Apartments being fed by (2) 100A 3-pole switches

[Mr. Serious]

Each 100A switch is only single-pole: Like robertd said, it makes a little more sense that way, and you would think maybe handle ties would fix the issue, but you have to start looking at the list of apartments and make sure they can all be put in groups such that every group of apartments can be controlled by some group of 3 switches, one on each phase.

That does not seem to be the case here. I start looking at the list pictured in reply #21: switches 7,12, and 13 have a lot of the same apartments in them. Together, these three switches could almost be called a 3-phase feeder to a group of apartments, but then you have apartments 12A and 2B, each of which has one leg fed from another switch outside this group of 3. Overall, there's not much rhyme or reason to it. Either none of the electricians who hooked this up understood very well what they were doing, or perhaps this part of the job was handed off to an apprentice who acted like he understood what he was being told, but didn't really.

 

[GoldDigger]

The label on each of the switches, as shown in a very clear photo, states that each is a three pole switch. So each could be used as three single pole switches with a common operating lever, with the three outputs divided among the six or fewer apartments. That would provide one 100A single pole switches for either one or two apartments, with the other switch providing the second phase, hopefullly for the same group of apartments.
If this is the actual setup, you could have two switches providing the two out of three phases through a 208/120V meter to each apartment.
Since this is an MWBC, having a separate switch for each phase is a serious Code violation, as stated earlier. It is a safety issue, not just a technical point.
If it is actually 120/240V, then the metering is simpler but the violation is just the same.

 

[Mr. Serious]

OK, the breakers are single-pole, but the switches are 3-pole. I didn't see that distinction. As you said, a safety issue. I guess there is no way to shut off one apartment without also shutting off one leg of multiple other apartments.

 

[Tainted]

OK, the breakers are single-pole, but the switches are 3-pole. I didn't see that distinction. As you said, a safety issue. I guess there is no way to shut off one apartment without also shutting off one leg of multiple other apartments.

That is exactly my concern when looking at the system, like I said I wish I can test this system without making people angry lol

 

[robertd]

Each 100A switch is only single-pole: Like robertd said, it makes a little more sense that way, and you would think maybe handle ties would fix the issue, but you have to start looking at the list of apartments and make sure they can all be put in groups such that every group of apartments can be controlled by some group of 3 switches, one on each phase.

That does not seem to be the case here. I start looking at the list pictured in reply #21: switches 7,12, and 13 have a lot of the same apartments in them. Together, these three switches could almost be called a 3-phase feeder to a group of apartments, but then you have apartments 12A and 2B, each of which has one leg fed from another switch outside this group of 3. Overall, there's not much rhyme or reason to it. Either none of the electricians who hooked this up understood very well what they were doing, or perhaps this part of the job was handed off to an apprentice who acted like he understood what he was being told, but didn't really.

What I said makes sense is that each apartment has 2 single pole breakers feeding it. I thought the breakers were feeding other, unknown, loads.

The lack of tie handles is a somewhat major problem.

Did this service ever get inspected? Is there an inspection sticker? I could see the inspector missing the strange wiring of the 100A switches,
but how does someone miss the total lack of tie handles on all of those breakers?

Clearly one or more of the persons who worked on this mess had no clue what they were doing.

 

[Frank DuVal]

In the 50s most apartment here did not have HVAC and 4 circuits was "normal"

Here in Richmond prior to WWII two circuits per apartment! Gas stove, gas hot water, gas heat*. No AC. Small refrigerator, not frost free, so no heater inside. Maybe a toaster and the iron tested the fuses! 15 Amp replaced by a 30 when the tenant tired of buying fuses...

*and if gas maybe a hydronic gravity flow, so no circulator motor, or it was building supplied steam.