There are a couple of potential issues here that would concern me more than the wireway.
Are these "service" conductors from a utility transformer, or are they secondary conductors from an SDS ?
Trough Fill
- Thread starter sparky220volt
- Start date
- Status
There are a couple of potential issues here that would concern me more than the wireway.
Are these "service" conductors from a utility transformer, or are they secondary conductors from an SDS ?
sparky220volt
Member
- Location
- Pensacola, FL, USA
The utility transformer sends 4 parallel runs of 4 #500 copper to the trough. They splice in the trough to the feeders to the above panels. Three parallel runs of 400 to one. One run of 350 to another. One run or 250 to another. All three panels then load back into the trough and feed straight through into the building. The chiller also feeds through this trough with one run of 3 300's and a 4 ground.
masterinbama
Senior Member
- Location
- Huntsville Alabama
Then you would have service conductors and feeders in the same enclosure, which is a NEC violation. (someone will give you a reference number I am sure)
Can you not mount your wireway above the panels and feed the loads out of the bottom of them?
Can you not mount your wireway above the panels and feed the loads out of the bottom of them?
sparky220volt
Member
- Location
- Pensacola, FL, USA
I Already mounted all this stuff in the same trough. I did it according to the prints. Every thing is fed underground. I would have to start all over. Which would be a disaster. Is it that the load wires off the breakers can't be in there with the wires from the transformer?
texie
Senior Member
- Location
- Fort Collins, Colorado
- Occupation
- Electrician, Contractor, Inspector
You're looking for Art. 230.7. Not only is this a violation of 230.7, most all POCO's also spell this out as forbidden in their terms of service. That said, I've seen it too many times and it is just a bad practice and I don't think an AHJ or POCO should give any leeway on this.
Last edited:
sparky220volt
Member
- Location
- Pensacola, FL, USA
There are only 3 breakers to kill all the power to the building. And I have a thick skin. If this is wrong. I just hope the engineer/architect drew it wrong.
- Location
- Placerville, CA, USA
- Occupation
- Retired PV System Designer
If your supply conductors are downstream of a breaker, they are not service conductors.
Sorry, I am a bit confused.... do the 4 sets of 500 have any overcurrent protection ahead of your wireway ?
Also, a related question, in th event they are "feeder" taps and not service taps, how long are the
400,350 and 250 taps ?
Also, a related question, in th event they are "feeder" taps and not service taps, how long are the
400,350 and 250 taps ?
- Location
- Placerville, CA, USA
- Occupation
- Retired PV System Designer
When the OP stated that the supply conductors ran straight from "the transformer" I assumed SDS, but you are correct that we do not know.
If SDS, the secondary may be protected by the primary OCPD.
230.7 says raceway, not enclosure.
william talbot
Member
- Location
- Livonia, Michigan.
junior
junior
Your cable from the xfmr capacity is 1520 amps. You have three MLO DP's above the trough. I think you have three feeder CB's in each DP?=9 CB's total? To start with, this looks like a tap rule problem. My quick answer is to take out the trough and install a 1600 amp Distribution Panel with a 1600 amp MCB or Fu/Sw. with room for the 9 feeder bkrs. and space for future loads.
junior
Your cable from the xfmr capacity is 1520 amps. You have three MLO DP's above the trough. I think you have three feeder CB's in each DP?=9 CB's total? To start with, this looks like a tap rule problem. My quick answer is to take out the trough and install a 1600 amp Distribution Panel with a 1600 amp MCB or Fu/Sw. with room for the 9 feeder bkrs. and space for future loads.
- Status