests, and 11 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
#182079 - 11/17/08 05:36 PM SER sizing  
highground  Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 53
Chama, NM
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


2017 / 2014 NEC & Related Books and Study Guides

#182083 - 11/17/08 06:13 PM Re: SER sizing [Re: highground]  
George Little  Offline
Member
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,489
Michigan USA
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

#182089 - 11/17/08 09:16 PM Re: SER sizing [Re: George Little]  
gfretwell  Offline


Member
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,069
Estero,Fl,usa
I am with George, The confusion comes when people confuse a "main feeder" with a load side feeder in a residence.


Greg Fretwell

#182105 - 11/18/08 09:04 PM Re: SER sizing [Re: gfretwell]  
Tom  Offline
Member
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,044
Shinnston, WV USA
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.

#182111 - 11/18/08 10:08 PM Re: SER sizing [Re: Tom]  
Electricmanscott  Offline
Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,457
Holden, MA USA
I see undersized feeders all the time. Seems many mis-apply 310.15 B 6


#182404 - 11/25/08 03:02 PM Re: SER sizing [Re: Electricmanscott]  
macmikeman  Offline
Member
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 717
Honolulu, Hawaii
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.



Member Spotlight
Bill Addiss
Bill Addiss
NY, USA
Posts: 3,878
Joined: October 2000
Show All Member Profiles 
Featured:

2017 NEC and Related
2017 NEC
Now Available!

Shout Box
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0
Page Time: 0.013s Queries: 15 (0.003s) Memory: 0.7770 MB (Peak: 0.9230 MB) Zlib enabled. Server Time: 2017-04-27 22:46:22 UTC