20 amp circuits

[jaylectricity]

By that reasoning you can only use 5 20A breakers in a 100A panel.

By supplying multiple receptacles capable of 20A you aren't insisting that each one uses 20A. You are simply offering the opportunity to use 20A at any one of those outlets.

In the end, the breaker will keep the circuit from overloading.

Still, I do enjoy when customers ask me if they can have a 30A circuit because they think 7 lights is a lot to have on a 15A circuit. And by enjoy, I mean I'm bemused.

 

[iwire]

you must work with special type inspectors that believe all -- with you example their is no reason for a definition of individual branch circuit

So you still disagree?

Even though you have been shown direct evidence that the CMP has stated very directly that an individual branch circuit can supply more than one receptacle you will not change your position?

If that is the fact then in my opinion you are not doing your job correctly

 

[iwire]

if the intent was not to restrict # of outlets then please explain the purpose of the art-100 def of indi-bc.

Its time to fold up the tent, the show is over. To keep arguing this is pointless when the people who write the code have stated.

Panel Statement: The panel does not agree that a single receptacle is required. A receptacle other than a single receptacle could be used, and other means such as configuration or arrangement of the equipment could limit the application to a single utilization equipment.

That is it, very simple and straight forward. If you still feel it is wrong then try to come up with better substantiation than has been given before and perhaps the CMP will accept it. Until that time multiple receptacles on individual branch circuits can be NEC compliant.

 

[FionaZuppa]

Its time to fold up the tent, the show is over. To keep arguing this is pointless when the people who write the code have stated.

That is it, very simple and straight forward. If you still feel it is wrong then try to come up with better substantiation than has been given before and perhaps the CMP will accept it. Until that time multiple receptacles on individual branch circuits can be NEC compliant.

you keep quoting the panel, of which they do not mention "outlet", they only talk about "receptacle". the two by Art-100 definitions are not the same.

 

[roger]

you keep quoting the panel, of which they do not mention "outlet", they only talk about "receptacle". the two by Art-100 definitions are not the same.

So what's your point, the proposal did not mention outlet either.

We take care of an electronics manufacturer and they have special soldering equipment that is moved from one station to another as needed, the stations (up to 14) are fed with one individual branch circuit with receptacles for the equipment, they don't have a problem.

As already stated, if you don't like the rule submit a proposal to change it.

Roger

 

[user 100]

There is no safety issue to be put away.

Here is a for instance.

Lets say I have a maintenance shop, I buy a 40 amp pressure washer. Per its listing it requires an individual branch circuit. Yet I want to use it all around my shop without long cords, so I install a number of receptacles on an individual branch circuit that only serves that one piece of utilization equipment where ever I happen to roll too.


If the NEC was as restrictive as many here feel it is, I would have run entirely separate branch circuits for each location the machine might be used.

That would wasteful and would not provide any added safety.

There have been a number of proposal to require only an single receptacle outlet on an individual branch circuit. They were all rejected by the Code Making Panel.

And rightfully so......

Mandating that each IBC have only one receptacle could actually lead to more safety issues b/c of the long ext cords mentioned above by iwire- imo that's substantiation enough right there to reject the change- the shorter and fewer ext cords there are anywhere the safer things are.

 

[jaylectricity]

Oh wow, when I made my post I didn't even notice there were seven pages to this thread. I believe I was responding to something on page 1, but the conversation went way away from there.

 

[Little Bill]

I agree the wording of the code does not limit the number of receptacles on an individual branch circuit.

However, why even have individual branch circuits in the code? I don't see the difference between them and a general purpose branch circuit. How could one determine whether the circuit was GP or INV. BC if he was inspecting it? Or enforce anything about it?

Kind of the same thing as can't plug utilization equipment into a general purpose circuit that also has lights on it if it draws more than 50% of the rated circuit current.
I don't see how that's enforceable either.:happyno:

 

[iwire]

However, why even have individual branch circuits in the code?

Because UL keeps requiring dedicated circuits for many kinds of equipment.

 

[FionaZuppa]

Because UL keeps requiring dedicated circuits for many kinds of equipment.

where does NEC address "dedicated" ??

 

[wwhitney]

where does NEC address "dedicated" ??

"dedicated" = slang for "individual".

Wayne

 

[iwire]

where does NEC address "dedicated" ??

you keep quoting the panel, of which they do not mention "outlet", they only talk about "receptacle". the two by Art-100 definitions are not the same.

You must have forgotten you said this:

i not trying to be a hard hat, but do you see what i mean?

The panel responded with 'receptacle' because that was the subject of the proposal they were responding too. But the fact that you understand receptacle and outlet are defined terms just as utilization equipment is a defined term makes it very hard to understand why, when you are shown the actual code definition of Branch Circuit, Individual

Branch Circuit, Individual. A branch circuit that supplies
only one utilization equipment.

you choose to ignore defined terms and tell us that is not the intent. :huh:

 

[GerryB]

It was asked to limit an individual branch circuit to a single receptacle if the circuit fed a receptacle. (blue = proposed new text) The proposal was made for the 2011 cold cycle.

