Main breaker in seperate enclosure

Learn the NEC with Mike Holt now!

Main breaker in seperate enclosure

  • Yes

    Votes: 9 32.1%

  • No

    Votes: 14 50.0%

  • I feel neutral

    Votes: 5 17.9%
  • Total voters
    28
Status
Not open for further replies.
GoldDigger said:
Actually, I believe that the FDs prefer the more expensive cheap brass locks that are labelled as having a "frangible shackle". (The shackle is made of cast iron and has narrowed spots to concentrate the stress.) That way you do not even have to bend the brass. You can also use a pry bar on them.
Click to expand...


That sounds even better and I will look into those.
 
As for the OP's question, I do support some type of service conductor guarding. I'm not in favor of the Canadian design because many times in panel replacement, it's just better and easier to come into the top rather than the sides. Short cables would have to be rerouted and spliced if we could only use the side knockouts, or change the NEC to allow them to be mounted sideways. A "happy medium" could be found where the main breaker itself has some type of substantial guarding on the terminals.
 
peter d said:
As for the OP's question, I do support some type of service conductor guarding. I'm not in favor of the Canadian design because many times in panel replacement, it's just better and easier to come into the top rather than the sides. Short cables would have to be rerouted and spliced if we could only use the side knockouts, or change the NEC to allow them to be mounted sideways. A "happy medium" could be found where the main breaker itself has some type of substantial guarding on the terminals.
Click to expand...
I am with you on this, nothing wrong with protecting those terminals somehow, but wouldn't be all that good to lose the space that is lost if the entire main breaker end of the panel is not accessible.

Also sometimes we don't always enter with supply conductors on the wall that the main lugs are facing. In particular with NEMA 3R loadcenters that are bottom fed. Though I wish they would make them so the panelboard interior could be turned around for bottom feeding.
 
electrofelon said:
Peter, Its quite irrelevant what your views are.... ;)
Click to expand...

OK, you got me there. But the point I was making is that OSHA has spoken very clearly on the matter of working live and we simply have to put our personal views on it away. The penalties for working live are severe both in monetary and personal cost if something goes wrong.

n a perfect world, I would like to see less live parts exposed (as mentioned perhaps similar/equivalent to I-line) and then a relaxation of OSHA hot work rules for certain electrical systems.
Click to expand...

I can say confidently you will never see OSHA rules for working live get relaxed and if anything, they will only get more stringent.
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
Because you get a 2 to 4 hour window as to when they will be there...who pays for the waiting time ?... especially where the wait time is longer than the time it takes to do the work
Click to expand...
The customer of course since I don't work for free (usually). The money saved on a disconnect probably won't be looking so good now. How about selling a disconnect upgrade so they won't have to wait next time?
 
mivey said:
Is that a new requirement?:D
Click to expand...

For many areas where POCOs have not required an exterior disconnect it is now a new requirement. And yes there is the argument of meter packs which I have a story about those.
 
Last edited:
GoldDigger said:
Like an e-cigarette or a vaper?
Click to expand...


Household appliance, motor, subpanel, anything. Its not unheard of:


http://kitchenaidfire.com/


That and someone in the process of being shocked such as an energized door, pool, ect. This could be the difference between life and death.

http://terrylove.com/forums/index.php?threads/my-garage-is-electrically-charged-w-120v.13934/


growler said:
You have to use a little common sense when padlocking a disconnect.

You don't buy high quality locks, you are not not trying to keep out real thieves and criminals, you are trying to keep kids out that may be up to mischief. You buy those cheap brass locks that one good rap with a hammer or fireman's ax and they are history.

If you think a cheap lock is hard to get off then try to remove a barrel lock on the meter to pull it. I have seen them get stuck and even the power company couldn't get them back off ( they have to be cut off ).
Click to expand...


What average joe knows the difference? Some do, some dont, most are just happy to keep the kids out. Come emergency spending 5 minutes trying to bust a lock in panic defeats the point.
 
peter d said:
OK, you got me there. But the point I was making is that OSHA has spoken very clearly on the matter of working live and we simply have to put our personal views on it away. The penalties for working live are severe both in monetary and personal cost if something goes wrong.



I can say confidently you will never see OSHA rules for working live get relaxed and if anything, they will only get more stringent.
Click to expand...



Lets be serious, and I am not advocating dangerous work ethic, but who works in a de-enrgized resi panel? Other then when I was first starting out, I dont think I've ever tripped a main adding a circuits or changing out a breaker. I always knew, and still know what live parts to avoid. Personally, as you say, I will take shields over the lugs in the event something brushes up against those main unprotected service lugs. A shield however serves no merit, and it still does not grantee people will throw the main to work inside the panel.

