ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
Top Posters(30 Days)
Potseal 11
Recent Posts
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
How do you find a good employee?
by HotLine1. 04/22/17 10:44 AM
Electrode boilers question
by SteveFehr. 04/21/17 08:32 AM
New in the Gallery:
SE cable question
Popular Topics(Views)
234,727 Are you busy
169,482 Re: Forum
162,774 Need opinion
Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 79 guests, and 7 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
#77202 - 05/10/01 09:01 PM Tap vs. Ocpd  
sparky  Offline
Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,306
This is somewhat of a borrowed Q i thought i'd bring to this forum.

Taps are made , resulting in a conductors served from larger OCPD's, this is primarily addressed in 240-21
(b)feeders
(c)Xformers
(d)service cond.
(e)busway's
(f)motor circuits
(g)genny's

so how would the conductors included in
T310-15(b)(6) or T430-72(b) be defined in light of this?
( or are they meant as d & f ?)

any conjecture, speculation, etc...?
[Linked Image]




[This message has been edited by sparky (edited 05-10-2001).]


2017 / 2014 NEC & Related Books and Study Guides

#77203 - 05/11/01 02:30 AM Re: Tap vs. Ocpd  
Scott35  Offline

Broom Pusher and
Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,707
Anaheim, CA. USA
Steve,

On the first table [if I am looking at the right one], I would say that the demand on free air feeders would be only high for minute times - not exceeding an hour or so.

On the other table T430-72 (b), I have some referenced notes that came with my 99 NEC, which edits the printed text.

In that note, there's a few points towards values of 400% of 310-17's 60 degree table, plus 300% of 310-16's 60 degree table.

I'm not exactly sure what level of current would cause a #10 cu to fry, but 160 amps would be at least close enough.

Is this going in the direction you were hoping?? [Linked Image]


Scott SET


Scott " 35 " Thompson
Just Say NO To Green Eggs And Ham!

#77204 - 05/11/01 06:14 AM Re: Tap vs. Ocpd  
sparky  Offline
Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,306
Thanks Scott!
yes, i find it interesting how the NEC defines protection in given situations. We tend to think in fixed numbers for conductors, yet this is frequently not so. The original Q eluded to just how far one can fanegal this in the NEC

Also the 'tap rules' as they are know, are not only to be smaller wires 'tapped' into larger wires, but also smaller wires directly introduced to larger OCPD's

This , although the end result is the same, creates a little focus on the definitional aspects of the practice.

The only guidance in those terms i have found is 240-3(e)

I just thought i'd throw it out for the BB's thoughts

[Linked Image]



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: 0.011s Queries: 15 (0.003s) Memory: 0.7529 MB (Peak: 0.8752 MB) Zlib enabled. Server Time: 2017-04-26 13:35:40 UTC