Parking light poles overcurrent

[Gary11734]

If you're using an OCPD at each pole could you can apply a tap rule then the fact that this is a 40 amp circuit would become irrelevant?

If I was building this circuit for future lighting in a parking lot, I would do exactly how its stated. I might want to add 50 lighting poles to this one circuit in the future. I see no reason to apply 210 23 C to this application if I'm fusing it at the fixture. The branch wire is protected. The fixture is protected. What could be the issue here? I've been wrong before, so this will not be my first, or last! And the fix, change the breaker and everyone is happy.

 

[infinity]

If I was building this circuit for future lighting in a parking lot, I would do exactly how its stated. I might want to add 50 lighting poles to this one circuit in the future. I see no reason to apply 210 23 C to this application if I'm fusing it at the fixture. The branch wire is protected. The fixture is protected. What could be the issue here? I've been wrong before, so this will not be my first, or last! And the fix, change the breaker and everyone is happy.

There are two different scenarios in this thread, a 40 amp branch circuit without heavy duty lamp holders (violation) and what you've mentioned, individual OCPD at each light pole. 210.23(C) would apply to the prior scenario not the one you've mentioned.

 

[kwired]

If I was building this circuit for future lighting in a parking lot, I would do exactly how its stated. I might want to add 50 lighting poles to this one circuit in the future. I see no reason to apply 210 23 C to this application if I'm fusing it at the fixture. The branch wire is protected. The fixture is protected. What could be the issue here? I've been wrong before, so this will not be my first, or last! And the fix, change the breaker and everyone is happy.

I agree that the branch wire is protected and that the luminaire and fixture wire is protected. The devil may be in the details though. I haven't read enough yet to say whether this is allowed or not. Load side of a supplemental protective device is not a new branch circuit - that I am fairly certain of.

 

[infinity]

I agree that the branch wire is protected and that the luminaire and fixture wire is protected. The devil may be in the details though. I haven't read enough yet to say whether this is allowed or not. Load side of a supplemental protective device is not a new branch circuit - that I am fairly certain of.

What about a tap rule?

 

[Gary11734]

I agree that the branch wire is protected and that the luminaire and fixture wire is protected. The devil may be in the details though. I haven't read enough yet to say whether this is allowed or not. Load side of a supplemental protective device is not a new branch circuit - that I am fairly certain of.

I know that the branch wire to the fixture is protected. I know the fixture is protected. What is the problem? What is the devil in this scenario? Are we going to try and make it not work? Is there a safety problem? Is there a fire issue? Does this create a safety hazard? And, I never thought of the tap rules when hooking up in-line fuses on fixtures to twenty amp circuits.

 

[kwired]

I know that the branch wire to the fixture is protected. I know the fixture is protected. What is the problem? What is the devil in this scenario? Are we going to try and make it not work? Is there a safety problem? Is there a fire issue? Does this create a safety hazard? And, I never thought of the tap rules when hooking up in-line fuses on fixtures to twenty amp circuits.

You probably don't think of tap rules when wiring troffers with 18 AWG whips all that often either, but it is the tap rules that allow that 18 AWG whip.

I'm not saying what you are suggesting is wrong, but if someone does find it to not be code compliant, it will likely involve tap rules and/or branch circuit technicalities. I don't know how to factor in "supplemental protection" at this point, haven't looked into it hard enough to give a definite answer. AFAIK so far you still have a 40 or 50 amp branch circuit, if you put in a supplemental fuse for an individual luminaire that doesn't create an additional branch circuit, unless the overcurrent device you use is a listed branch circuit device, which in line fuseholders are not.

 

[tortuga]

I am NOT following 210 at all. I have fused the fixtures at their location. The breaker at the panel is protecting the wire, #8. Why do I care about heavy-duty lamp holders since I'm fusing the fixture at its location with the appropriate fuse? What was the intent of 210 23 C in the first place? To make sure everything in the circuit was capable of handling the current that could be applied. The fuse in the fixture does this. At least that is how I'm looking at it...

Got it, With all due respect unless there is a real OCPD (a fused disconnect) at each pole, I see 240.10 as classifying the entire thing a 40 Amp outside branch circuit. I looked in 225 for exemptions and 225.7 just re-invokes 210.
We are allowed to tap 'fixture wires' per 240.21
That sends us to → 210.20(B) Flexible cords and fixture wires shall be
protected in accordance with 240.5.
240.5 has two options:
→ 240.5 Protection of Flexible Cords, Flexible Cables, and
Fixture Wires. Flexible cord and flexible cable, including tinsel
cord and extension cords, and fixture wires shall be protected
against overcurrent by either 240.5(A) or (B).

