ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
Top Posters(30 Days)
Potseal 11
Recent Posts
600 KW 120/208 3 Phase Y protection
by Yooperup. 07/24/17 12:20 PM
1913 American Electrician's Handbook
by gfretwell. 07/20/17 01:08 PM
Green House wiring
by ghost307. 07/20/17 09:10 AM
Permit Snafus...AHJs and Contractors Jump in
by HotLine1. 07/18/17 08:06 PM
New in the Gallery:
SE cable question
Popular Topics(Views)
239,332 Are you busy
174,803 Re: Forum
167,182 Need opinion
Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 64 guests, and 8 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
#81707 - 09/13/02 08:24 PM 310.16(B)6  
aphares  Offline
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 37
I understand Dwelling units Service entrance Ampacity can be applied using 310.15(B) 6, But can sub-feeder leaving the dwelling unit feeding, example: (Garages) on the premises, or would you have to apply 310.16.

2017 / 2014 NEC & Related Books and Study Guides

#81708 - 09/13/02 08:58 PM Re: 310.16(B)6  
Redsy  Offline
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,056
Bucks County PA
I believe the increased ampacity allowed in 310.15 (B)(6) would not be allowed in your case.

I've seen #2 SER cable it used as a 100 amp subpanel feed to garages.
Some supply houses carry 1/0 SER. That would be the way to go, IMHO.

#81709 - 09/13/02 10:44 PM Re: 310.16(B)6  
Ron  Offline
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 582
White Plains, NY
I've seen it argued both ways. The text before the chart is what sways me. "....that serve as the main power feeder to a dwelling unit ..." but more importantly "For application of this section, the main power feeder shall be the feeder(s) between the main disconnect and the .... branch cirucit panelboard(s).
If you were to work it out, that the garage panel originated at the main disconnect, then I think it is ok. But if it is a subpanel to the main panelboard, then use 310.16.


#81710 - 09/14/02 06:51 AM Re: 310.16(B)6  
Electricmanscott  Offline
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,457
Holden, MA USA
We have had this one before and to understand it as written I don't think the garage would be considered a dwelling unit. I wonder however if the garage, as part of the property could be considered as part of the dwelling unit. That may or may not be stertching it but I don't understand why these ampacity ratings are ok for the entire house yet not for a subpanel feeding only part of the house or a garage.

#81711 - 09/14/02 08:17 PM Re: 310.16(B)6  
sparky  Offline
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,311
interseting commentary after said article..

If a single set of 3-wire, single-phase, service-entrance conductors in raceway or cable supplies a one-family, two-family, or multifamily dwelling, the reduced conductor size permitted by 310.15(B)(6) is applicable to the service-entrance conductors, service-lateral conductors, or any feeder conductors that supply the main power feeder to a dwelling unit.
This section permits the main feeder to a dwelling unit to be sized according to the conductor sizes in Table 310.15(B)(6) even if other loads, such as ac units and pool loads, are fed from the same service. The feeder conductors to a dwelling unit are not required to be larger than its service-entrance conductors.
Exhibits 310.7 and 310.8 illustrate the application of 310.15(B)(6). In Exhibit 310.7, the reduced conductor size permitted is applicable to the service-entrance conductors run to each apartment from the meters. In Exhibit 310.8, the reduced conductor size permitted is also applicable to the feeder conductors run to each apartment from the service disconnecting means, because these feeders carry the entire load to each apartment

#81712 - 09/16/02 10:36 AM Re: 310.16(B)6  
tdhorne  Offline
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 345
Maryland, USA
I was taught that the reason a higher ampacity is permitted for these service and feeder conductors is the intermittent nature of dwelling loads and their inherent diversity. The key to sizing the feeders is that they must carry the entire load of the dwelling unit in question in order to make use of the reduced sizing. There is a much lower likelihood of the load on a garage feeder being diverse enough to make any reduction in feeder size a safe practice.

Tom Horne

"This alternating current stuff is just a fad. It is much too dangerous for general use" Thomas Alva Edison

#81713 - 09/16/02 06:19 PM Re: 310.16(B)6  
sparky  Offline
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,311
i guess a 'garage' would not be a dwelling unit......

#81714 - 09/16/02 11:10 PM Re: 310.16(B)6  
Ron  Offline
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 582
White Plains, NY
As mentioned before, the key is that the feeder will not originate at the main disconnect, so it cannot use the table in question.


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

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: 14 (0.002s) Memory: 0.7929 MB (Peak: 0.9515 MB) Zlib enabled. Server Time: 2017-07-25 22:43:40 UTC