Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 35

Thread: Breakers of the same size in series

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    2,461
    Quote Originally Posted by kwired View Post
    Why do you think it is not in series?

    It definitely is not in parallel.
    Because there's no appreciable resistance. It's not in parallel or series. It's not even a complete circuit. If you put the neutral from the first panel on the main on the second panel, then hooked the branch circuit ungroundeds to the breakers of the second panel while landing the neutrals to the breakers on the first panel, then maybe you could call that in series.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Placerville, CA, USA
    Posts
    18,450
    Looking at it a different way: If opening either breaker cuts off current to the load, then the three are in series.

    Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

  3. #13
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    3,807
    Quote Originally Posted by jaylectricity View Post
    Because there's no appreciable resistance. It's not in parallel or series. It's not even a complete circuit. If you put the neutral from the first panel on the main on the second panel, then hooked the branch circuit ungroundeds to the breakers of the second panel while landing the neutrals to the breakers on the first panel, then maybe you could call that in series.
    Dude, they're in series. You're overthinking it.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,325
    Quote Originally Posted by GoldDigger View Post
    Looking at it a different way: If opening either breaker cuts off current to the load, then the three are in series.

    Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
    Where did three sneak in?
    The more they overthink the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    NE Nebraska
    Posts
    33,711
    Quote Originally Posted by dkidd View Post
    Where did three sneak in?
    Two breakers and the load, there is at least one other thing in the series - the source.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    2,461
    The breaker is a splice. A splice with a handle. A feed-in/feed-out. It's not a series. YOU'RE overthinking it.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Placerville, CA, USA
    Posts
    18,450
    Quote Originally Posted by jaylectricity View Post
    The breaker is a splice. A splice with a handle. A feed-in/feed-out. It's not a series. YOU'RE overthinking it.
    You, on the other hand are under thinking it.
    A closed loop for applying Kirchoff's voltage law is a set of series elements, while the wires connecting to a node to apply the current law are in some sense in parallel.

    If I open a splice (with or without a handle), the current stops flowing, so it must be in series.

    You, on the other hand, seem to think that series and parallel only apply to loads and sources.

    Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    NE Nebraska
    Posts
    33,711
    Quote Originally Posted by jaylectricity View Post
    The breaker is a splice. A splice with a handle. A feed-in/feed-out. It's not a series. YOU'RE overthinking it.
    If you don't put the breaker in series with the path of current it won't stop current flow when it opens, it just opens whatever parallel path(s) are connected to it.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX, USA
    Posts
    8,557
    Quote Originally Posted by jaylectricity View Post
    The breaker is a splice. A splice with a handle. A feed-in/feed-out. It's not a series. YOU'RE overthinking it.
    Electrically, the breakers are in series. "In series" might mean something else special to you, but all the current from the source to the load passes first through one breaker and then through the other. They are by the definition of the word in series.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    San Francisco, CA, USA
    Posts
    7,020
    Quote Originally Posted by jaylectricity View Post
    Why don't you want twice the protection?
    Aside from the strange side trip into the definition of "series", I'll also point out that having two breakers in series is not "twice the protection", it's the SAME protection, twice. Or in other words, it's redundant, not additive. There is a difference.

    To reiterate what I said earlier, the argument against it is that you will now spend more time trying to determine WHICH of the redundant protection devices acted on the fault current, increasing your troubleshooting time and thus, down time losses if it's any kind of a production or processing facility.
    __________________________________________________ ____________________________
    Many people are shocked when they discover I am not a good electrician...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •