Another Mobile Home

Status
Not open for further replies.
david said:
I kept wondering why you are so vested in this seeming unreasonable position.

The more you posted on this subject the clearer it became. You believed and it seems still do believe, that there is no difference between stick built and mobile home rules when it comes to the electrical supply requirements.

You also believe in June of 1976 HUD took a position that mobile homes and manufacture homes are the same. You are so vested in this position because you done over a thousand electrical inspections with this point of view. According to your statement that was just the ones after the year 2000.






You are stating from the outside 3-wire to the manufactured installed distribution panel

Then you have your repeated statement prior to 2008 and a separate structure. At first I didn?t understand why you kept putting emphasis on prior to 2008. Then it hit me you came on board requiring a four wire feeder into the mobile/manufactured home when feeding its distrubution panel from another structure. Not because article 550 required it all along, but because 3 wire feeder became absolute by other sections of the code. So that tells me in your way of thinking there is still no difference between stick built homes than manufactured homes.






You keep saying a three wire feeder is safe, you need to quit advising the OP until you recognize article 550 rules when supplied by a feeder always required a four wire feeder to the distribution panel and you cannot deem the installation safe until it meets the min. requirements as outlined in article 550.
Click to expand...

550.33(A)
Exception: For an existing feeder that is installed between
the service equipment and a disconnecting means as covered
in 550.32(A), it shall be permitted to omit the equipment
grounding conductor where the grounded circuit conductor
is grounded at the disconnecting means in accordance with
250.32(B) Exception.

What is unsafe about a 3-wire with no paralleled paths and bonded in the panel? Other than we can not do it in new work?

Anything wrong with this?

Exhibit250.17.JPG
 
jxofaltrds said:
550.33(A)
Exception: For an existing feeder that is installed between
the service equipment and a disconnecting means as covered
in 550.32(A), it shall be permitted to omit the equipment
grounding conductor where the grounded circuit conductor
is grounded at the disconnecting means in accordance with
250.32(B) Exception.

What is unsafe about a 3-wire with no paralleled paths and bonded in the panel? Other than we can not do it in new work?

Anything wrong with this?

View attachment 12254
Click to expand...

Well again as the case with swimming pools there are elevated shock hazards in the case of a swimming pool electricity metal surfaces that can become energized and water surfaces.

NFPA took a position that certain rules needed to be in place to address what was consider an elevated risk. Most users of a swimming pool are un-aware of the risk and the measures taken to address that risk.

Likewise with manufactured homes / mobile homes,

NFPA has taken a similar position. Because the large amount of metal surfaces where the risk of shock hazards are elevated.
In the old days the metal chases and the metal siding and metal skirting. Large metal contact surfaces that could become energized. The un-expecting (un-aware ) public could come in contact with. Weather crawling under the metal chasse, touching the metal skirting, standing on the grounded cement basement reaching up and crabbing the metal chasse.

Imagine you are under a manufactured home , ground being a little damp or you body being half in wet grass. You reach up take a real firm hold on the metal chasse to pull yourself under. And the shock hazard just happens to be present.

It is not your decision to make, to ignore or negate the special requirements in article 550, NFPA and HUD have incorporated into their standards to address the concern over and elevated potential shock hazard.

If that is your position why not just ignore the special provisions found in article 680 for swimming pools
 
550.17 Testing.
(A) Dielectric Strength Test. The wiring of each mobile home shall be subjected to a 1-minute, 900-volt, dielectric strength test (with all switches closed) between live parts (including neutral conductor) and the mobile home ground. Alternatively, the test shall be permitted to be performed at 1080 volts for 1 second. This test shall be performed after branch circuits are complete and after luminaires or appliances are installed.
550.32 Service Equipment.
(3) Means shall be provided for the connection of a grounding electrode conductor to the service equipment and routing it outside the structure.

Have you ever asked yourself why is that significant.?

If I don?t understand why should I ignore the requirement.

What if it is as simple as they did not want the grounding electrode conductor to come in contact with the metal structure in the event that it becomes part of the fault clearing path. Though not effective in and of itself to clear a fault. But could become a path for current to be induced onto the metal chasse.

