2 Pole breaker no handties

[domnic]

Is their any code violation using a 2 pole breaker with hand ties removed for two 120 v circuits ( no shared neutral ) ?

 

[peter d]

No code violation.

 

[ActionDave]

I agree not a code violation, but the breaker will still be common trip so a fault will take out both poles.

 

[templdl]

May it be a violation of the manufacture's UL lishting? It was manufactured and listed as a assembly.

 

[kwired]

Impossible to do with a QO breaker without redesigning it first

Same applies to many "industrial" breaker lines that only have a single handle for multiple poles.

 

[mbrooke]

Code violation.


Anyway not something I would do. I know for a fact old GE breakers will jam when one pole is in the off position and the other tries to trip because the internal common trip mechanism hangs up the arm which rests against the metal trip piece. Can be replicated (seen) by pulling off the handle ties and breaking part of the casing off.

 

[mbrooke]

No code violation.

Unfortunately engineers designing equipment do not assume that, see the above.

 

[mbrooke]

*Also, just to add that when you break the casing off it lets you take a paper clip and move the trip piece back simulating an over load. The arm will release but get hung up on the internal common trip lever preventing that arm from going down. What made me do this in the first place was when a MWBC fed from a double pole handle ties removed breaker inadvertently short circuited while the other pole was turned off. The pole left on never tripped despite carnage saying it should have.

 

[jaggedben]

The code violation is modifying a listed assembly by removing it, not the way it is used.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

Is their any code violation using a 2 pole breaker with hand ties removed for two 120 v circuits ( no shared neutral ) ?

Just don't remove the tie and you're good