Wolf Ranges etc.

[sfav8r]

We have run into this once again with a 36" Wolf Range. Under the electrical specifications it says "The stove circuit should have it's own 15a circuit breaker." It doesn't say the word required, but it also doesn't just say they recommend it. I finally called them and they said "We recommend that all our products are on dedicated circuits." I told them I have no problem with them RECOMMENDING it but that when they use the word SHOULD it means the same as SHALL and shall means we need a dedicated circuit...which in this case is three floors down as this is a condo. So personally I'm tired of manufacturers having "requirements" like this. I am recommending that the client select a different manufacturer. What do you guys do? I suspect if I just ignore it the local inspector will not read the requirements, but then again Wolf stated flat out that the warranty would be void if the stove isn't on a dedicated circuit. Their position is that the igniter generates noise on the line and is a problem for other products and that the stove electronics are very susceptible to noise from blenders, etc. To me it jusst sounds like bad engineering. There are lots of stoves that don't have this requirement.

• :thumbsup:
  

 

[kwired]

We have run into this once again with a 36" Wolf Range. Under the electrical specifications it says "The stove circuit should have it's own 15a circuit breaker." It doesn't say the word required, but it also doesn't just say they recommend it. I finally called them and they said "We recommend that all our products are on dedicated circuits." I told them I have no problem with them RECOMMENDING it but that when they use the word SHOULD it means the same as SHALL and shall means we need a dedicated circuit...which in this case is three floors down as this is a condo. So personally I'm tired of manufacturers having "requirements" like this. I am recommending that the client select a different manufacturer. What do you guys do? I suspect if I just ignore it the local inspector will not read the requirements, but then again Wolf stated flat out that the warranty would be void if the stove isn't on a dedicated circuit. Their position is that the igniter generates noise on the line and is a problem for other products and that the stove electronics are very susceptible to noise from blenders, etc. To me it jusst sounds like bad engineering. There are lots of stoves that don't have this requirement.

• :thumbsup:

That same line with noise on it connects via the bus in the panelboard to other circuits on the same supply conductor. I have never figured out why line noise was a sole reason to put something on its own circuit.

 

[A/A Fuel GTX]

So personally I'm tired of manufacturers having "requirements" like this.

• :thumbsup:

I agree and will take it a step further with the mfgr's requirement that a bath fan installed within shower and tub spaces be on a GFI. Why??? A recessed can in the same area doesn't have the same requirement.

 

[qcroanoke]

We have run into this once again with a 36" Wolf Range. Under the electrical specifications it says "The stove circuit should have it's own 15a circuit breaker." It doesn't say the word required, but it also doesn't just say they recommend it. I finally called them and they said "We recommend that all our products are on dedicated circuits." I told them I have no problem with them RECOMMENDING it but that when they use the word SHOULD it means the same as SHALL and shall means we need a dedicated circuit...which in this case is three floors down as this is a condo. So personally I'm tired of manufacturers having "requirements" like this. I am recommending that the client select a different manufacturer. What do you guys do? I suspect if I just ignore it the local inspector will not read the requirements, but then again Wolf stated flat out that the warranty would be void if the stove isn't on a dedicated circuit. Their position is that the igniter generates noise on the line and is a problem for other products and that the stove electronics are very susceptible to noise from blenders, etc. To me it jusst sounds like bad engineering. There are lots of stoves that don't have this requirement.

• :thumbsup:
  

To me the word "should" is not a requirement only a suggestion.
The word "shall" means you will do it.
I am not an Inspector but if I were I don't think I would make you run a dedicated circuit to the range because the word "should" was used.
If the word "shall" was used I would expect a dedicated circuit to the range.

This is only my opinion. I would like to hear others.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

I wired a wine cooler that was something like an amp or 2 and it required a separate circuit.

 

[WorkSafe]

The word "should" is the same as a recommendation. It definetly does not mean the same as "shall or will."

 

[gadfly56]

The word "should" is the same as a recommendation. It definetly does not mean the same as "shall or will."

When the manufacturer says they'll void the warranty if you don't do what you "should", that's the same as "shall".

 

[charlie b]

What do I do? Well, I have my Wolf range on a dedicated 20 amp circuit, that's what! :happyyes:

But then, that is what happened to be in place when I bought the house, so that is what I have the stove plugged in to.

The bit about the igniters being impacted by a blender is nonsense. They will still work.

 

[jeremysterling]

To me the word "should" is not a requirement only a suggestion.
The word "shall" means you will do it.
I am not an Inspector but if I were I don't think I would make you run a dedicated circuit to the range because the word "should" was used.
If the word "shall" was used I would expect a dedicated circuit to the range.

