200 Amp service panel

Status
Not open for further replies.
The service to a mobile home is not mounted on the structure so the feed to it carries the entire load of the dwelling. IMO, it is good however the fact that a home comes with a 200 amp service may come into question. I suspect they just build them all with 200 amp services but an argument can be made to feed it with a 100 amp feeder. In this case the #2 aluminum, imo, is fine.
 
Dennis Alwon said:
The service to a mobile home is not mounted on the structure so the feed to it carries the entire load of the dwelling. IMO, it is good however the fact that a home comes with a 200 amp service may come into question. I suspect they just build them all with 200 amp services but an argument can be made to feed it with a 100 amp feeder. In this case the #2 aluminum, imo, is fine.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with this assessment, but do want to add - T310.16(B)(6) applies to the dwelling unit...if you successfully argued with the AHJ that the feeder supplied 100% of the load to the dwelling unit you still could not use a #2 to a [detached] garage panel.
 
augie47 said:
550.33(b) allows the feeder to be sized per 310,15(B)(6)

That said, I think it is questionable if one can use a 100 amp feeder to feed the MH if it has a nameplate calling for 200 amp service as noted in 550.11(D).
Click to expand...

Dennis Alwon said:
The service to a mobile home is not mounted on the structure so the feed to it carries the entire load of the dwelling. IMO, it is good however the fact that a home comes with a 200 amp service may come into question. I suspect they just build them all with 200 amp services but an argument can be made to feed it with a 100 amp feeder. In this case the #2 aluminum, imo, is fine.
Click to expand...

I thought the OP was talking about a modular structure, a SFD built in a factory and assembled on site. He mentioned a basement, I don't think you can mount mobile home with a chassis over a basement.
 
Twoskinsoneman said:
hmm. I guess your right. I hadn't known that. What about the feeder to the garage?
Click to expand...

augie47 said:
IMO, in this case, as mentioned earlier, a wire sized per 310.15(B)(6) is allowable per 550.33(B),
If it were not a modular home I'm afraid you are going to be in an argumentative situation. If one considers the detached garage as "associated with the dwelling" (I happen to say it is), then 310.15(B)(6) could not be used for the dwelling as ALL loads are not included.
I have no doubt it would be accepted by some inspectors who would not consider the garage as "associated load"
Click to expand...

elohr46 said:
I thought the OP was talking about a modular structure, a SFD built in a factory and assembled on site. He mentioned a basement, I don't think you can mount mobile home with a chassis over a basement.
Click to expand...

Bugger. Ok I think this is correct and now agree with my original assessment that you can't use table 310.15(B)(6), 550 wouldn't apply, I don't see anything in 545 that would allow it.
 
why can't 310-15 (B)(6) be applied here if he's splitting a 200 amp panel to feed a house and garage ? its (#2al) is good for 100 amps per the table for a residence, it's a feeder, (maybe a lateral) am i missing something ?. working 2008 nec
 
PEDRO ESCOVILLA said:
why can't 310-15 (B)(6) be applied here if he's splitting a 200 amp panel to feed a house and garage ? its (#2al) is good for 100 amps per the table for a residence, it's a feeder, (maybe a lateral) am i missing something ?. working 2008 nec
Click to expand...

It's not a lateral if it is a feeder and the article clearly states "feeder conductors that serve as the main power feeder to each dwelling unit, a detached garage is not a dwelling unit. I say he can't use T310.15(B)(6).
 
Last edited:
You know after looking at this for a while I thought why would the code allow you to size a feeder to a modular home differently than a field constructed dwelling. Well now I'm not so sure. If that were the intent I think they would have specified that it could be sized IAW with TABLE 310.15(B)(6).

Since it only references the section and not the table would it not make sense that it would have to comply with the requirements of the text?

"and shall be permitted to be sized in accordance
with 310.15(B)(6)."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top