Branch circuits in with feeders

[garrisonm1]

Can you share the same nipple in a double panel with feeder wire for that panel and branch circuits. I know its not good practice, I usually like drilling a seperate hole and putting an extra nipple in there to seperate the branch circuits with the feeders. But are you allowed to share. Thanks greg

 

[LarryFine]

Can you share the same nipple in a double panel with feeder wire for that panel and branch circuits.

The ubiquitous answer: I see it done all the time, and I've never heard of it being an issue.

As always, you have to keep all the lines of a circuit, including neutral, in the same nipple.

 

[garrisonm1]

Ok, say you have a conduit coming into the left far panel of a 3 section panel, and you have circuit numbers let say: 1 and 110. Now obviously you have to drop the nuetral off in the first panel or should you take it through the nipples with circuit number 110 in the third panel.

 

[Dean83169]

I would run the all the conductors for that yoke into the panel it is getting its power from regardless if they are feed thru panels. Its a matter of practice and I feel is part or the neat and workmanship like manner part of the code. I do not think it is a violation but I wouldnt do it.

 

[rlMutch]

Another problem with this is possible violation of 300.20: Induced Currents in Metal Enclosures. If the phase conductor ran through a nipple to the 3rd section seperately from the feeder neutral to it, you'd have a bit of a seperation in the circuit.

 

[LarryFine]

Ok, say you have a conduit coming into the left far panel of a 3 section panel, and you have circuit numbers let say: 1 and 110. Now obviously you have to drop the nuetral off in the first panel or should you take it through the nipples with circuit number 110 in the third panel.

If you're talking about a MWBC with a shared neutral, not only should all of the hots come from the same panel, they really should be placed on adjacent breakers.

 

[Vertex]

When you say "double panel", I assume you mean two panels side by side. IMO, it is best to do what makes the workmanship look the neatest.

If you lack neutral lugs in the first panel, it may be best to run the neutrals with the "hots" originating from the second panel.

As far as being concerned with inducing currents in the nipple, simple accounting rules out that possibility either way you go.

I see no point in automatically running the neutral with the "hot" in the second panel unless you identify both wires with the same identification. The exception to that rule would be if you you had a conduit entering either panel with circuits terminating in each panel. In that case, I would definitely keep keep them separate by banding each bundle near conduit opening with electrical tape or tie-straps.

 

[tom baker]

The exception to that rule would be if you you had a conduit entering either panel with circuits terminating in each panel. In that case, I would definitely keep keep them separate by banding each bundle near conduit opening with electrical tape or tie-straps.

This may be a requirement in the 2008 NEC....

 

[iwire]

I see no point in automatically running the neutral with the "hot" in the second panel unless you identify both wires with the same identification.

Vertex 300.3(B) requires we run the conductors together.