Dedicated circuit for iron

[mbrooke]

I was going to ask this in relation to another thread but decided to start a new one. Does the code require a dedicated circuit for an ironing area or can it tap off the required 20amp circuit?

I ask because some front load washers have a 12 amp rating (built in heater) and these do exist also 12 amps:

http://www.walmart.com/ip/Panasonic-1500-Watt-360-degree-Multi-Directional-Quick-Steam-Iron-with-Anti-Calcium-System/14205730

 

[JFletcher]

I was going to ask this in relation to another thread but decided to start a new one. Does the code require a dedicated circuit for an ironing area or can it tap off the required 20amp circuit?

I ask because some front load washers have a 12 amp rating (built in heater) and these do exist also 12 amps:

http://www.walmart.com/ip/Panasonic-1500-Watt-360-degree-Multi-Directional-Quick-Steam-Iron-with-Anti-Calcium-System/14205730

See 210.11(C)(2), unless that has changed since 2008 NEC.

That said, if you know the HO will use a 12A washer and is likely to use an iron at the same time, it seems prudent to run 2 circuits.

 

[mbrooke]

See 210.11(C)(2), unless that has changed since 2008 NEC.

That said, if you know the HO will use a 12A washer and is likely to use an iron at the same time, it seems prudent to run 2 circuits.

My thinking. But if I didnt know what the HO will be plugging in, I could in theory get away with one circuit?

 

[charlie b]

I could in theory get away with one circuit?

Yes. The code requires us to put in one 20 amp circuit for the laundry. There is no mention of what that circuit is required to be used for by the homeowner, and certainly no requirement for us to ask the homeowner what they intend to do with it.

 

[kwired]

How long of duration do you suspect you will have 12 amps from the washer and 12 amps from the iron?

24 amps on a 20 amp circuit but a cycling heating element as one of the loads - probably very rarely ever trips the breaker.

 

[mbrooke]

How long of duration do you suspect you will have 12 amps from the washer and 12 amps from the iron?

24 amps on a 20 amp circuit but a cycling heating element as one of the loads - probably very rarely ever trips the breaker.

My thought exactly. :thumbsup::angel:

 

[petersonra]

My inclination would be to put in two circuits if there is enough concern about it to even consider that it might be an issue.

Why create issues for the HO down the road over something that is going to cost almost nothing to add.

 

[kwired]

My inclination would be to put in two circuits if there is enough concern about it to even consider that it might be an issue.

Why create issues for the HO down the road over something that is going to cost almost nothing to add.

Because there is no issue to begin with, HO is more likely to have kitchen appliances cause this kind of trouble - even with a single circuit to each kitchen receptacle outlet.

 

[mbrooke]

Because there is no issue to begin with, HO is more likely to have kitchen appliances cause this kind of trouble - even with a single circuit to each kitchen receptacle outlet.

But... basically we have a loop hole which lets us wire to code even though the sparky knows of potential overload (at least I do in this case because of the area being specifically for a 1,500 watt iron).

 

[mgookin]

But... basically we have a loop hole which lets us wire to code even though the sparky knows of potential overload (at least I do in this case because of the area being specifically for a 1,500 watt iron).

Code is a minimum. It is as crappy as we are allowed to build.

If it were our own stuff, we'd have dedicated circuit to the washing machine, coffee maker, etc. But when we do lowball bid or design work for starter homes, we follow minimum code.

 

[ActionDave]

But... basically we have a loop hole which lets us wire to code even though the sparky knows of potential overload (at least I do in this case because of the area being specifically for a 1,500 watt iron).

It's thinking like this that keeps pushing the NEC to accept more crap proposals that make it a crap design manual instead of a very good, safe installation manual. It's not the job of the NEC to make sure an electrician designs a trouble free house, only that the wiring as installed is safe.

 

[iwire]

It's thinking like this that keeps pushing the NEC to accept more crap proposals that make it a crap design manual instead of a very good, safe installation manual. It's not the job of the NEC to make sure an electrician designs a trouble free house, only that the wiring as installed is safe.

