Chase branch circuits through main disconnect.

Status
Not open for further replies.
R

RogerKint

Member
Location
California
Occupation
General Electrician
Hello I'm doing a panel upgrade on my own house. The existing panel is inside but I want to do the new panel outside. Currently there's a 2-in nipple with the existing feeders out of the back of the main disconnect (outside) to the interior panel.

I want to mount the new panel next to the main disconnect, nipple my feeders from the main disconnect and in a separate nipple bring the branch circuits into the bottom of the main disconnect and through the 2-in nipple to the existing panel space where I can junction the existing branch circuits.

I can't find a code reason that I can't do this.
 
Although some areas allow it, running all the branch circuits through a single raceway is not allowed by the NEC. There is an exception for sleeving above a panel but I don't think there is one for coming out the bottom. Your AHJ/inspector would have to answer that for your area.
 
Little Bill said:
Although some areas allow it, running all the branch circuits through a single raceway is not allowed by the NEC. There is an exception for sleeving above a panel but I don't think there is one for coming out the bottom. Your AHJ/inspector would have to answer that for your area.
Click to expand...
I don't think from his description he is sleeving cables, he is running conductors through nipples between enclosures.

If so only things that could come up is raceway fill (60% for short nipple) or possibly fill of the wiring space within panel. Also can't run non service conductors in a raceway with service conductors though it don't sound like that is happening.
 
Since this is a residential application, I'm assuming NM is in place so he can't be "sleeving" cables.

That would be a violation of NM that is not allowed to be installed in a wet location, which a raceway outdoors is.

If he runs single wet location rated conductors from the new outside panel to the inside panel which has how become a junction box, he should be fine as long as he doesn't violate the fill requirements for a nipple, which is unlikely he will do so in this circumstance.

He's also not sharing a raceway with Service Conductors since he's installing an additional nipple for the branch circuits, but, even if there were a couple of circuits going through the nipple that feeds the outdoor panel, these are feeders anyway, so no harm done.

JAP>
 
It's just a nipple (under 24") from the main disco to the enclosure for the old panel. I did the math and wire fill is ok.

Branch circuits and feeder would pass each other only in the bottom of the main disco en route to the new panel installed next to the main disco.

New wire would splice with existing romex in old panel enclosure inside the house.

Pic of main disco outside. New panel to be installed next to it.
Main Disco
 
Last edited:
That just goes to show that one shouldn't speculate.

That's going to get really busy really quick.

JAP>
 
jap said:
That just goes to show that one shouldn't speculate.

That's going to get really busy really quick.

JAP>
Click to expand...
Not any worse than a conduit body if no splices. No reason the EGC's need to come through there they can land on a bar in existing indoor panel. Then it really depends on how many circuits and maybe how many are over 10 AWG.
 
Presuming the pullout disconnect is a fuseholder type?

Is there a reason you are not changing to a meter-main with enough spaces to supply your needs?
 
In general there is not problem but specifically you have a problem with 200.4 in tnat the neutral can not be used for multiple circuits.
 
kwired said:
Presuming the pullout disconnect is a fuseholder type?

Is there a reason you are not changing to a meter-main with enough spaces to supply your needs?
Click to expand...

Possiby time,shutdown,Inspection,expense,etc....

JAP>
 
augie47 said:
In general there is not problem but specifically you have a problem with 200.4 in tnat the neutral can not be used for multiple circuits.
Click to expand...

Can you expand on this?

Where would that be an issue if it's not violated in the indoor install already?


JAP>
 
I may have viewed it incorrectly. I saw the one neutral and various branch circuit conductors and assumed we had a neutral supplying more than one branch circuit.
 
kwired said:
Presuming the pullout disconnect is a fuseholder type?

Is there a reason you are not changing to a meter-main with enough spaces to supply your needs?
Click to expand...

Yes, expense etc but there's no drip loop or slack to weather head, ie I would have to get new wire all the way to the utility pole if I cut it.

Here's a pic:

Weather head
 
augie47 said:
I may have viewed it incorrectly. I saw the one neutral and various branch circuit conductors and assumed we had a neutral supplying more than one branch circuit.
Click to expand...

All circuits will have dedicated neutrals. 16 20amp circuits, 4 30amp (dryer and water heater), 2 50amp (range).
 
RogerKint said:
Yes, expense etc but there's no drip loop or slack to weather head, ie I would have to get new wire all the way to the utility pole if I cut it.

Here's a pic:

Weather head
Click to expand...
As is water will not follow conductor into weatherhead/raceway, I don't see a problem. JMO, but adding another enclosure just uglifies the installation when clients often don't really want to see any of this stuff if possible to begin with. But there is always those that will choose the less expensive option even if it only saves $20.
 
augie47 said:
I may have viewed it incorrectly. I saw the one neutral and various branch circuit conductors and assumed we had a neutral supplying more than one branch circuit.
Click to expand...
You are looking at the "before" picture. The feeder will pass through side wall to loadcenter after finished, and branch circuits will be brought from inside through existing nipple then pass go to loadcenter.
 
RogerKint said:
Yes, expense etc but there's no drip loop or slack to weather head, ie I would have to get new wire all the way to the utility pole if I cut it.

Here's a pic:

Weather head
Click to expand...
Cut it and put new conductors in the riser and make them long enough for the drip loop. Cut the service drop as long as possible. Weatherhead is well above the drop so a drip loop I wouldn't think is a big deal
 
Eddie702 said:
Cut it and put new conductors in the riser and make them long enough for the drip loop. Cut the service drop as long as possible. Weatherhead is well above the drop so a drip loop I wouldn't think is a big deal
Click to expand...
Weatherhead being above the POA naturally accomplishes what a drip loop is all about. It is when the POA and/or any connectors are above the weatherhead that you need to do something to help keep water from following conductors into the raceway. This not really a problem on any mast that is also supporting the drop, is a problem when drop is attached to side of house and weatherhead is at or below same level as POA.
 
kwired said:
Weatherhead being above the POA naturally accomplishes what a drip loop is all about. It is when the POA and/or any connectors are above the weatherhead that you need to do something to help keep water from following conductors into the raceway. This not really a problem on any mast that is also supporting the drop, is a problem when drop is attached to side of house and weatherhead is at or below same level as POA.
Click to expand...

Yes, it doesn't need a drip loop, The problem is that I don't have enough slack in the service cable to cut it, put a new meter in and splice it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top