Square D Breaker in Siemens Panel

Status
Not open for further replies.
N

NCHI

Member
First post here but I'm looking for assistance with a panel I inspected yesterday.

Home was built in 1990 and has a Siemens I-T-E Load Center panel. All branch breakers are HOM Square D. Panel label indicates only I-T-E breakers should be used or it will void the warranty. Since the panel has not been modified since original build, I'm thinking these breakers may have been OK to use.

Any help would be appreciated. (I have contacted Siemems direct but it will be Monday before I hear back from them)

Thanks again,
Robert
 
NCHI said:
First post here but I'm looking for assistance with a panel I inspected yesterday.

Home was built in 1990 and has a Siemens I-T-E Load Center panel. All branch breakers are HOM Square D. Panel label indicates only I-T-E breakers should be used or it will void the warranty. Since the panel has not been modified since original build, I'm thinking these breakers may have been OK to use.

Any help would be appreciated. (I have contacted Siemems direct but it will be Monday before I hear back from them)

Thanks again,
Robert
Click to expand...

Square D has never had a UL 'listing' or 'classification' for their HOM breakers in other manufacturers panels.
 
jim dungar said:
Square D has never had a UL 'listing' or 'classification' for their HOM breakers in other manufacturers panels.
Click to expand...

I did write it up as mixed brands in panel a recommended a licensed electrician inspect/ repair as needed. Just curious if the electrician will replace all the breakers... guess we'll see :)

Thanks!
 
Mixed Brands

Mixed Brands

I see a lot of that in my area. SD HL, Siemens/ITE, CH/BR, GE, a few Challenger and old T & B. I try to keep enough breakers not to mix them, but I don't swap them if already there. Though not UL approved, I haven't seen any more trouble from mixed brands than those kept "pure". I don't see UL as that great of a quality symbol anyway. They approved backstabbing, Federal Pacific and Zinsco. I rest my case.
 
Last edited:
jmellc said:
I see a lot of that in my area. SD HL, Siemens/ITE, CH/BR, GE, a few Challenger and old T & B. I try to keep enough breakers not to mix them, but I don't swap them if already there. Though not UL approved, I haven't seen any more trouble from mixed brands than those kept "pure". I don't see UL as that great of a quality symbol anyway. They approved backstabbing, Federal Pacific and Zinsco. I rest my case.
Click to expand...

UL is not necessarily a guarantee of longterm quality or performance. Many product performance issues are directly related to the level of workmanship or application. However, any NRTL will "pull the listing" as soon as they validate that the product does not meet standards. The key word is "validate" and this could take a long time depending on the severity and consistency of the problem. They did this with Zinsco in the early 70's and Federal Pacific more recently.

A panel manufacturer is not required to have an NRTL evaluate competitor brands breakers in their panel. (maybe they should..). Some panel mfr's have purposely "keyed" their breakers to their panels so that their breakers cannot be used in any other panel except their own. However, there are other possible performance issues that could cause safety and reliability issues (i.e. slightly different busbar tolerances/designs, different breaker contact designs, etc.).

In Zinsco's case, the failure was primarily at the aluminum busbar / breaker interface and high contact resistance. The failures increased over time which would indicate a possible relation to oxidation or loss of contact pressure. When these breakers failed to trip or encountered a short circuit situation, they blew up or caused the conductors to heat up and melt. Because of the relatively cheap design and price point, better materials were not used. They were sufficient to pass the initial UL testing at the time.

With regards to FPE, not only were the panel/breakers substandard, the test results at UL were misrepresented.

In a class-action lawsuit against FPE/Reliance in New Jersey, the Court found that Federal Pacific Electric Co. (FPE) committed fraud by representing that their FPE Stab-Lok(R) circuit breakers met the applicable (UL) standard test requirements when in fact they did not. The Court's finding of fraud, published in 2005, indicates that FPE cheated on the tests that were required to obtain UL listings. The company improperly applied UL labels to circuit breakers that could not and did not meet the UL requirements. FPE covered up the defective performance of the circuit breakers by a long-standing practice of fraudulent testing. The Court's finding helps resolve the question as to how the defective breakers got into the marketplace and into homes." -- 2007 FPE Stab-Lok TECHNICAL REPORT, p.1, Dr. Jess Aronstein
Click to expand...

http://www.inspectapedia.com/fpe/FPE_IAEI.htm

http://www.inspectapedia.com/fpe/FPESummary.htm

I am sure more stringent oversight and testing of overcurrent protection devices have been put in place at all NRTL's since FPE, and more recently, with SquareD counterfeit CB's.

The bottom line, is that while *most* manufacturers follow the proper protocol and procedures, there are some that cut corners in order to gain a price edge. We all know where that leads...:roll:
 
Well, I am glad to find out that much, that Federal wasn't straight with UL. But I still see a lot of equipment with UL labels with lots of no no's. Grounds terminated with tek screws, ungrounded metal parts, sloppy & loose fmc runs, wiring boxes too small for factory wiring, much less our feeders. Hot to shell on various panel lights.
 
NCHI said:
First post here but I'm looking for assistance with a panel I inspected yesterday.

Home was built in 1990 and has a Siemens I-T-E Load Center panel. All branch breakers are HOM Square D. Panel label indicates only I-T-E breakers should be used or it will void the warranty. Since the panel has not been modified since original build, I'm thinking these breakers may have been OK to use.