I?m not saying that it is but it is clear the Manufacture has to decide how and to what point that conductor is routed.
Again at what point do I take it upon myself to say the special provisions in this article are not relevant
 
david said:
550.17 Testing.
(A) Dielectric Strength Test. The wiring of each mobile home shall be subjected to a 1-minute, 900-volt, dielectric strength test (with all switches closed) between live parts (including neutral conductor) and the mobile home ground. Alternatively, the test shall be permitted to be performed at 1080 volts for 1 second. This test shall be performed after branch circuits are complete and after luminaires or appliances are installed.
550.32 Service Equipment.
(3) Means shall be provided for the connection of a grounding electrode conductor to the service equipment and routing it outside the structure.

Have you ever asked yourself why is that significant.?

If I don?t understand why should I ignore the requirement.

What if it is as simple as they did not want the grounding electrode conductor to come in contact with the metal structure in the event that it becomes part of the fault clearing path. Though not effective in and of itself to clear a fault. But could become a path for current to be induced onto the metal chasse.

I?m not saying that it is but it is clear the Manufacture has to decide how and to what point that conductor is routed.
Again at what point do I take it upon myself to say the special provisions in this article are not relevant
Click to expand...

In blue if on piers I could put it anywhere under the home. And why would they say outside if you were not allowed to have the first means of disconnect 'inside'?

Please explain what I highlighted in red.
 
jxofaltrds said:
In blue And why would they say outside if you were not allowed to have the first means of disconnect 'inside'?
Click to expand...

I?m not sure what you mean the reference came from 550.32 (B) it is one of the criteria that must be followed if you use a manufactured home distribution panel as your service disconnect.

One way of keeping the grounding electrode conductor installed outside is make the connection to the neutral in the meter enclosure. If that is not the option than according to the criteria the manufacture will have provided a means of routing the grounding electrode outside. You would have to consult the manufactures instruction?s to determine what is acceptable.



jxofaltrds said:
f on piers I could put it anywhere under the home. Please explain what I highlighted in red.
Click to expand...

I guess you could take that position but that position would not be compliant with what the section says



The point being made is when the reason or significance to a rule is un- known we can speculate about its purpose, but not understanding the significance does not give us the right to ignore the rule

When the manufacture instructions indicate where this connection is to be made we do not have the right to make the connection anywhere we please. And if the NEC states it must be routed outside we do not have the choice of routing it some other way.
 
jxofaltrds said:
550.33(A)
Exception: For an existing feeder that is installed between
the service equipment and a disconnecting means as covered
in 550.32(A), it shall be permitted to omit the equipment
grounding conductor where the grounded circuit conductor
is grounded at the disconnecting means in accordance with
250.32(B) Exception.

What is unsafe about a 3-wire with no paralleled paths and bonded in the panel? Other than we can not do it in new work?
Click to expand...


550.33(A) is talking about the 2nd disconnect outside if the service equipment/disconnect is more than 30' from the mobile home. It is saying that the 4th wire (EGC) can be omitted between the service disconnect and the 2nd disconnect if it's an existing installation and meets the requirements of 250.32(B) exception.

Notice that 550.33(A) refers you back to 550.32(A), which says:
550.32 Service Equipment.
(A) Mobile Home Service Equipment. The mobile home
service equipment shall be located adjacent to the mobile
home and not mounted in or on the mobile home. The
service equipment shall be located in sight from and not
more than 9.0 m (30 ft) from the exterior wall of the mobile
home it serves. The service equipment shall be permitted to
be located elsewhere on the premises, provided that a disconnecting
means suitable for use as service equipment is
located within sight from and not more than 9.0 m (30 ft)
from the exterior wall of the mobile home it serves and is
rated not less than that required for service equipment per
550.32(C). Grounding at the disconnecting means shall be
in accordance with 250.32.
Click to expand...

The first part says that service equipment can't be mounted on or in the mobile home and must be within 30' of the home.
The second part says service equipment can be farther than 30' but an additional (2nd) disconnect must be added within 30' of the mobile home.
That's what 550.33(A) is talking about, the 2nd disconnect. It says nothing about not having to run a 4-wire into the mobile home. It's simply talking about between the service disconnect (outside) and the 2nd disconnect (outside).
 
