400amp underground residential service conductor size

Status
Not open for further replies.

jzadroga

Member
Location
MA
I have noticed that I may be using a larger set of underground service cables than required by code and I'm not sure if I am right in what I can use. MY original thinking and practice was to use parallel 4/0?s based on the following:
Table 310.15(B)(7): 400amp can use 400kcmil copper
400kcmil has an area of .416in2
In order to parallel I use 4/0 with an area of .219 in2 for a total area of .438 in2 based on table 8 (conductor properties).
Now I am questioning myself and would appreciate either confirmation I am correct or an explanation as to the correct way to figure this out. I use the 2011 code (not that it effects this)
 
Location
NE (9.06 miles @5.9 Degrees from Winged Horses)
Occupation
EC - retired
On the surface it looks to me like you could use parallel 2/0 cu for the 400 A residential service.

Ignoring that possibility, use of parallel 3/0 cu would be allowed for a 400 amp service. Table 310.15(B)(16). Either way, 4/0 is more than minimum.

AL is a lot cheaper.
 
Location
NE (9.06 miles @5.9 Degrees from Winged Horses)
Occupation
EC - retired
Table 310.15 (B)(7) does not give allowances for a parallel run so IMO 3/0 copper is necessary for 400 amps.

It doesn't forbid it either and the NEC is generally permissive in nature. 2-2/0 would normally have a rating of 350 which is already higher than the 335 of the 400MCM. Use of two raceways to get away from any correction factors may change the economics somewhat.
 
Location
NE (9.06 miles @5.9 Degrees from Winged Horses)
Occupation
EC - retired
I have noticed that I may be using a larger set of underground service cables than required by code and I'm not sure if I am right in what I can use. MY original thinking and practice was to use parallel 4/0?s based on the following:
Table 310.15(B)(7): 400amp can use 400kcmil copper
400kcmil has an area of .416in2
In order to parallel I use 4/0 with an area of .219 in2 for a total area of .438 in2 based on table 8 (conductor properties).
Now I am questioning myself and would appreciate either confirmation I am correct or an explanation as to the correct way to figure this out. I use the 2011 code (not that it effects this)

Normally I divide the load by 2, or whatever, then find a wire with that ampacity. The ampacity/cm is larger in smaller wires. You will have to derate for more than 3 CCC if using one raceway .
 

infinity

Moderator
Staff member
Location
New Jersey
Occupation
Journeyman Electrician
It doesn't forbid it either and the NEC is generally permissive in nature. 2-2/0 would normally have a rating of 350 which is already higher than the 335 of the 400MCM. Use of two raceways to get away from any correction factors may change the economics somewhat.

I agree with Dennis, although your idea makes sense there is nothing in 310.15(B)(7) that would permit it. The general rule is to comply with T310.15(B)(16) or meet all of the less stringent requirements of 310.15(B)(7). Your 2-#2/0 does not comply with the latter.
 

jzadroga

Member
Location
MA
OK, so see if this follows. Table 310.15(B)(7) Allows me to use 400kcmil USE copper for a 400 amp underground residential service which in table 310.15(B)(16) would have an amperage rating of 335 amps. Now using the amperage rating of 2/0 USE, which is 175 amps, and running it in parallel would give a total ampacity of 350 amps. Because of 310.15(B)(3)(3) I don?t have to de-rate if I have less than 10 feet above ground. So running 2/0 USE in this case would have a greater total ampacity than 400kcmil USE by 15 amps.

Does this sound right?

Now does 310.15(B)(3)(3) permit the underground conductors to be in conduit all the way (not just the part that is above ground) to not require de-rating due to the number of conductors in parallel?
Is the amount permited above ground in 310.15(B)(3)(3) 10ft total or 10ft at each end of the service?

Just to make it easier here is 310.15(B)(3)(3):

"Adjustment factors shall not apply to underground conductors entering or leaving an outdoor trench if those conductors have physical protection in the form of rigid metal conduit, intermediate metal conduit, rigid polyvinyl chloride conduit (PVC), or reinforced thermosetting resin conduit (RTRC) having a length not exceeding 3.05 m (10 ft), and if the number of conductors does not exceed four. "
 

jzadroga

Member
Location
MA
Infinity and Dennis, I see your point and after reading your comments closely I can see your point. Table 310-15(B)(16) states what the maximum ampacities for a conductor are and table 310.15(B)(7) modifies that for residential services. Does anyone see any engineering/practical reason other than code that a paralleled service conductors equivalent in ampacity should not be used?
 

infinity

Moderator
Staff member
Location
New Jersey
Occupation
Journeyman Electrician
There will be some changes to this section in the 2014 NEC where the ungrounded conductors will be permitted to be sized at 83% of their normal ampacity.

6-49a Log #CP604 NEC-P06

Final Action:
Accept
(310.15(B)(7))
________________________________________________________________

TCC Action: The Correlating Committee directs that the panel clarify
their action on this proposal.

The Correlating Committee also directs the panel to revise the
Informational Note as it contains permissive language, i.e. the word
?may?. This action will be considered as a public comment.
Submitter:
Code-Making Panel 6,
Recommendation:
Delete Table 310.15(B)(7) and replace 310.15(B)(7) with
the following:

(7) 120/240 Volt, Single-Phase Dwelling Services and Feeders.
For service and feeder conductors of 120/240-volt, single-phase, individual dwelling unit
one-family, two-family, and multifamily service ratings from 100 through 400
amperes, an adjustment factor of 0.83 of the service ampere rating shall be
permitted to be used to determine the size of the ungrounded conductors. The
grounded conductor shall be permitted to be smaller than the ungrounded
conductors, provided that the requirements of 215.2, 220.61, and 230.42 are
met.
Informational No. 1: The conductor ampacity may require other correction or
adjustment factors applicable to the conductor installation.
Informational No. 2: See example DXXX in Annex D.
Substantiation:
It was determined that during the 1956 Proceedings of the
Sixteenth NFPA Annual Meeting that 84 percent was used to establish the
aluminum residential service conductor size. However, if the panel used 84
percent in the changed language, it would have resulted in larger sizes for some
of the conductors, compared to the sizes in the 2011 NEC. Since the panel had
no technical substantiation to justify these changes, 83 percent was used to
maintain consistency with the sizes in the 2011 Table 310.15(B)(7).

In order to address the various proposals submitted suggesting changes to
310.15(B)(7), the panel analyzed the existing language and determined that the
conductor sizes in Table 310.15(B)(7) are equivalent to those that would be
used if a 0.83 multiplier was applied to each service ampere rating. The
resulting conductor size will be the same as existing text in Table 310.15(B)(7),
if the same conductor types and installation conditions are applied.

The informational note was added to make it clear that adjustment and
correction factors apply depending on conditions of use. This action no longer
requires the definition of a ?main power feeder? in 310.15(B)(7).
Panel Meeting Action: Accept
Number Eligible to Vote: 10
Ballot Results:
Affirmative: 9 Negative: 1
 
Infinity and Dennis, I see your point and after reading your comments closely I can see your point. Table 310-15(B)(16) states what the maximum ampacities for a conductor are and table 310.15(B)(7) modifies that for residential services. Does anyone see any engineering/practical reason other than code that a paralleled service conductors equivalent in ampacity should not be used?

To answer your question: will 2c x 2/0 per phase work? Yes, assuming actual load does not exceed 350A.
Is it to code? No.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top