1. Originally Posted by GoldDigger
And therefore probably not relevant for an analysis of the NEC.

Darn tootin!!!

Donâ€™t be bringing that there logical type stuff into a discussion. Confuses me.

2. Junior Member
Join Date
Aug 2016
Location
Milford, Pennsylvania, USA
Posts
11
Originally Posted by Ingenieur
he is only using 1 30 from each pedestal
not 2 if it has 2
5 x 30 x 0.8 x 0.9 = 108 A

the note is not clear
it says use the largest
it does not address if you have 2 'largest'
The 108a is listed as the "effective current", which is still one more step. And the chart shows the receptacle quantity as (9). I don't know why the designer chose to use effective current here but am I correct that the formula that should have been used here to find effective current is:
Ieff=I/sqrt(2)? Which in this case would be 194.4/1.4142=137.5a.

3. Originally Posted by JB78
The 108a is listed as the "effective current", which is still one more step. And the chart shows the receptacle quantity as (9). I don't know why the designer chose to use effective current here but am I correct that the formula that should have been used here to find effective current is:
Ieff=I/sqrt(2)? Which in this case would be 194.4/1.4142=137.5a.
no
imo the sqrt2 is not involved
that is used to convert a sinusoidal wave from the peak value to the rms value

post the chart

4. Junior Member
Join Date
Aug 2016
Location
Milford, Pennsylvania, USA
Posts
11
Originally Posted by Ingenieur
no
imo the sqrt2 is not involved
that is used to convert a sinusoidal wave from the peak value to the rms value

post the chart
I think the attachment took. This is just the first two circuits. Let me know.

Thanks,
JB78

5. Originally Posted by JB78
I think the attachment took. This is just the first two circuits. Let me know.

Thanks,
JB78
Whatever your EE is doing is wrong.

Using the term effective current is wrong here.

RFI the guy and ask where the heck he came up with using it here.

6. Originally Posted by JB78
I think the attachment took. This is just the first two circuits. Let me know.

Thanks,
JB78
the numbers make no sense
looks like he fudging stuff

270 x 0.8 x 0.9 x X = 108 so X = 0.5556
240 x 0.9 x 0.9 x X = 97 so X = 0.4990

no idea what he is doing
what is the 'conduit fill adj.'?

RFI him

7. Originally Posted by jumper
Whatever your EE is doing is wrong.

Using the term effective current is wrong here.

RFI the guy and ask where the heck he came up with using it here.
you know, pot is "not illegal" in CA now. be prepared for lots of weird things popping up

8. Originally Posted by FionaZuppa
you know, pot is "not illegal" in CA now. be prepared for lots of weird things popping up
What in the hell are you talking about?

OP is in PA and I bloody well do not smoke pot, so your point is what?

#### Posting Permissions

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