Any help would be appreciated. (I have contacted Siemems direct but it will be Monday before I hear back from them)

Thanks again,
Robert
Click to expand...


So you are going to call Siemens and ask them if the warranty is voided on their panel that was installed with the wrong breaker 20 years ago ? :confused: :D

Technically that breaker shouldn't be in there. But in reality it is no big deal.
 
Actually, some manufacturers do indeed submit their breakers to be used in older panels, but usually only those in some way connected or associated by legacy. I know for sure that Cutler Hammer has listed their current plug-on breakers to be used in several older brands such as Westinghouse, Bryant and Challenger. Siemens lists their current plug-on breakers in Murray (obviously) but also older ITE, Goulds and Siemens-Allis panels, even though ITE was not owned by Siemens at the time those panels were built and Siemens-Allis was technically a different company than the present day Siemens Energy. You can request a UL document from either of them that can be presented to inspectors proving this.

But none of them have any incentive to list their breakers with non-related current competitors' products, so I have never seen any documents to that effect.
 
Jraef said:
Actually, some manufacturers do indeed submit their breakers to be used in older panels, but usually only those in some way connected or associated by legacy. I know for sure that Cutler Hammer has listed their current plug-on breakers to be used in several older brands such as Westinghouse, Bryant and Challenger. Siemens lists their current plug-on breakers in Murray (obviously) but also older ITE, Goulds and Siemens-Allis panels, even though ITE was not owned by Siemens at the time those panels were built and Siemens-Allis was technically a different company than the present day Siemens Energy. You can request a UL document from either of them that can be presented to inspectors proving this.

But none of them have any incentive to list their breakers with non-related current competitors' products, so I have never seen any documents to that effect.
Click to expand...
While they are not listed, there are classified breakers from one manufacturer intended to be used in another manufacturers current product line.
 
Why Made Similar?

Why Made Similar?

I should have brought this up earlier. I tend to think many mfr's do make their stuff to interchange, in spite of what they print and say. Otherwise, each one would have distinctly different busbars, brackets, etc. But we see largely the same busbars on ITE/Gould/Siemens, Bryant/CH br, GE and SD hl. I don't think that was all coincidence. In general, these breakers all interchange. Compare to CH ch, SD qo or SD I Line. Same true with Federal and Zinsco, though sorry stuff. No way possible to swap those breakers. Someone else may have more history & background info. If so, I'd like to know more.
 
Some of the pool sub panels Ive seen list many different manufacturer type breakers that can be used in there panel.
 
Russ Edwards

Russ Edwards

If the current and voltage rating of the circuit breaker match the circuit and the inturrupted rating of the individual circuit breaker matches the inturrupted rating of the main breaker it is my understanding that there would be no operational problem in using a different circuit breaker not matching the panel manufacturer. One thing is certain. if the inturrupted rating is different then you should not use that circuit breaker as the replacement. Does anyone else have this understanding?
 
Russ Edwards said:
If the current and voltage rating of the circuit breaker match the circuit and the inturrupted rating of the individual circuit breaker matches the inturrupted rating of the main breaker it is my understanding that there would be no operational problem in using a different circuit breaker not matching the panel manufacturer. One thing is certain. if the inturrupted rating is different then you should not use that circuit breaker as the replacement. Does anyone else have this understanding?
Click to expand...
No. The issue is the connection between the breaker and the panel bus. They are not all the same and even when they look the same, there may be enough difference to cause an issue.
 
jmellc said:
I should have brought this up earlier. I tend to think many mfr's do make their stuff to interchange, in spite of what they print and say. Otherwise, each one would have distinctly different busbars, brackets, etc. But we see largely the same busbars on ITE/Gould/Siemens, Bryant/CH br, GE and SD hl. I don't think that was all coincidence. In general, these breakers all interchange. Compare to CH ch, SD qo or SD I Line. Same true with Federal and Zinsco, though sorry stuff. No way possible to swap those breakers. Someone else may have more history & background info. If so, I'd like to know more.
Click to expand...

I have an ITE/ Siemens single pole 20 amp breaker that will fit in SQ-D QO panel, never seen one before, and probley never again, but the mounting is just like a QO but the breaker looks like a Siemens with the siemens markings and all.

I'll try to remember to get a photo of it, when I go into the shop.
 
hurk27 said:
I have an ITE/ Siemens single pole 20 amp breaker that will fit in SQ-D QO panel, never seen one before, and probley never again, but the mounting is just like a QO but the breaker looks like a Siemens with the siemens markings and all.

I'll try to remember to get a photo of it, when I go into the shop.
Click to expand...
Yes, Siemens makes what is called a "QD" Series breaker that is UL listed and "classified" to be used in a very specific list of Sq. D load centers. The list comes in the box with the breakers, but you CANNOT use them willy-nilly in place of QO breakers. The reason is, some QO load centers are series listed with specific Sq. D mains or sub-feed breakers and if you are using that series rating, the Siemens QD are NOT tested for that.

This entire issue comes down to economics. It costs a manufacturer roughly $20K per line item to get something listed. So why would a mfr pay an additional $20K for each and every size of breaker and again for each different brand and style of competitive panel just so people could plug them into a competitor's panel and thereby allowing them to not buy their own panel? There is almost no profit at the mfrs end of circuit breakers, they make their money on the gear.

So why did Siemens do it with the QD? Rumor is, to get back at Sq. D for the Homeline.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top