:thumbsup:

 

[MasterTheNEC]

It's thinking like this that keeps pushing the NEC to accept more crap proposals that make it a crap design manual instead of a very good, safe installation manual. It's not the job of the NEC to make sure an electrician designs a trouble free house, only that the wiring as installed is safe.

Agreed.......let us never forget....

90.1 Purpose.
(A) Practical Safeguarding. The purpose of this Code is
the practical safeguarding of persons and property from
hazards arising from the use of electricity.This Code is not
intended as a design specification or an instruction manual
for untrained persons.So we should never assume it is also a instructional manual for the trained persons either.

 

[kwired]

Agreed.......let us never forget....

90.1 Purpose.
(A) Practical Safeguarding. The purpose of this Code is
the practical safeguarding of persons and property from
hazards arising from the use of electricity.This Code is not
intended as a design specification or an instruction manual
for untrained persons.So we should never assume it is also a instructional manual for the trained persons either.

Yet they keep adding requirements that are more design then safety issues.

 

[MasterTheNEC]

Yet they keep adding requirements that are more design then safety issues.

Well......I can't really say I disagree after my stint on CMP 17 and seeing how the development process changed starting in the 2014 cycle....where the NFPA gave more control to the CMP's to create, change and alter existing language.

It was unprecedented and so.....while i serve in the process I am less than happy about the recent development of the process. However, the public inputs will continue to come in and people are needed to weigh in and filter through the information. The NFPA Process is not going to change so we can only hope that the next generation of CMP members keep that in mind.

I will either remain a believer in the system or become jaded over time....I am on a second panel starting in the 2020 cycle so we will see how it goes. I believe some good work was done in the 2017 Cycle....but much is left to do.

My beef in the process is that in order to add something or take something away it has to be technically justified and substantiated in fact and less on personal feelings.....trust me the system is moving away from that concept....but that's how I vote.....and remember I don't have voting rights on CMP 17 but I had a voice of reason which I doubt you think is possible...but it was a fact.

 

[user 100]

...... It's not the job of the NEC to make sure an electrician designs a trouble free house, only that the wiring as installed is safe.

:thumbsup:. Safety and practicality should always trump any far fetched convenience issues. The scenario put forth by mbrooke really doesn't necessitate the addition of another circuit-the breaker would likely hold as the maximum load, as previously stated by others in the thread, would be intermittent. Besides, even *if* the breaker did trip, when given a choice to go thru the extra cost of adding another circuit just for that iron vs. just using common sense and not running the washer and iron at same time, most people will choose the latter.

 

[GerryB]

I find it interesting when a post like this come up about exceeding the code based on what someone might do. How far can you take that? It will cost hardly anything to do? Really? Another circuit, another 12-2 or a 12-3, another breaker, a 2-gang box, another GFI, extra time?Easy to say if you are not the contractor trying to compete. My not so humble opinion, if the breaker trips, "don't iron while the washer is running".

 

[ActionDave]

My beef in the process is that in order to add something or take something away it has to be technically justified and substantiated in fact and less on personal feelings.....trust me the system is moving away from that concept....but that's how I vote..

Glad to hear that.

...and remember I don't have voting rights on CMP 17 but I had a voice of reason which I doubt you think is possible...but it was a fact.

Good to know.

 

[mbrooke]

It's thinking like this that keeps pushing the NEC to accept more crap proposals that make it a crap design manual instead of a very good, safe installation manual. It's not the job of the NEC to make sure an electrician designs a trouble free house, only that the wiring as installed is safe.

Or not imo. The code should allow the exception for a 15 amp circuit where the washer is in a closet with no provisions for iron. I know of a guy in another electrical forum who will run 15 amp circuits where the washer is a single receptacle.

 

[ActionDave]

Or not imo. The code should allow the exception for a 15 amp circuit where the washer is in a closet with no provisions for iron. I know of a guy in another electrical forum who will run 15 amp circuits where the washer is a single receptacle.

I don't think the code should get involved any more than it is right now in allowing or disallowing anything in someone's laundry room.