what do you think

[Ponchik]

usually when i do panel upgrades i install 1.25" riser with (2) 2/0 and one #1 for the neutral. One of my customers had some landscaping work done with a separate contractor and the contractor's electrician told my customer that the service conduit for the 200Amp must be 2" with (3) 3/0 conductors. I assured my customer that my installation is up to code, it has passed inspection and i offer 10year workmanship warranty.

When i was talking with the other electrician he kept insisting that 3/0 is the way to go and that is what he has been doing for # of years. He told my customer that my installation will cause problems and my installation is not up to code.

So, what i am asking you is your comments about my installation. even though my client trusts my installation I will forward this thread to my customer as well.


Thank you

 

[jumper]

Just show your customer the resi table 310.15(B)(6), 2/0 CU is 200A and 1 CU is 150A for the neutral.

 

[ActionDave]

I think the other electricianis dead wrong and needs to be more resource conscious . There is no rational reason to use 3/0 CU on a resi. service. I would bet my next paycheck, and I have a ton of overtime in it, the service conductors will ever see more than 100A.

 

[jumper]

I think the other electricianis dead wrong and needs to be more resource conscious . There is no rational reason to use 3/0 CU on a resi. service. I would bet my next paycheck, and I have a ton of overtime in it, the service conductors will ever see more than 100A.

I agree and I am willing to back this up with your paycheck also.

 

[ActionDave]

I agree and I am willing to back this up with your paycheck also.

Double or nothing?

 

[jumper]

Double or nothing?

Sure, if I am wrong: you give the OP two of your pay checks. I am willing to risk that.:angel:

 

[infinity]

If the other electrician keeps bidding 200 amp services with 2" conduit and #3/0 copper he won't be any competition for you.

 

[charlie b]

Rather than simply saying that “the other electrician” was wrong, I tried to figure out how he might have come to his conclusion that a 3/0 was needed. It was not hard to come up with a possible explanation. I will go on to say that it is possible, based on the limited information provided in post #1, that “the other electrician” might be right.

If you only look at table 310.16, it is clear that a 2/0 does not have the ampacity to support a 200 amp service. But if you are allowed to apply table 310.15(B)(6), then (without regard to ampacity values) you can use a 2/0 for service conductors to a building’s main service panel that is rated at 200 amps. But there is nothing in post #1 that allows us to deduce that the panel upgrades under discussion meet the requirements for applying that table.

So in order for me to make a clear statement to your customer, as to whether you are right or “the other electrician” is right, I will need you to tell me the installation for that particular customer met the conditions listed in article 310.15(B)(6).

 

[cowboyjwc]

I'm not sure where he came up with the 3/0, but the 2" pipe is sometimes a requirement of the utility if you are going more than 3' above the roof line.

And I'll bet Daves paycheck that I'm right.

Sorry, tired this morning, Infinity's right he probably just got the 3/0 from the 310.16.

 

[texie]

Rather than simply saying that ?the other electrician? was wrong, I tried to figure out how he might have come to his conclusion that a 3/0 was needed. It was not hard to come up with a possible explanation. I will go on to say that it is possible, based on the limited information provided in post #1, that ?the other electrician? might be right.

If you only look at table 310.16, it is clear that a 2/0 does not have the ampacity to support a 200 amp service. But if you are allowed to apply table 310.15(B)(6), then (without regard to ampacity values) you can use a 2/0 for service conductors to a building?s main service panel that is rated at 200 amps. But there is nothing in post #1 that allows us to deduce that the panel upgrades under discussion meet the requirements for applying that table.

So in order for me to make a clear statement to your customer, as to whether you are right or ?the other electrician? is right, I will need you to tell me the installation for that particular customer met the conditions listed in article 310.15(B)(6).

And....How do we know that this is not AL and instead of copper, then the "other" electricial contractor would be correct. I'm assumming the riser does not have the drop attached to it so it may not need to be 2", but I did not do the math to see if these conductors fit in a 1.25" RMC. Where is the OP to clarify?

 

[growler]

it has Passed inspection and i offer 10year workmanship warranty.

When i was talking with the other electrician he kept insisting that 3/0 is the way to go and that is what he has been doing for # of years. He told my customer that my installation will cause problems and my installation is not up to code.

