Commercial hood in a resturant

[Cartoon1]

I'm working on a restaurant that requires a hood. The hood is going to require a shunt trip in the panel. Can i run all kitchen equipment, hood, and general outlets throughout the resturant on that same panel? Or does the kitchen equipment and hood must be in a seperate panel incase the fire protection in hood activates and shuts off only the kitchen equipment and not the rest of the restaurant?

Thank you

 

[Buck Parrish]

The same panel is fine.

 

[LarryFine]

Welcome to the forum.

Are you talking about a panel with a shunt-trip main breaker, or separate shunt-trips for each circuit?

If the former, that won't work. The exhaust fan, horn/strobe, etc., need to have power after a system trip.

And, no, you definitely do not want a system trip to shut down the entire building.

 

[Kansas Mountain]

In the event of a fire, all heat producing equipment under the hood must automatically be shutoff. To keep my designs simple and consistent, I would always just have a contactor (or series of contactors if necessary) that all equipment and outlets under the hood were routed through. If the hood fire suppression gets activated, then the contactor would open all necessary circuits. You don't want to trip any additional circuits and wind up shutting down equipment like the freezers/coolers/POS systems/etc. and cause unnecessary loss of product and accounting headaches.

 

[kwired]

Details of what you have make a difference. if you only have a couple loads that need to shut off when fire suppression is activated you might just put in a couple shunt trip breakers for each of those loads. If you have several items to shut down you possibly are better off supplying a sub panel and use a shunt trip for feeder breaker or even the main in the panel. But you likely don't want any other loads in that panel besides what is required to be shut down when the fire suppression is activated.

 

[d0nut]

Also, you typically can't get a shunt trip and GFCI trip in the size of breakers for the circuits you would have under the hood. That either leaves you with shunt trips in the breakers and remote mounted GFCI, or shunting a main in a subpanel and putting the required GFCI in the branch breakers.

 

[kwired]

Also, you typically can't get a shunt trip and GFCI trip in the size of breakers for the circuits you would have under the hood. That either leaves you with shunt trips in the breakers and remote mounted GFCI, or shunting a main in a subpanel and putting the required GFCI in the branch breakers.

True. I haven't done many these in some time and forgot about the GFCI being required on most anything normally involved. Most recent involvement was on relays instead of shunt trip breakers.

 

[gadfly56]

In the event of a fire, all heat producing equipment under the hood must automatically be shutoff. To keep my designs simple and consistent, I would always just have a contactor (or series of contactors if necessary) that all equipment and outlets under the hood were routed through. If the hood fire suppression gets activated, then the contactor would open all necessary circuits. You don't want to trip any additional circuits and wind up shutting down equipment like the freezers/coolers/POS systems/etc. and cause unnecessary loss of product and accounting headaches.

^^^This right here. I would only add, depending on how much electrical equipment you're talking about, you might use a contactor to open a sub-panel instead, if there are enough circuits to justify the sub-panel.

 

[Cartoon1]

Welcome to the forum.

Are you talking about a panel with a shunt-trip main breaker, or separate shunt-trips for each circuit?

If the former, that won't work. The exhaust fan, horn/strobe, etc., need to have power after a system trip.

And, no, you definitely do not want a system trip to shut down the entire building.

Thank you!! probably separate shunt-trips for few devices.

 

[Cartoon1]

In the event of a fire, all heat producing equipment under the hood must automatically be shutoff. To keep my designs simple and consistent, I would always just have a contactor (or series of contactors if necessary) that all equipment and outlets under the hood were routed through. If the hood fire suppression gets activated, then the contactor would open all necessary circuits. You don't want to trip any additional circuits and wind up shutting down equipment like the freezers/coolers/POS systems/etc. and cause unnecessary loss of product and accounting headaches.

Thank you, much appreciated.

 

[Cartoon1]

Details of what you have make a difference. if you only have a couple loads that need to shut off when fire suppression is activated you might just put in a couple shunt trip breakers for each of those loads. If you have several items to shut down you possibly are better off supplying a sub panel and use a shunt trip for feeder breaker or even the main in the panel. But you likely don't want any other loads in that panel besides what is required to be shut down when the fire suppression is activated.

Thank you. few devices only, so i'm probably going to do few shunt trip breakers.

 

[Cartoon1]

Also, you typically can't get a shunt trip and GFCI trip in the size of breakers for the circuits you would have under the hood. That either leaves you with shunt trips in the breakers and remote mounted GFCI, or shunting a main in a subpanel and putting the required GFCI in the branch breakers.

the shunt trip addition to breaker requires an extra pole if i'm not mistaken. I will have to reevaluate my panel and see if i have enough.

 

[Cartoon1]

^^^This right here. I would only add, depending on how much electrical equipment you're talking about, you might use a contactor to open a sub-panel instead, if there are enough circuits to justify the sub-panel.

Yes thank you. I will have to evaluate the panel for extra poles

 

[kwired]

Thank you. few devices only, so i'm probably going to do few shunt trip breakers.

Keep in mind that many times a shunt trip branch type breaker takes up one more pole space in the panel for the shunt trip module.

Guess you figured that out while I was replying

 

[gadfly56]

the shunt trip addition to breaker requires an extra pole if i'm not mistaken. I will have to reevaluate my panel and see if i have enough.

Yes, it does. My techs have had to install a tandem from time to time to get enough room in a panel for the shunt breaker. I would rather use contactors any day of the week.

 

[LarryFine]

Remember to supply the power that trips the breakers from one of the protected circuits, as the coil in most shunt-trip breakers can not withstand constant energization.

 

[hillbilly1]

Remember to supply the power that trips the breakers from one of the protected circuits, as the coil in most shunt-trip breakers can not withstand constant energization.

I have yet to run across one of those, must be a regional thing. All I have installed have clearing contacts inside, and de-energizes the coil. On the bigger breakers where I have field installed the coils, they have a plunger contact that clears the coil.