Problem or not? You make the call!

Status
Not open for further replies.

ivsenroute

Senior Member
Location
Florida
Electrician runs 2 circuits for the kitchen counter receptacles as required.

However:

With both (2) home runs of 12/2 he connects the blacks to a double pole 20amp circuit breaker in the panel instead of separate breakers. This was not a shared neutral installation in case you were wondering.

You make the call!
 

charlie b

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Lockport, IL
Occupation
Retired Electrical Engineer
NEC compliant? Yes.

Owner happy? For the moment, yes. But the owner might wake up to the situation later, and not be happy.

Is that an NEC issue? No.

Agree with M.D.? Yes.
 

roger

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Fl
Occupation
Retired Electrician
ivsenroute said:
Poor installation
Why do you think it's a poor installation? Do you expect either circuit to be tripping frequently?

Roger
 

roger

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Fl
Occupation
Retired Electrician
Jon, even though it is not on a single yoke, 210.7(B) recognizes Multiple Branch Circuits and would require them to be on a two pole breaker for a 210.7(B) application.

Roger
 

charlie b

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Lockport, IL
Occupation
Retired Electrical Engineer
roger said:
Why do you think it's a poor installation? Do you expect either circuit to be tripping frequently?
I wouldn't expect that. But I mentioned the possibility of a future unhappy owner because of the possibility of future modifications. You would lose all SA outlets, to replace or add one outlet on one of the SA circuits. Merely inconvenient, but an unnecessary inconvenience. That is why I would call it a poor installation.
 

winnie

Senior Member
Location
Springfield, MA, USA
Occupation
Electric motor research
roger said:
Jon, even though it is not on a single yoke, 210.7(B) recognizes Multiple Branch Circuits and would require them to be on a two pole breaker for a 210.7(B) application.

Whoops.

I read the OP a couple of times, but for some reason I imagined that this was a single pole breaker, not a double pole breaker. I retract any suggestion that this situation is a single circuit. :)

-Jon
 

Dennis Alwon

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Chapel Hill, NC
Occupation
Retired Electrical Contractor
winnie said:
Whoops.

I read the OP a couple of times, but for some reason I imagined that this was a single pole breaker, not a double pole breaker. I retract any suggestion that this situation is a single circuit. :)

-Jon
I don't know if we ever can forgive you, Jon. :)
 

wbalsam1

Senior Member
Location
Upper Jay, NY
ivsenroute said:
Electrician runs 2 circuits for the kitchen counter receptacles as required.

However:

With both (2) home runs of 12/2 he connects the blacks to a double pole 20amp circuit breaker in the panel instead of separate breakers. This was not a shared neutral installation in case you were wondering.

You make the call!

Would 240.8 apply? Are they individual circuit breakers being connected in parallel? In other words 2 single pole breakers with a handle tie? Or is it 1 double pole breaker? Also, 240.20(B)(1)&(2) seems to indicate that you should use 2 individual CB's.
 

charlie b

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Lockport, IL
Occupation
Retired Electrical Engineer
wbalsam1 said:
Also, 240.20(B)(1)&(2) seems to indicate that you should use 2 individual CB's.
I don't think so. Both of these paragraphs are worded in the "shall be permitted" sense. This proposed installation meets 240.20(B), so there is no need to go to the "unless otherwise permitted" language that follows.
 

charlie b

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Lockport, IL
Occupation
Retired Electrical Engineer
wbalsam1 said:
Are they individual circuit breakers being connected in parallel?
They wouldn't be in parallel unless they were connected together at both ends. On the supply side, they attached to opposite poles of the panel. On the load side, they each supply a different set of SA outlets. That is not a parallel situation.
 

wbalsam1

Senior Member
Location
Upper Jay, NY
charlie b said:
I don't think so. Both of these paragraphs are worded in the "shall be permitted" sense. This proposed installation meets 240.20(B), so there is no need to go to the "unless otherwise permitted" language that follows.

I'm just raising it as a talking point...My concern would be if one circuit is faulted, will there be a positive off by the strictly mechanical means of the handle-tie or an electrical disconnect by the make-up of the internal workings of the DP breaker? What effect, if any, would that have? Is there any legitimate concern? :)
 

charlie b

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Lockport, IL
Occupation
Retired Electrical Engineer
If one side faults, the breaker trips, taking both poles with it. Again, that is an inconvenience, but is no worse a concern than that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top