I don't think I would like another electrician insisting that my work was not up to code or was unsafe in some way.

In this area I would call the head electrical inspector and get his opinion or an official ruling on the matter. :happyyes:

Lots of people have different opinions on how electrical work should be done but only those with authority make any real difference.

 

[jxofaltrds]

Maybe he put a 225 AMP service in back in the day and never got that out of his mind.

 

[Ponchik]

My 200Amp service does qualify for table 310.15(b)(6), service entrance conductors are copper, the service is attached to the riser, our POCO allows a minimum of 1.25" service riser and if goes higher that 42" then it is to be braced and without overfilling the conduit (2) 2/0 & (1) #1 do fit in a 1.25" IMC.

I am i am correct and if i am wrong then i will learn.

The reason for my post is to get the forum's comments so i can forward this to my client and the other electrician. Maybe he will learn something.

It is irritating when others find fault with your installation but have no way of backing their claim.

 

[jxofaltrds]

I install one of these with every upgrade just in case they want to add a microwave or other high use appliance.

 

[texie]

My 200Amp service does qualify for table 310.15(b)(6), service entrance conductors are copper, the service is attached to the riser, our POCO allows a minimum of 1.25" service riser and if goes higher that 42" then it is to be braced and without overfilling the conduit (2) 2/0 & (1) #1 do fit in a 1.25" IMC.

I am i am correct and if i am wrong then i will learn.

The reason for my post is to get the forum's comments so i can forward this to my client and the other electrician. Maybe he will learn something.

It is irritating when others find fault with your installation but have no way of backing their claim.

Sounds like you are in the clear here. Been down this road before with another contractor running his mouth without doing his homework first. Depending on how much time and annoyance these things cause, I sometimes make it point to manage to get them embarressed over it in front of the owner and/or AHJ. I have some pretty funny stories about situations like this that I have been involved in over the years.

 

[charlie b]

My 200Amp service does qualify for table 310.15(b)(6), service entrance conductors are copper. . . .

Based on these two statements, I agree that your installation is code compliant. I further agree that the claim (i.e., that you need a 3/0) by "the other electrician" is wrong.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

The electrician probably doesn't know about the residential Table allowing 2/0 copper for a 200 amp service. The neutral can be as small as a #4 but must be large enough for the calculated load. I suspect most inspectors might question the #1. Most homes don't need much for a neutral as most of the larger loads are 240V. I suspect #1 is good but cannot verify that without a calculation.

I suspect the other EC believes his way is the only way. For myself I always have used 2" but I usually use a 1/0 copper neutral -- I am sure that is overkill and I know I can use 1 1/2" but I bet our suppliers don't even carry 1 1/2" weatherheads as 1 1/4" and 2" are standard around here.

To the homeowner-- I would not worry about this install.

 

[cdslotz]

I just rebuilt the service on my house. 200A service.
I used 3/0 copper on phase and neutral because I had a pile of it in my garage.

Now I have a spec grade, extra heavy duty 200A service

Now my 200A is better than your 200A!

 

[HoosierSparky]

Local POCO Requirements

Local POCO Requirements

POCO's here, provide thier own Service Installation Guideline sheets. Unbraced point-of-attachment maximum height above roof is 20" for 1-1/2" conduit and 30" for 2" and larger.
Wire is as follows:

SERVICE RATING	COPPER	ALUMINUM	WEATHERHEAD & CONDUIT
100A	#4	#2	1-1/2"
125A	#2	#1/0	1-1/2"
150A	#1	#2/0	1-1/2"
200A	#2/0	#4/0	2"
225A	#3/0	#250	2" (2-1/2" IF #250)

They also require a minimum 24" of lead off the weatherhead.

Jurisdictions here, usually only inspect from the bottom of the meter in and drops over walkways, drives, roofs and pools. The rest is generally left to the POCO inspector. The service won't be connected without both the AHJ and POCO approvals and clearances.

 

[renosteinke]

The PoCo here in Arkansas, as well as my prior PoCo in Nevada, both specified a minimum 2" mast.

I hate to keep mentioning this, BUT .... if it's a 'service,' you need to look to the PoCo requirements!