This is only my opinion. I would like to hear others.

The word "should" is the same as a recommendation. It definetly does not mean the same as "shall or will."

I agree. "Shall" is an imperative verb that is to be obeyed. "Should" is a suggestion or strong recommendation. There is a huge distinction.

 

[PetrosA]

What do I do? Well, I have my Wolf range on a dedicated 20 amp circuit, that's what! :happyyes:

But then, that is what happened to be in place when I bought the house, so that is what I have the stove plugged in to.

The bit about the igniters being impacted by a blender is nonsense. They will still work.

So if it says to have it on its own 15A circuit, shouldn't you change the breaker out for a 15A?

I think it was the built-in electronics that were supposedly affected by the blender, but if that were true, wouldn't the ignitor affect the built-in electronics, too? Totally senseless

 

[kwired]

I agree. "Shall" is an imperative verb that is to be obeyed. "Should" is a suggestion or strong recommendation. There is a huge distinction.

Did a search in 2008 NEC on CD.

Search for "should" come up with 30 hits. Most of them were in FPN's or notes to tables, or even in front and back materials. One instance in an actual code article was something like "should a second fault occur .....", not exactly a situation of saying you must obey vs. if you wish, you can.....

Also did a search for "shall". That one had 8134 hits.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

From Wolf

The Wolf gas range requires a 110/120 V AC, 50/60 Hz electrical supply to operate the electronic ignition system. The service should have its own 15 amp circuit breaker. A ground fault circuit interrupter (GFCI) is not recommended and may cause interruption of operation.

I love that the service should have it's own 15 amp circuit breaker.

Anyway, this is not a requirement, IMO as many have said.


Page 7 of this pdf
Wolf Range

 

[kwired]

From Wolf

A ground fault circuit interrupter (GFCI) is not recommended and may cause interruption of operation.

I love that the service should have it's own 15 amp circuit breaker.

Anyway, this is not a requirement, IMO as many have said.

I love that a GFCI may cause interruption of operation.

Sounds like homeowner mentality of GFCI's.

 

[sfav8r]

The word "should" is the same as a recommendation. It definetly does not mean the same as "shall or will."

What are you basing that on? Is this in Article 100?

 

[zbang]

What are you basing that on? Is this in Article 100?

NEC (2008) says:

90.5 Mandatory Rules, Permissive Rules, and Explanatory Material.
(A) Mandatory Rules. Mandatory rules of this Code are those that identify actions that are specifically required or prohibited and are characterized by the use of the terms shall or shall not.
(B) Permissive Rules. Permissive rules of this Code are those that identify actions that are allowed but not required, are normally used to describe options or alternative methods, and are characterized by the use of the terms shall be permitted or shall not be required.

Although we have to follow any instructions:

110.3 (B) Installation and Use. Listed or labeled equipment shall be installed and used in accordance with any instructions included in the listing or labeling.

So, nothing in the NEC. I have some other standards that include:

* "MUST"
This word or the adjective "REQUIRED" means that the item is an absolute requirement of the specification.

* "SHOULD"
This word or the adjective "RECOMMENDED" means that there may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore this item, but the full implications should be understood and the case carefully weighed before choosing a different course.

And the Oxford English Dictionary says:

should: 1- used to indicate obligation, duty, or correctness, typically when criticizing someone?s actions:
indicating a desirable or expected state:

When we get back to it, common English usage says that "should have" does not mean the same as "must have". IMHO if Wolf requires a dedicated supply circuit for their devices, that have not said so using plain English.

 

[sfav8r]

NEC (2008) says:

When we get back to it, common English usage says that "should have" does not mean the same as "must have". IMHO if Wolf requires a dedicated supply circuit for their devices, that have not said so using plain English.

I guess at the end of the day I'll just tell future clients they SHOULD use a manufacturer that doesn't have this requirement.

 

[qcroanoke]

I guess at the end of the day I'll just tell future clients they SHOULD use a manufacturer that doesn't have this requirement.

Your instructions said "should" they did not say "shall, required or must"
You asked a question of us. If you don't like the answer, sorry.......

 

[sfav8r]

Your instructions said "should" they did not say "shall, required or must"
You asked a question of us. If you don't like the answer, sorry.......

Who said I didn't like the answers?:blink:

 

[macmikeman]

Well The op should have gotten an Viking Gas range, cause mine has a "mandatory" 40 amp double pole breaker serving it.

 

[A/A Fuel GTX]

Well The op should have gotten an Viking Gas range, cause mine has a "mandatory" 40 amp double pole breaker serving it.

A two pole 40 for a GAS range:?