Little Bill said:
550.33(A) is talking about the 2nd disconnect outside if the service equipment/disconnect is more than 30' from the mobile home. It is saying that the 4th wire (EGC) can be omitted between the service disconnect and the 2nd disconnect if it's an existing installation and meets the requirements of 250.32(B) exception.

Notice that 550.33(A) refers you back to 550.32(A), which says:


The first part says that service equipment can't be mounted on or in the mobile home and must be within 30' of the home.
The second part says service equipment can be farther than 30' but an additional (2nd) disconnect must be added within 30' of the mobile home.
That's what 550.33(A) is talking about, the 2nd disconnect. It says nothing about not having to run a 4-wire into the mobile home. It's simply talking about between the service disconnect (outside) and the 2nd disconnect (outside).
Click to expand...

What if it is an existing home with a 3-wire from the outside disconnect to the interior panel and there is a G/N bond?
 
Oh my! ... Holy mackerel! ? This is what I love this forum... it is full of passionate professionals and their expertise is unquestionable ?.
 
Ok, then, according with all the above information, I can go directly from the meter/disconnect to a service panel with 3 insulated conductors and do there the N/G bonding, the grounding rods and the frame bond AND bypass the pedestal (eliminate it) because the service disconnect (meter and breaker) is less than 30? from this mobile home. I like and I agreed because it is less expensive, BUT, if this mobile home needs to be remove/change, THEN the whole electrical system will need reworked ? Will the AHJ here in WA approved that?
 
Little Bill said:
550.33(A) is talking about the 2nd disconnect outside if the service equipment/disconnect is more than 30' from the mobile home. It is saying that the 4th wire (EGC) can be omitted between the service disconnect and the 2nd disconnect if it's an existing installation and meets the requirements of 250.32(B) exception.

Notice that 550.33(A) refers you back to 550.32(A), which says:


The first part says that service equipment can't be mounted on or in the mobile home and must be within 30' of the home.
The second part says service equipment can be farther than 30' but an additional (2nd) disconnect must be added within 30' of the mobile home.
That's what 550.33(A) is talking about, the 2nd disconnect. It says nothing about not having to run a 4-wire into the mobile home. It's simply talking about between the service disconnect (outside) and the 2nd disconnect (outside).
Click to expand...

If you take the position that there is no difference in the electrical criteria for manufactured homes and normal stick built homes.

In 1976 all the criteria for mobile homes was wiped away and the only criteria left is that for manufactured homes.

The only thing you have left is the criteria for regular stick built homes

So we don?t need article 550 to address how you install the electrical supply to a manufactured/mobile home

The only thing that is applicable from article 550 is the few rules that tell you the location the service is allowed to be on, inside or within 30 ft.

He has negated any significance to the wiring criteria from article 550. When it comes to how to he is taking that all from article 230 and 250
 
Last edited:
Esthy said:
Ok, then, according with all the above information, I can go directly from the meter/disconnect to a service panel with 3 insulated conductors and do there the N/G bonding, the grounding rods and the frame bond AND bypass the pedestal (eliminate it) because the service disconnect (meter and breaker) is less than 30? from this mobile home. I like and I agreed because it is less expensive, BUT, if this mobile home needs to be remove/change, THEN the whole electrical system will need reworked ? Will the AHJ here in WA approved that?
Click to expand...
I can't digest all that's been debated in this thread, my eyes start to blur.

Bottom line is from outside the mobile home to inside the mobile home you need four wires.
 
jxofaltrds said:
What if it is an existing home with a 3-wire from the outside disconnect to the interior panel and there is a G/N bond?
Click to expand...

Then it was done wrong to start with if by "home" you mean mobile home.
Because it's been stated over and over, you can't run a 3-wire (no EGC) into a mobile home ever, period.
 
Esthy said:
Ok, then, according with all the above information, I can go directly from the meter/disconnect to a service panel with 3 insulated conductors and do there the N/G bonding, the grounding rods and the frame bond AND bypass the pedestal (eliminate it) because the service disconnect (meter and breaker) is less than 30? from this mobile home. I like and I agreed because it is less expensive, BUT, if this mobile home needs to be remove/change, THEN the whole electrical system will need reworked ? Will the AHJ here in WA approved that?
Click to expand...

