conductor split between 2 lugs

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'll assume you are not talking about the lack of white tape. :grin:

I'm sure there is another article but I would use art. 310.4(A) for paralleled conductors being a minimum of 1/0
 
Dennis Alwon said:
I'll assume you are not talking about the lack of white tape. :grin:

I'm sure there is another article but I would use art. 310.4(A) for paralleled conductors being a minimum of 1/0
Click to expand...

I don't have a problem with that. All of the strands were terminated and he did not put more "conductors" under the lug than it was rated for. It would be a real stretch to call it "parrallel".
 
One-eyed Jack said:
I don't have a problem with that. All of the strands were terminated and he did not put more "conductors" under the lug than it was rated for. It would be a real stretch to call it "parrallel".
Click to expand...

why would that be a stretch? It is parallel, IMO. Do I think there should be a problem with this-- probably not but I don't see it as code compliant.
 
Not much different than 110.3(b) (and I agree I hate using that one, but sometimes it's the best we can do), but 110.14 states:"......devices such as pressure terminal or pressure splicing connectors and soldering lugs shall be identified for the material of the conductor and shall be properly installed and used."
The data stickers on the panels give the wire range for "proper use"
 
augie47 said:
Not much different than 110.3(b) (and I agree I hate using that one, but sometimes it's the best we can do), but 110.14 states:"......devices such as pressure terminal or pressure splicing connectors and soldering lugs shall be identified for the material of the conductor and shall be properly installed and used."
The data stickers on the panels give the wire range for "proper use"
Click to expand...

If you measure the individual groups of conductors they will fit nicely within the wire range specified. He did not trim the conductor to fit.
 
They may fit. but the lug isn't listed for that wire range.
That two ply tire fits my truck, but won't carry the payload.:)
 
One-eyed Jack said:
If you measure the individual groups of conductors they will fit nicely within the wire range specified. He did not trim the conductor to fit.
Click to expand...

I don't see how you can use that argument, and then say they aren't parallel conductors.

If the contact resistance of the two sets of wires aren't the same, the current won't divide evenly.

Steve
 
steve66 said:
I don't see how you can use that argument, and then say they aren't parallel conductors.

If the contact resistance of the two sets of wires aren't the same, the current won't divide evenly.

Steve
Click to expand...

Most stranded conductors have an odd number of strands. That alone will prevent the current from dividing evenly. Some even have 2-3 different sizes of strands.
 
That wire was not listed to be terminated that way. Also not good workmanship. Do the right thing and tag it. Not tagging this is unfair to the others that spend time and money to comply with nec. Only hacks do tricks like this.
 
sameguy said:
How other than UL listed is an addalug any different?
Click to expand...

My point exactly. Mechanical lugs for "single" conductors with two set screws are readily available. Two compression points on a single conductor spaced 3/8 inch apart. You guys don't seriously think that a detrimental current division is going to occur at that point.
 
One-eyed Jack said:
My point exactly. Mechanical lugs for "single" conductors with two set screws are readily available. Two compression points on a single conductor spaced 3/8 inch apart. You guys don't seriously think that a detrimental current division is going to occur at that point.
Click to expand...

No, but if I have to go to court, I don't want to try and justify a violation I chose not to enforce.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top