HEIGHT of an AC DISCONNECT pull out

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't really care if we call it a switch or whatever. They are a cheap way to meet code. Under normal conditions they are seldom used. Maybe once or twice a year for maintenance of an AC unit. I just can't see paying more for a breaker in a 3r box. They do what was intended and keeps the worker safe and as been said you can keep the handle with you for added safety. My only concern is that it is legal. I do all of my own AC work and will likely be the only one to use it. Should i ever sell it and got an argument from an HI i would simply place a few concrete blocks on the ground under the disconnect to meet 110.26
 
SEO said:
Charlie what about panels, load centers etc. that have a door that has to be opened to access the circuit breakers?
Click to expand...
I think the difference is that with the door open the guts of the panel (i.e., bus bars, breakers, wires, etc.) are still completely covered by an enclosure.
 
SEO said:
Per definitions in Art 100 "Externally Operable" means capable of being operated without exposing the operator to contact with live parts.
Click to expand...
I'll have to think about that one. It might be the death knell to my point of view. I'll get back to you (right after I get the 2011 NEC revised to remove that definition :grin:).

One question, not being familiar with installation and maintenance activities. When you pull out the pullable-out part of a pullout, is there exposed metal visible in the box you leave behind?
 
charlie b said:
I'll have to think about that one. It might be the death knell to my point of view. I'll get back to you (right after I get the 2011 NEC revised to remove that definition :grin:).

One question, not being familiar with installation and maintenance activities. When you pull out the pullable-out part of a pullout, is there exposed metal visible in the box you leave behind?
Click to expand...

No not really exsposed, similar to saying a receptacle is exsposed. You could put your probe in them to check for voltage on line side
 
charlie b said:
When you pull out the pullable-out part of a pullout, is there exposed metal visible in the box you leave behind?
Click to expand...
Good question. The line and load side contacts in the "pull out receptacle" of the enclosure are inside the slots of a non-conductive mold.

The construction is similar to the slots over a standard straight blade receptacle, only slightly larger, depending upon the current capacity required.
 
I would have to agree with Charlie on this subject.Although one could consider any switch a disconnect, not all disconnects are considered switches. If you pull an extension cord out of a receptacle did you turn on or off a switch ? no, you disconnected the power. I would however consider the breaker type AC Disconnects that are not " Actually Breakers" but non rated switches a switch.
 
Jim W in Tampa said:
I don't really care if we call it a switch or whatever.
...
They do what was intended and keeps the worker safe and ... you can keep the handle with you for added safety.
...

... simply place a few concrete blocks on the ground under the disconnect to meet 110.26
Click to expand...

Jim,
Good points.

""a breaker in a 3r box"" is sold by HD, containing a circuit breaker
with NO Thermal sensor inside the CB case.
It comes in an enclosure with a flipping cover, a pad-lock tab,
an internal dead-front, and offers no exposed conductors.
I use them to replace/repair Pull-Outs cheaply.
Some people walk away with fused pull-outs from a neighbor,
so they can re-fuse their own house.

Our inspectors require that the Disconnects (of any type)
be mounted below 6'7", and to one side of the A/C, and always within site.

The NEC is concerned about Fire Prevention
and Personal Safety.

When I get a call to a hot burning A/C, then
Reaching Over or Behind a hot burning A/C
is a matter of Fire Prevention and Personal Safety.

I don't see why some of the guys are so interested
in every possible jot and tittle of a continually revised NEC,
when the Intent is plainly
Fire Prevention and Personal Safety.

Maybe I missed something,
and to that end, I am sure I'll receive comments.

I plan to read iWire's comments first.
I Always read his comments first.

This thread has turned in to a joke.
I've got to go find some place with
electrical theory
and calculations and equations.

:)
 
Last edited:
glene77is said:
Maybe I missed something, and to that end, I am sure I'll receive comments.
Click to expand...
Yea, you did, and you will. I?ll start.
glene77is said:
Our inspectors require that the Disconnects (of any type) be mounted below 6'7", and to one side of the A/C, and always within sight.
Click to expand...
Many members of this forum have expressed a distaste for inspectors that enforce their own views, when there is nothing in the code itself to back up their views. The nature of the present discussion is a debate over whether the NEC wording, as written, would apply the 6?7? rule to a disconnect. There is no agreement yet on that question.
glene77is said:
The NEC is concerned about Fire Prevention and Personal Safety.
Click to expand...
No, it is just about electrical safety. It says so in 90.1(A). I do agree that fires are bad, and I sure you will get many to agree that a violation of an NEC requirement could lead to a fire. But ?fire prevention? itself is not within the scope of the NEC.
glene77is said:
When I get a call to a hot burning A/C, then Reaching Over or Behind a hot burning A/C is a matter of Fire Prevention and Personal Safety.
Click to expand...
The disconnect that is required to be within sight of an AC unit is not, Not, NOT intended to function as an emergency shutoff. It may or may not prove useful in that capacity, should an AC unit catch fire. But that is absolutely not its job, and nothing in the NEC requires (or should require, IMHO) that it be capable of performing that job.
glene77is said:
I don't see why some of the guys are so interested in every possible jot and title of a continually revised NEC, when the Intent is plainly Fire Prevention and Personal Safety.
Click to expand...
Please don?t call into question the professional integrity of any member of this forum. We are all professionals, and we are all aware of our responsibilities with regard to safety. But I must now invoke ?Charlie?s Rule?: ?The code does not say what you think it says.? Under discussion here is what the code does say, what the inspector can enforce. We are not discussing the best practices, or emergency procedures. We are discussing the wording of the code itself.
 
The name plate on the condencing units will specify what type of protection, usually fuses or HACR circuit breaker and sometimes fuses only.
 
Last edited:
charlie b said:
And the pullout disconnect is not a "switch." . . . Want proof? Take a look at 404.3(A). A pullout does not meet the requirement that a switch must be externally operable.
Click to expand...
In view of the article 100 definition of "externally operable," which I should have looked for before I called this a "proof" (mea culpa), I must now withdraw my claim that 404.3(A) provides the proof that the pullout is not a switch.

That said, I maintain my position that the pullout does not constitute a "swich" in the context of the 6'7" rule. My argument in favor of this position is less strong than I thought, but I haven't changed my view on this point. Some people (Al claims to be one) may choose to turn off a running AC unit by pulling out the pullout. But I think that is bad idea, and an inappropriate use of the component. I think it is safer, and a better way to control the task, to turn it of using the "real switch" inside, then turn off the breaker, and finally pull out the pull out. But I don't do that job, and it never shows up on my design drawings (the pullout might, but the instructions on how to use it don't).

So I will have to leave this on the level of "that's my view, feel free to disagree." If I were the AHJ, and if Jim bought me a beer, I would pass the installation with the pullout at 6'11".

But just for the sake of discussion, as this thought just occurred to me and I haven't a copy of the NEC with me and I have no intention of looking it up on-line, isn't there something in the 6'7" rule that talks about the switch handle being in the up position?
 
charlie b said:
..............................So I will have to leave this on the level of "that's my view, feel free to disagree." If I were the AHJ, and if Jim bought me a beer, I would pass the installation with the pullout at 6'11".

........
Click to expand...

:grin:.. you are way too easy
 
Charlie per section 404.8 (A) They shall be installed such that the center of the grip of the operating handle of the switch or circuit breaker, when in its highest position, is not more than (6 ft 7 in.) above the floor or working platform.
 
Last edited:
Okay, I don't mean to throw gas on a fire but, I have installed many switches that you need a ladder to get to. Water heaters above the T-bar.
Air handlers above the T-bar. Role up doors. Too many things to mention.:roll:
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top