→ 240.5 (A) with your supplemental fuse a smaller than 12AWG conductor can be used as fixture wire.
OR (without the fuse)
→ 240.5(B)(2)(5) → 40A circuit requires 12AWG fixture wire.

However in all this I see no modification of the rules requiring a heavy duty lampholder.

However, after looking up that spec sheet for your fixed lighting units it appears they do not contain a lampholder, which if true makes them 'other utilization equipment', and so the whole lampholder issue is moot.

There are two different scenarios in this thread, a 40 amp branch circuit without heavy duty lamp holders (violation) and what you've mentioned, individual OCPD at each light pole. 210.23(C) would apply to the prior scenario not the one you've mentioned.

I think in both scenarios the 40A circuit is a branch circuit and 210.23(C) applies to both. A 15 or 20A branch circuit would need to be created by a real OCPD not a supplemental one. I would be interested to see those specs on the fuse holder.

You probably don't think of tap rules when wiring troffers with 18 AWG whips all that often either, but it is the tap rules that allow that 18 AWG whip.

Tap rule:
240.21 Location in Circuit. Overcurrent protection shall be
provided in each ungrounded circuit conductor and shall be
located at the point where the conductors receive their supply
except as specified in 240.21(A) through (H). Conductors sup-
plied under the provisions of 240.21(A) through (H) shall not
supply another conductor except through an overcurrent protec-
tive device meeting the requirements of 240.4.
(A) Branch-Circuit Conductors. Branch-circuit tap conduc-
tors meeting the requirements specified in 210.19 shall be permit-
ted to have overcurrent protection as specified in 210.20.

→ 210.20 (B) Conductor Protection. Conductors shall be protected in
accordance with 240.4. Flexible cords and fixture wires shall be
protected in accordance with 240.5.

I'm not saying what you are suggesting is wrong, but if someone does find it to not be code compliant, it will likely involve tap rules and/or branch circuit technicalities. I don't know how to factor in "supplemental protection" at this point, haven't looked into it hard enough to give a definite answer. AFAIK so far you still have a 40 or 50 amp branch circuit, if you put in a supplemental fuse for an individual luminaire that doesn't create an additional branch circuit, unless the overcurrent device you use is a listed branch circuit device, which in line fuseholders are not.

And as long as we don't have the lampholder I say the branch circuit technicalities give us the green light.:thumbsup:
And if not there is always 90.4

Happy New Year!

 

[hhsting]

Got it, With all due respect unless there is a real OCPD (a fused disconnect) at each pole, I see 240.10 as classifying the entire thing a 40 Amp outside branch circuit. I looked in 225 for exemptions and 225.7 just re-invokes 210.
We are allowed to tap 'fixture wires' per 240.21
That sends us to → 210.20(B) Flexible cords and fixture wires shall be
protected in accordance with 240.5.
240.5 has two options:
→ 240.5 Protection of Flexible Cords, Flexible Cables, and
Fixture Wires. Flexible cord and flexible cable, including tinsel
cord and extension cords, and fixture wires shall be protected
against overcurrent by either 240.5(A) or (B).

→ 240.5 (A) with your supplemental fuse a smaller than 12AWG conductor can be used as fixture wire.
OR (without the fuse)
→ 240.5(B)(2)(5) → 40A circuit requires 12AWG fixture wire.

However in all this I see no modification of the rules requiring a heavy duty lampholder.

However, after looking up that spec sheet for your fixed lighting units it appears they do not contain a lampholder, which if true makes them 'other utilization equipment', and so the whole lampholder issue is moot.


I think in both scenarios the 40A circuit is a branch circuit and 210.23(C) applies to both. A 15 or 20A branch circuit would need to be created by a real OCPD not a supplemental one. I would be interested to see those specs on the fuse holder.


Tap rule:
240.21 Location in Circuit. Overcurrent protection shall be
provided in each ungrounded circuit conductor and shall be
located at the point where the conductors receive their supply
except as specified in 240.21(A) through (H). Conductors sup-
plied under the provisions of 240.21(A) through (H) shall not
supply another conductor except through an overcurrent protec-
tive device meeting the requirements of 240.4.
(A) Branch-Circuit Conductors. Branch-circuit tap conduc-
tors meeting the requirements specified in 210.19 shall be permit-
ted to have overcurrent protection as specified in 210.20.

→ 210.20 (B) Conductor Protection. Conductors shall be protected in
accordance with 240.4. Flexible cords and fixture wires shall be
protected in accordance with 240.5.



And as long as we don't have the lampholder I say the branch circuit technicalities give us the green light.
And if not there is always 90.4

Happy New Year!

Does the manufacturer specify fixture wire size? 240.5(b)(2)(3) says 20 amps circuit 14awg or larger but 240.5(b)(2)(1) and (2) says something else for 20 amps circuit.

Sent from my SM-G935U using Tapatalk