is this legal, as far as using panel as raceway

[brett711]

 

[roger]

Using the panel as a raceway is not the problem, the problem is with the nipples and 300.3(B).

Roger

 

[chris kennedy]

Looks like the OP hasn't finished bringing the ungrounded conductors through the top nipple.

 

[iMuse97]

View attachment 5670

As Roger mentioned in short, you are creating a dangerous situation for inductive heating, as well as possible inductive current.

Solve your problem:
1. Run wire from any individual circuit or network ("hots and neutrals") in the same raceway, ie. through the same nipple.
2. Land neutrals in the same panel where the line side Hots originate.
3.

 

[Volta]

It's always a brave person that will post a picture.

I have always considered offset nipples to use running threads, and feel they won't thread tightly to a coupling 344.42(B).

But looks like the panels will come together just fine.

 

[infinity]

Since offset nipples have straight threads they're not listed for entering a hub.

 

[Sierrasparky]

why the seperate load centers?

 

[brett711]

thankyou for your responses, boss made mistake on order, to small of panel, so we added the sub panel, but i wasnt sure..this in miami, opa locka..

 

[Sierrasparky]

I see, How come you did not use the feed through lugs at the bottom of the all in one?

 

[mark32]

Since offset nipples have straight threads they're not listed for entering a hub.

Hi Rob, are you saying it is a violation if one uses an offset nipple and threads that into a hub? I've never done it but I see installs like the one posted quite often.

 

[infinity]

Hi Rob, are you saying it is a violation if one uses an offset nipple and threads that into a hub? I've never done it but I see installs like the one posted quite often.

There was an article written by Make Ode of UL about a year ago in a trade magazine that stated that hubs have not be tested for use with straight threads. It may be true but then it be a violation to install a PVC terminal adapter, SE cable connector or EMT connector in a hub too. Depends on how far the inspector wants to go to enforce 110.3(B) regarding the listing of the hub.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

Using a plastic offset nipple with rigid pipe is a violation also unless you bond the rigid pipe to the grounded conductor at the top of the riser.

Edit---I see now that it is a metallic offset nipple-- doh.

 

[renosteinke]

I believe that the OP is asking whether the branch circuits from the add-on panel are allowed to pass through the main panel on their way into the building. It's a question that needs a definitive answer, as the HI crowd likes to assert that this is a violation.

As for some other issues ...
-It looks to me that the OP did run both his 'hots' and his neutrals through the same nipple, with the feeder going through the lower nipple. Looks good to me;
-I have an issue with the PVC nipples between the two boxes; there's no bonding of the add-on panel;
-The add-on panel needs to be treated as a sub-panel, with the ground and neutral separated and a ground buss;
(On closer examination, it looks like the OP did address these later two issues as well).

Regarding the offset nipples and hubs, I am not sure that they have straight threads. If they did, I don't see how the one in the picture could have been so completely seated in the hub. I do wonder about just how water-tight that rigid coupling is ... and my PoCo's specs say 'no couplings in the service mast.' Yet another reason I started hanging my masts from 'thin' strut.

That mast does look small; again, my PoCo specifies a minimum 2" mast. The only time I've been allowed an exception was when the existing mast was within a solid brick wall. The mast in the pic looks like 1-1/4" to me.

I'm also a bit unhappy with the generous use of 'skinny' breakers on a new install.

Oh, and don't forget the grounding buss on the outside of the service, for the low voltage guys to use!

 

[Twoskinsoneman]

I'm also a bit unhappy with the generous use of 'skinny' breakers on a new install.

Probably goes along with:

boss made mistake on order, to small of panel, so we added the sub panel, but i wasnt sure..this in miami, opa locka..

:happysad:

 

[infinity]

I believe that the OP is asking whether the branch circuits from the add-on panel are allowed to pass through the main panel on their way into the building. It's a question that needs a definitive answer, as the HI crowd likes to assert that this is a violation. Not a violation

As for some other issues ...
-It looks to me that the OP did run both his 'hots' and his neutrals through the same nipple, with the feeder going through the lower nipple. Looks good to me;
-I have an issue with the PVC nipples between the two boxes; there's no bonding of the add-on panel; There's a green EGC run with the feeder in the bottom nipple
-The add-on panel needs to be treated as a sub-panel, with the ground and neutral separated and a ground buss;
(On closer examination, it looks like the OP did address these later two issues as well).

Regarding the offset nipples and hubs, I am not sure that they have straight threads. If they did, I don't see how the one in the picture could have been so completely seated in the hub. I do wonder about just how water-tight that rigid coupling is ... and my PoCo's specs say 'no couplings in the service mast.' Yet another reason I started hanging my masts from 'thin' strut.

That mast does look small; again, my PoCo specifies a minimum 2" mast. The only time I've been allowed an exception was when the existing mast was within a solid brick wall. The mast in the pic looks like 1-1/4" to me. Looks like 2" to me and not sure if this is even being used a mast since the OP never mentioned it.

I'm also a bit unhappy with the generous use of 'skinny' breakers on a new install. A personal preference of course.

Oh, and don't forget the grounding buss on the outside of the service, for the low voltage guys to use! It's right there under the panel on the left!

 

[don_resqcapt19]

As Roger mentioned in short, you are creating a dangerous situation for inductive heating, as well as possible inductive current.
...

While clearly a violation of the NEC, it is not really a serious or dangerous problem in this case. The Canadian Electrical Code is more technically correct on this issue than is the NEC. The rule in that CEC that is the equivalent to 300.3(B) and 300.20(B) does not apply until the current on the circuits exceeds 200 amps. They understand that the inductive heating does not occur at low currents.

 

[augie47]

It's always a brave person that will post a picture.

.

Like wearing a pork chop in a dog kennel

 

[donselectric]

and its not plumb.

 

[Tom C]

Would landing the neutral in one section and the hot on a breaker in another section be a violation in a two section panel?

 

[Volta]

Would landing the neutral in one section and the hot on a breaker in another section be a violation in a two section panel?

Yes, at least almost always.

210.4(A), 210.4(D), 300.3(B), although on the other hand 300.3(B)(4).