Steve Ragan
Member
- Location
- Austin, Texas
I have an electrical engineer stating that it is OK to put a 2 pole 40amp Cutler Hammer breaker in a GE panel, I did not know that you could mix breakers in panels.
Electrical Panel
- Thread starter Steve Ragan
- Start date
- Status
- Location
- Windsor, CO NEC: 2017
- Occupation
- Service Manager
The breaker would have to be listed for use in the panel. Some Cutler Hammer breakers are classified for use in other panels, you'd have to check the specific breaker manufacturer information to be sure.
weressl
Esteemed Member
- Location
- Chapel Hill, NC
- Occupation
- Retired Electrical Contractor
If the Cutler Hammer breakers fits in a GE panel it is either the BR series or hopefully one that is listed for GE. Almost all the manufacturers have made breakers listed for the competitions panels.
I was under the assumption that the breakers were not listed they were "classified" for specific models of competing panels.
- Location
- Illinois
- Occupation
- retired electrician
That is correct. The only breakers that are listed for use in a panel are those that were manufactured by the company that made the panel. The other breakers that UL says you can use are "classified" for that use. This is a case where UL is saying that 110.3(B) does not apply:?
- Location
- Windsor, CO NEC: 2017
- Occupation
- Service Manager
I think it falls under the "yeah, yeah, whatever" clause in the back of the White Book. Nobody's perfect. 
- Location
- Illinois
- Occupation
- retired electrician
What this says to me is that 110.3(B) only applies to the instructions that are in the white book or the actual listing documents, not to the recommendations that are provided with the product by the manufacturer.I think it falls under the "yeah, yeah, whatever" clause in the back of the White Book. Nobody's perfect.
I think it falls under the "yeah, yeah, whatever" clause in the back of the White Book. Nobody's perfect.
I believe this is the case. :?
renosteinke
Senior Member
- Location
- NE Arkansas
Just a personal note ...
UL simply tried to be nice ... and got kicked in the nuts for it.
There's more than a little politicking / lobbying / hand-holding in UL/manufacturer relations. When the Taiwan-based manufacturer submitted his breakers, along with Square D panels, for evaluation .... well, UL had no problem with that. Square D went ballistic. Just to be nice, UL offered to call the other guys' breakers 'classified,' rather than 'listed.' For UL, a meaningless distinction.
Square D wasn't about to accept even that. They happily sent their sales force out, asserting that there must be some cosmic difference between 'listed' and 'classified.' Right about then, UL found itself wishing for a "Way-back machine," so they could return to the first panel evaluation, and just call all the bits and pieces 'recognized components.'
Until that intrepid Chinaman sent his stuff into UL, the lab boys could comfortable hide between the "We don't / can't know without doing an evaluation" mantra. Never reach a conclusion, offer an opinion, accept responsibility- without charging for it first. Hence, the example used by the White book of using the 'wrong' ground bar in a panel. I might agree with UL on this one .... but never expect to hear harp music coming from UL!
Square D wasn't above inferring that the 'unknown' manufacturer was somehow unreliable. This offended the folks at C-H, who saw an opportunity to go where no C-H had gone before .... into QO panels. If Square D is the "500# gorilla" in the panel market, they forgot to watch the 2-ton elephant called "Eaton." Oops.
Square D has based it's entire business model on striving for exclusivity. That's why they developed the QO in the first place, and they continue to work against any form of breaker 'standard frame' scheme. That also was a factor in developing the I-Line .... an attempt to restrict competition. It's almost as if they were a plumbing manufacturer.
The problem, IMO, isn't UL .... it's Square D. Were it up to them, you would only be allowed to use their wire and their wire nuts, to connect to their receptacles and switches. Given a chance, they'd patent square conduit, and insist you use it on their panels. Alas for their plan, NEMA got there first.
We saw similar examples of such deplorable (even corrupt) behavior when the Steel Pipe Institute packed NFPA conventions, in an attempt to ban 'smurf' pipe. Others have alleged manufacturer influence regarding AFCI's and tamper-resistant receptacles. Time to wake up, Hansel and Gretle, and recognize that there ARE witches in the forest.
UL simply tried to be nice ... and got kicked in the nuts for it.
There's more than a little politicking / lobbying / hand-holding in UL/manufacturer relations. When the Taiwan-based manufacturer submitted his breakers, along with Square D panels, for evaluation .... well, UL had no problem with that. Square D went ballistic. Just to be nice, UL offered to call the other guys' breakers 'classified,' rather than 'listed.' For UL, a meaningless distinction.
Square D wasn't about to accept even that. They happily sent their sales force out, asserting that there must be some cosmic difference between 'listed' and 'classified.' Right about then, UL found itself wishing for a "Way-back machine," so they could return to the first panel evaluation, and just call all the bits and pieces 'recognized components.'
Until that intrepid Chinaman sent his stuff into UL, the lab boys could comfortable hide between the "We don't / can't know without doing an evaluation" mantra. Never reach a conclusion, offer an opinion, accept responsibility- without charging for it first. Hence, the example used by the White book of using the 'wrong' ground bar in a panel. I might agree with UL on this one .... but never expect to hear harp music coming from UL!
Square D wasn't above inferring that the 'unknown' manufacturer was somehow unreliable. This offended the folks at C-H, who saw an opportunity to go where no C-H had gone before .... into QO panels. If Square D is the "500# gorilla" in the panel market, they forgot to watch the 2-ton elephant called "Eaton." Oops.
Square D has based it's entire business model on striving for exclusivity. That's why they developed the QO in the first place, and they continue to work against any form of breaker 'standard frame' scheme. That also was a factor in developing the I-Line .... an attempt to restrict competition. It's almost as if they were a plumbing manufacturer.
The problem, IMO, isn't UL .... it's Square D. Were it up to them, you would only be allowed to use their wire and their wire nuts, to connect to their receptacles and switches. Given a chance, they'd patent square conduit, and insist you use it on their panels. Alas for their plan, NEMA got there first.
We saw similar examples of such deplorable (even corrupt) behavior when the Steel Pipe Institute packed NFPA conventions, in an attempt to ban 'smurf' pipe. Others have alleged manufacturer influence regarding AFCI's and tamper-resistant receptacles. Time to wake up, Hansel and Gretle, and recognize that there ARE witches in the forest.
- Location
- Windsor, CO NEC: 2017
- Occupation
- Service Manager
Do you have anything to back that story up? :blink:
- Status