Pin Adapters - Lug Listing

[publicgood]

It is my under standing: Molded case breaker mechanical lug sets are listed for Class B or C conductors only. Using DLO cable, for example, requires conductor sleeves.

I also understand some manufacturers have single hole compression kits you can have as an accessory on a molded case breaker.

That said, assuming the proper size pin adapter and insulating covers are used, are mechanical lugs listed for use with pin adapters (such as a Burndy product)?

 

[oldsparky52]

I've done it for years and never had it questioned. AFAIK, the lugs are listed to have the pin adapters used.

You do need to make sure the pin adapter is listed for the fine strand cable, not all of them are, and it's important to use the correct crimper.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Unless the pin adapter has a pin made of a class B or C stranded conductor, the mechanical lugs are not typically listed as being suitable for a pin adapter. I don't see any real world issue, just a code and listing issue.

 

[publicgood]

Pin Adapters: MCCBs

Pin Adapters: MCCBs

As I understand it, MCCB mechanical lugs are rated for Stranded B or C wire. If you use finer strand, such as DLO cable, you need to use conductor sleeves.

What about pin adapters? Would MCCB lugs be listed for solid wire in all size range they list? Similar to:

https://www.hubbell.com/burndy/en/P...erminals/Pin-Terminals-and-Adapters/c/2146657

I've also seen pin adapters that have wire instead of a solid pin, but they don't say Stand B or C:

http://www.nsiindustries.com/catalog/nsiproducts/connectors/pin-terminals

Are these pin adapters suitable for use via their UL 486A/B listing? Does NEC 110.14 play into this?

When I tried asking one major equipment manufacturer I received this response:

The solid pin connector cannot be used in our MCCB connectors. We would not be able to meet the torque, temperature, or secureness requirements with the solid pin.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

I moved publicgood's new thread here (post above) because it is basically the same. [MENTION=154426]publicgood[/MENTION]

 

[Jraef]

As I understand it, MCCB mechanical lugs are rated for Stranded B or C wire. If you use finer strand, such as DLO cable, you need to use conductor sleeves.

What about pin adapters? Would MCCB lugs be listed for solid wire in all size range they list? Similar to:

https://www.hubbell.com/burndy/en/P...erminals/Pin-Terminals-and-Adapters/c/2146657

I've also seen pin adapters that have wire instead of a solid pin, but they don't say Stand B or C:

http://www.nsiindustries.com/catalog/nsiproducts/connectors/pin-terminals

Are these pin adapters suitable for use via their UL 486A/B listing? Does NEC 110.14 play into this?

When I tried asking one major equipment manufacturer I received this response:

The solid pin connector cannot be used in our MCCB connectors. We would not be able to meet the torque, temperature, or secureness requirements with the solid pin.

The devices referenced in your post are not for this purpose, they are for transitioning from Al to Cu wire. So the Cu pigtail is smaller than the side for the stranded Al wire, it's not for terminating fine stranded Cu wire.

Burndy and Ilsco do make pin adaptors for use with DLO, but they are NOT UL listed.

The only adaptors I have ever found that can be used for DLO to go into a mechanical lug that are UL listed are made by Greaves, called a "Shoo Pin", and they have a short piece of B stranded wire on the business end, so the issue of a solid pin terminating into a breaker lug is irrelevant.

It is an interesting point though; the solid pin mfrs list the pins as termination devices, and state that their intended purpose is to terminate into MCCB lugs. But the MCCB mfr does not list their lugs to have solid pins terminating in them. Which one wins out? My vote is with the MCCB mfrs.

 

[LarryFine]

It is an interesting point though; the solid pin mfrs list the pins as termination devices, and state that their intended purpose is to terminate into MCCB lugs. But the MCCB mfr does not list their lugs to have solid pins terminating in them. Which one wins out? My vote is with the MCCB mfrs.

Would that mean you also don't like using classified breakers?

 

[Jraef]

Would that mean you also don't like using classified breakers?

Yeah, you're right, similar issue.

And no, I don't mind using classified breakers. So I guess I'm a hypocrite...

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Would that mean you also don't like using classified breakers?

I object to using classified breakers only because UL absolutely insists that every published word from a manufacturer is a 110.3(B) instruction. The panel manufacturer always has a published statement saying to only use their breakers in their panels. Until they resolve that conflict, I will object to the use of classified breakers. Note, I don't see any real world issue in using them, and I am only objecting to UL having statement that are 100% opposed to each other.

 

[yesterlectric]

On the class B or C stranding issue, if one uses Panduit brand pin adapters, those ones basically go to a piece of copper stranded wire.

On the equipment compatibility issue, you certainly can't use them if the manufacturer prohibits it.

I had a circumstance one time where we were using a UL listed dead front switchboard fabrication shop to make 480V switchgear using molded case breakers from a particular manufacturer. That breaker manufacturer didn't make a lug kit for their breakers that was large enough for the wire we needed for our scenario. Pin adapters were proposed by our switchgear shop, and our client asked we prove the breaker manufacturer allowed this. Breaker manufacturer would neither endorse it, nor prohibit it. They said they knew it was frequently was done, but that warranty would be voided if post-incident it was discovered that use of pin adapters was the reason for a failure.

We had the fabrication shop ship the gear with the pin adapters bolted onto the breakers. The UL listed shop is the one that makes decisions on compatibility of components for their specific application, and absent of an outright prohibition by the manufacturer, it is reasonable to rely on the UL listed shop to perform its evaluation. The shop warrantied it instead.