An example I have had of a indiv bc needing to be a duplex is a sump pump with a battery back up.

 

[FionaZuppa]

An example I have had of a indiv bc needing to be a duplex is a sump pump with a battery back up.

a perfect example of "one outlet". this is the intent of indi-bc.
art-100 definition is poorly written.

 

[mwm1752]

So you still disagree?

Even though you have been shown direct evidence that the CMP has stated very directly that an individual branch circuit can supply more than one receptacle you will not change your position?

If that is the fact then in my opinion you are not doing your job correctly

never said disagreement just expanding the NEC code worded issue in which CMP statements are not documented within the published text --- You really need to read comments -- understand what has been written -- just because you are a moderator does not give you supreme voice over conversations -- you know nothing of my work or judgements and your opinion is not appreciated.

 

[mike@mikeholt.com]

Mike Holt Clarification

Mike Holt Clarification

Guys, it would be best if you gave the NEC reference when you give your 'opinion.' The answer on the use of "duplex receptacles" on 15A and 20A circuits is contained in 210.21(B)(3). Per this rule (table), 15A multioutlet circuits are only permitted to have 15A rated receptacles, and 20A circuits can have either 15A or 20A receptacles. If the discussion is related to a 'single receptacle" on an individual circuit, then we need to read 210.21(B)(1) - on an individual 15A circuit you can have a single 15A or 20A receptacle; on an individual 20A circuit, you can only have a single 20A receptacle.

 

[iwire]

Guys, it would be best if you gave the NEC reference when you give your 'opinion.' The answer on the use of "duplex receptacles" on 15A and 20A circuits is contained in 210.21(B)(3). Per this rule (table), 15A multioutlet circuits are only permitted to have 15A rated receptacles, and 20A circuits can have either 15A or 20A receptacles. If the discussion is related to a 'single receptacle" on an individual circuit, then we need to read 210.21(B)(1) - on an individual 15A circuit you can have a single 15A or 20A receptacle; on an individual 20A circuit, you can only have a single 20A receptacle.

Mike, respectfully the conversation has been mostly about the article 100 definition of individual branch circuit and the CMPs statement that an individual branch circuit may have more than one receptacle.

 

[dkidd]

Guys, it would be best if you gave the NEC reference when you give your 'opinion.' The answer on the use of "duplex receptacles" on 15A and 20A circuits is contained in 210.21(B)(3). Per this rule (table), 15A multioutlet circuits are only permitted to have 15A rated receptacles, and 20A circuits can have either 15A or 20A receptacles. If the discussion is related to a 'single receptacle" on an individual circuit, then we need to read 210.21(B)(1) - on an individual 15A circuit you can have a single 15A or 20A receptacle; on an individual 20A circuit, you can only have a single 20A receptacle.

Great advice.

 

[FionaZuppa]

the 210.21(B) section, basically defines the receptacle rating allowed if its a single receptacle on the bc. and remember, art-100 def for indi-bc is not tied solely to receptacles. a single jbox for hardwire still applies, etc.

i think art-100 indi-bc definition was intended to mean "single outlet"
as example, look at the wall mounted shop vac figure
notice it mentions violation if on "multioutlet" and not "more than one receptacle". since the vac is >50% BC then the bc should be a single Outlet (which could be more than one receptacle).

remember, art-100 definitions for "outlet" and "receptacle" are different in meaning. one outlet that has duplex receptacle is ONE OUTLET WITH TWO RECEPTACLES. the vac would be nec compliant if it was using just one recept of a duplex if the duplex was the only outlet of the bc, thus making the bc fall into the art-100 definition of "Branch Circuit, Individual". more than one outlet then the bc falls into one of the other art-100 definitions.

does this restriction hold true if the bc had one receptacle outlet and 15 jbox outlets ??

Equipment fastened in place, other than luminaires, must not be rated more than 50% of the branch circuit ampere rating if this circuit also supplies luminaires, receptacle outlets, or both [210.23(A)(2)], as shown in Fig. 2

 

[FionaZuppa]

the 15min timer ran out again....

notice the verbiage of that section with the vac example. it mentions "receptacle outlets". would it still be a violation if i had one duplex recept outlet and 15 jbox outlets? i think the intention would say yes, but the verbiage leaves a loophole because not every "outlet" is a "receptacle outlet", not because i say so, because art-100 says so, etc

Outlet. A point on the wiring system at which current is
taken to supply utilization equipment.

Receptacle. A receptacle is a contact device installed at the outlet for the connection of an attachment plug. A single receptacle is a single contact device with no other contact
device on the same yoke. A multiple receptacle is two or more contact devices on the same yoke.

Receptacle Outlet. An outlet where one or more receptacles
are installed.