If I may, outside of Canada the approach taken is finger and tool safe shields over the main rather then a complete barrier.
 
mbrooke said:
What average joe knows the difference? Some do, some dont, most are just happy to keep the kids out. Come emergency spending 5 minutes trying to bust a lock in panic defeats the point.
Click to expand...

The average "Joe" as you put it doesn't know that the exterior disconnect will kill power to the house lock or no lock but the Fire Fighters do. I have seen plenty of homeowners that have an outside disconnect and have lived in the house for 20 years and still don't know it's there or what it's for. The good thing is that these people normally don't remove panel covers.

I have seen people that were to excited to hit an E-stop switch in an emergency.
 
growler said:
The average "Joe" as you put it doesn't know that the exterior disconnect will kill power to the house lock or no lock but the Fire Fighters do. I have seen plenty of homeowners that have an outside disconnect and have lived in the house for 20 years and still don't know it's there or what it's for. The good thing is that these people normally don't remove panel covers.

I have seen people that were to excited to hit an E-stop switch in an emergency.
Click to expand...



But for those that do know where it is come emergency only to find a lock? Thats why we have home inspectors instruct new HO on what is what during a walk through. And in terms of fire fighters it wont cutoff any illegal taps.


Either way I still see this a code rule which hold no statics.
 
outside disconnect

outside disconnect

growler said:
The average "Joe" as you put it doesn't know that the exterior disconnect will kill power to the house lock or no lock but the Fire Fighters do. I have seen plenty of homeowners that have an outside disconnect and have lived in the house for 20 years and still don't know it's there or what it's for. The good thing is that these people normally don't remove panel covers.

I have seen people that were to excited to hit an E-stop switch in an emergency.
Click to expand...

I live in a condo complex with 285 buildings. There are 1,700 condo units. The meters are on the exterior of the buildings with a 100 or 125 amp breaker disconnect for each unit. I have lived here for over thirty years. The equipment is accessible and clearly visible to all. I know of no instance that someone has turned off the power mischievously.
 
Greg1707 said:
I live in a condo complex with 285 buildings. There are 1,700 condo units. The meters are on the exterior of the buildings with a 100 or 125 amp breaker disconnect for each unit. I have lived here for over thirty years. The equipment is accessible and clearly visible to all. I know of no instance that someone has turned off the power mischievously.
Click to expand...

Greg I don't think anyone will have a problem with kids cutting the power off either. But if that is the best reason that anyone can come up with for not haveing an exterior disconnect I suggested they could be locked.

If I wanted to I could drive around and shut power off to most of the commercial property in this city by opening disconnects but I don't see anyone doing it. Most are not locked.

If I want to I can shut the gas and water off to, just for fun but I don't see it happening.
 
Greg1707 said:
I live in a condo complex with 285 buildings. There are 1,700 condo units. The meters are on the exterior of the buildings with a 100 or 125 amp breaker disconnect for each unit. I have lived here for over thirty years. The equipment is accessible and clearly visible to all. I know of no instance that someone has turned off the power mischievously.
Click to expand...

Depends on the area. I know of one complex where a group of angry kids did pull it off. Of course it was only once in 5 years of knowing the place, but its one more thing a disgruntled person can use to wreck havoc on society. In this day and age, no thank you.
 
mbrooke said:
But for those that do know where it is come emergency only to find a lock? Thats why we have home inspectors instruct new HO on what is what during a walk through. And in terms of fire fighters it wont cutoff any illegal taps.
Click to expand...

Those HIs must not be doing there job because I find that most people don't even know where to shut of their water if they have a leak.

I guess you are right and a disconnect wouldn't shut off an illegal tap but neither will pulling a meter.

Did you know that body armor (bullet proof vest) won't don't you any good if you get shot in the head. Doesn't mean it's useless.
 
growler said:
Greg I don't think anyone will have a problem with kids cutting the power off either. But if that is the best reason that anyone can come up with for not haveing an exterior disconnect I suggested they could be locked.

If I wanted to I could drive around and shut power off to most of the commercial property in this city by opening disconnects but I don't see anyone doing it. Most are not locked.

If I want to I can shut the gas and water off to, just for fun but I don't see it happening.
Click to expand...

OK, keep in mind that the code compels compliance. Without that requirement, no one has to spend extra for the material and labor. They can if they want, but it's a free choice. With the requirement, all are compelled to make that expenditure. What is your justification for making people spend more money?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top