Esthy,

Action Dave already said this but, you can NOT ever run just 3-wire into a mobile home.
In your case you already have a service disconnect outside. Since it is existing your AHJ might allow you to omit having to have other available circuits for outside equipment and just run your 4-wire from the service to the inside panel. Or he may require you to run a 4-wire to an additional disconnect with spaces for outside equipment, receptacles, etc.

But in no case are you allowed to run just 3-wires to the inside of a mobile home, especially the type you have in your situation.

Just read Article 550 and in particular 550.32(A)
550.32(B) Does Not apply to you!
 
Esthy said:
Ok, then, according with all the above information, I can go directly from the meter/disconnect to a service panel with 3 insulated conductors and do there the N/G bonding, the grounding rods and the frame bond AND bypass the pedestal (eliminate it) because the service disconnect (meter and breaker) is less than 30? from this mobile home. I like and I agreed because it is less expensive, BUT, if this mobile home needs to be remove/change, THEN the whole electrical system will need reworked ? Will the AHJ here in WA approved that?
Click to expand...

NO. What you need to do is not listen to me or anyone else. Force the AHJ to help you on this install.

We are arguing code. You have an existing installation. That means it is grandfathered unless you touch it.

Again only your AHJ can tell you what they will accept.

Inspecting existing installations requires looking at what is safe. If it is safe then you should be allowed to maintain it. Again IMHO.
 
jxofaltrds said:
NO. What you need to do is not listen to me or anyone else. Force the AHJ to help you on this install.

We are arguing code. You have an existing installation. That means it is grandfathered unless you touch it.

Again only your AHJ can tell you what they will accept.

Inspecting existing installations requires looking at what is safe. If it is safe then you should be allowed to maintain it. Again IMHO.
Click to expand...

After this statement I don?t have anything to add.

I think most authorities will take the position that an installation that was not compliant with the code at the time of the installation could never be ?Grandfathered?

In the old days long ago I?m told there was such a thing as a measuring rod. A known standard that other measurements can be compared to .
Safety kind of needs a bench mark so if you?re not going to use the code article that addressed mobile / manufactured homes to Gage what is a safe installation what are you going to use as your measuring rod?
 
jxofaltrds said:
NO. What you need to do is not listen to me or anyone else. Force the AHJ to help you on this install.

We are arguing code. You have an existing installation. That means it is grandfathered unless you touch it.

Again only your AHJ can tell you what they will accept.

Inspecting existing installations requires looking at what is safe. If it is safe then you should be allowed to maintain it. Again IMHO.
Click to expand...

david said:
After this statement I don?t have anything to add.

I think most authorities will take the position that an installation that was not compliant with the code at the time of the installation could never be ?Grandfathered?

In the old days long ago I?m told there was such a thing as a measuring rod. A known standard that other measurements can be compared to .
Safety kind of needs a bench mark so if you?re not going to use the code article that addressed mobile / manufactured homes to Gage what is a safe installation what are you going to use as your measuring rod?
Click to expand...

Yep, I don't think I can add anything else either. I have added the correct code articles citing how a Mobile Home should be fed. If that doesn't sink in I don't know what else to add.
Non-compliant installation "grandfathered"?:happyno:
 
jxofaltrds said:
That is not the opinion that I got from the state a few years back. But that's another discussion.

2nd point if nothing was codified and it is existing IMHO it is grandfathered. Thoughts?
Click to expand...

I really need to pull away from this.

From my personal experience, I have inspected over 50 mobile homes over the years for re-meter inspections that where still using cord and plug connections to supply the mobile home. When pulling the main fuse holder almost with certainty they would have 60 amp fuses. In the 60 amp rated fuse holder.

Do you think I should have considered that ?grandfathered? since who knows how long it has been that way?

Do you really believe the mobile home in this thread was allowed to be supplied by a cord hard wired to the old rec. style disconnect box (with guts missing) you see in the picture.
You have no Idea if this installation was codified in its original condition; all you know for sure is the condition you find it in when you walk onto the property.

Too many hands too many years.

So ill asked you again what are you using for a measuring rod (bench mark)
If you need a more favorable response wait for someone else

No disrespect but I have to pull away from this
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top