Are these taps ahead of the service disconnect OK? The two breakers on the left are 40 and 50 amp. Seems like they should be #2 CU and should not originate before the main.
Any pictures of the whole panel?
Gotta agree with Peter. We would like to see a full photo for some clarification.
Also, Jeff Pope just posted this on another thread regarding upside down panels (breakers).
240.81 Indicating.
Circuit breakers shall clearly indicate whether they are in the open “off” or closed “on” position. Where circuit breaker handles are operated vertically rather than rotationally or horizontally, the “up” position of the handle shall be the “on” position.
I’d like to see a whole pic as well.
What that looks like to me is an old style feed-through panel. This is one where a main breaker carries full amperage though to a remote panel, and there are 4-8 branch breakers as well.
In the case of this panel there would be three mains. The 200 and the other two 2-pole breakers.
This design may be before the “up/down” issue was in effect. I have seen a lot of old panels with breakers above and below in this configuration. You really can’t call this a violation or safety issue if it was installed legally at the time.
I must say, I’ve never seen one like that, but I bet that is what it is.
Here are some additional panel pix. This is an overhead service at an outbuilding on a property with a manufactured home. The 200 amp breaker feeds a 200 amp disconnect at the exterior of the home, which in turn feeds the 200 amp distribution panel inside the home. The 40 and 50 amp breakers shown feed sub-panels in the well house and barn. Both sub-panels are incorrectly wired. The outlet in one of the photos should be GFCI. There are abandoned wired in the panel that should be capped or removed. Some of the breakers are upside down.
I would like to concentrate the discussion on the taps before the main breaker. As it is wired, I guess there are three main breakers. If the #6 CU tap wires were the correct size (#2) for the combined load of the 40 and 50 amp breakers, would this be OK?
-#2 would be overkill for just those two breakers. How do you figure it should be #2?
You do not combine the breaker rating to figure the load.
Do you know the calculated load on them?
The #6 is probably small, I’d say #4 is what is right.
-When you say incorrectly wired sub-panels, what do you mean?
-That receptacle was more than likely installed in the pre-GFI days. You can definitely suggest it be GFI but there is no requirement for it.
Speedy
With all this free advice we should make you an honorary member!!
Electrical was always my week point,but I managed to pass college course.
Thanks
Mario
Peter (or anyone else),
Help me to understand why the tap wires would not be sized for the combined load of the two breakers they serve. My understanding (likely incorrect I am beginning to believe) is that a load calc is performed to determine the minimum service capacity of the panel and main breaker. The feed wires to the panel (panels in this case) should then be sized correctly based on main breaker sizes.
For instance, most homes I inspect have a 200 amp rated panel and main breaker. If the load calc on such a home was in fact only 100 amps, the panel would still need to be served by conductors rated for 200 amps, right?
Yes, but in a case like this it is a bit more complicated. You do not simply add up the breaker sizes.
A good example is a 400 (320) amp residential service:
You have 350 amp service conductors, feeding a 320 amp meter pan, to two 200 amp panels.
Theoretically you can draw 400 amps, but if the demand load calc is 320 or under you are legal and fine.
I had a sneaky suspicion that I did not have a full grasp of the situation. Thank you for the education.
To summarize:
The taps before the main breaker are OK because there are actually 3 main breakers and the equipment is designed to be wired this way.
The wires feeding the 40 and 50 amp breakers should be sized to a load calc, not to the combined rating of the breakers.
Thanks
Yup & yup.
It was not my original intention to discuss the sub-panels in the thread, but…
The first photo is the well house sub-panel. it is located at the same building as the main disconnect panel. The second photo is the garage sub-panel. It is located at a different building, but there is a 4-wire feed to the panel.
Here are my report comments:
Well house sub-panel:
[FONT=Arial][size=1]There are neutral wires in the well house sub-panel that share a lug with another wire. Also, the ground and neutal wires in the panel share the same bus bar. Both of these conditions are improper and may be hazardous. Recommend correction by a licensed electrician.
Unused openings in the well house sub-panel are missing covers. Recommend all unused openings be capped.
Not all of the circuit breakers in the well house sub-panel are properly labeled. Recommend all branch circuits be properly labeled.
Over fusing noted at well house sub-panel (circuit breaker size too large for wire size). This is hazardous. Recommend correction by a licensed electrician.
[/size][/FONT]**
**Garage sub-panel:
There are neutral wires in the garage sub-panel that share a lug with another wire. Also, the ground and neutal wires in the panel share the same bus bar. Both of these conditions are improper and may be hazardous. Recommend correction by a licensed electrician.
The garage sub-panel does not have its own grounding electrode system (i.e. ground rod), and the metal building does not appear to be bonded to the panel. Recommend further evaluation and correction as needed by a licensed electrician.
Over fusing noted at garage sub-panel (circuit breaker size too large for wire size). This is hazardous. Recommend correction by a licensed electrician.
Wow!
All valid points.
Paul,
Taps are allowed if they meet the provisions of Sec 230.82 of the NEC and its 1-7 specs. as it pertains to equipment connected to the Supply Side of Service Disconnect.