charlie
Senior Member
- Location
- Indianapolis
Re: meter banks
yep.
yep.
meter banks
- Thread starter jersey
- Start date
- Status
hurk27
Senior Member
- Location
- Portage, Indiana NEC: 2008
Re: meter banks
Now I'm seeing what your getting at.
First if we apply where the service drop/lateral stops and the service entrance begins we can see that the service entrance conductors will be at the meter. This would allow us to use the taps at the meter or a trough under the meter to tap the service entrance conductors to supply as many disconnects we need. The problem is the last part seems to require that when it says "several such service equipment enclosures" "Such" seems to point back to the first sentance where it states: "six service disconnecting means in separate enclosures are grouped at one location" which seems to mean that they are indeed required to be at one location? This also seems to change the statment in exception 1. where it says: "one set of service-entrance conductors for each service of different characteristics" and in exception 3. where it says: "one set of service-entrance conductors run to each "
"Supply Each" seems to say only one set of service entrance conductors. As in one set "Supply each"
"For each" seems to say multable service entrance conductors. As in one set "For each"
"Run to each" seems to say multable service entrance cables? as in one set "Run to each"
In your interpitation (if I may use that word) you seem to indicate that "Supply each" , "Run to each" and "For each" has the same meaning?
Because basicly each of the other two exceptions will result in the use of the meter fitting as the juntion box, But this is also true in what your saying for exception 2.
You see what I'm getting at?
Now I'm seeing what your getting at.
First if we apply where the service drop/lateral stops and the service entrance begins we can see that the service entrance conductors will be at the meter. This would allow us to use the taps at the meter or a trough under the meter to tap the service entrance conductors to supply as many disconnects we need. The problem is the last part seems to require that when it says "several such service equipment enclosures" "Such" seems to point back to the first sentance where it states: "six service disconnecting means in separate enclosures are grouped at one location" which seems to mean that they are indeed required to be at one location? This also seems to change the statment in exception 1. where it says: "one set of service-entrance conductors for each service of different characteristics" and in exception 3. where it says: "one set of service-entrance conductors run to each "
"Supply Each" seems to say only one set of service entrance conductors. As in one set "Supply each"
"For each" seems to say multable service entrance conductors. As in one set "For each"
"Run to each" seems to say multable service entrance cables? as in one set "Run to each"
In your interpitation (if I may use that word) you seem to indicate that "Supply each" , "Run to each" and "For each" has the same meaning?
Because basicly each of the other two exceptions will result in the use of the meter fitting as the juntion box, But this is also true in what your saying for exception 2.
You see what I'm getting at?
hurk27
Senior Member
- Location
- Portage, Indiana NEC: 2008
Re: meter banks
I need to add that this interpretation also undermines the whole requirement of not having more than six movements of the hand in both 230, 225, and other places in the NEC to remove all power to a building. This is one of those things that where one section can disrupt another sections requirements. I truly believe that when a single structure (like a church) under one management each building should only have one set of not more than six disconnect's. This is my own belief.
I need to add that this interpretation also undermines the whole requirement of not having more than six movements of the hand in both 230, 225, and other places in the NEC to remove all power to a building. This is one of those things that where one section can disrupt another sections requirements. I truly believe that when a single structure (like a church) under one management each building should only have one set of not more than six disconnect's. This is my own belief.
physis
Senior Member
Re: meter banks
I'm seeing the same thing with the use of "such" in Ex.2.
All of a sudden I don't even understand 230.40 and 230.71 anymore.
I asked Charlie to send me his paper hoping that'll help clear things up for me.
Edit: I spelled Charlie wrong
[ February 12, 2005, 03:18 PM: Message edited by: physis ]
I'm seeing the same thing with the use of "such" in Ex.2.
All of a sudden I don't even understand 230.40 and 230.71 anymore.
I asked Charlie to send me his paper hoping that'll help clear things up for me.
Edit: I spelled Charlie wrong
[ February 12, 2005, 03:18 PM: Message edited by: physis ]
- Location
- Massachusetts
Re: meter banks
Click here to see a satellite image of the building during construction, one wing has been completed and you can see the foot print of the wing yet to be built.
That building had 7 sets of switchgear spread out around the perimeter, I am not sure if they where services, I believe they would have been feeders.
This was a building of one occupancy, with seven 3000 amp breakers 100's of feet apart, that would have to be opened in order to shut it down, not to mention generators that would have to be disabled.
The building was shaped like an ell and it's narrowest dimension was more than 800'
You can't feed that much building all from one place, voltage drop issues would get out of hand.
[ February 12, 2005, 04:22 PM: Message edited by: iwire ]
Wayne it may come down to making a code that works for all situations. we have done some very large buildings, 45 acres (almost 2 million sq ft.) large in one case.
Click here to see a satellite image of the building during construction, one wing has been completed and you can see the foot print of the wing yet to be built.
That building had 7 sets of switchgear spread out around the perimeter, I am not sure if they where services, I believe they would have been feeders.
This was a building of one occupancy, with seven 3000 amp breakers 100's of feet apart, that would have to be opened in order to shut it down, not to mention generators that would have to be disabled.
The building was shaped like an ell and it's narrowest dimension was more than 800'
You can't feed that much building all from one place, voltage drop issues would get out of hand.
[ February 12, 2005, 04:22 PM: Message edited by: iwire ]
dnbob
Senior Member
- Location
- Rochester, MN
Re: meter banks
I believe that the church I used as an example may be more clearly explained in 230.2
"For the purpose of 230.40 exc. 2 only, underground sets of conductors, 1/0 awg and larger, running to the same location and connected together at their supply end but not connected to their load end shall be considered to be supplying one service"
Bob
I believe that the church I used as an example may be more clearly explained in 230.2
"For the purpose of 230.40 exc. 2 only, underground sets of conductors, 1/0 awg and larger, running to the same location and connected together at their supply end but not connected to their load end shall be considered to be supplying one service"
Bob
hurk27
Senior Member
- Location
- Portage, Indiana NEC: 2008
Re: meter banks
Bob a building that large is already covered under 230.2(B)(2)
No exception is needed in 230.40
Bob a building that large is already covered under 230.2(B)(2)
No exception is needed in 230.40
- Location
- Massachusetts
Re: meter banks
Also I am fairly certain that building I mentioned was covered by 225.30(B)(2) which allows more than one feeder to the building and by way of 225.33(A) up to six disconnects per feeder location.
I do agree with you that most times staying under six is a good idea.
I understand that, my point was really that the code already allows more than 6 disconnects to one occupancy.
Also I am fairly certain that building I mentioned was covered by 225.30(B)(2) which allows more than one feeder to the building and by way of 225.33(A) up to six disconnects per feeder location.
I do agree with you that most times staying under six is a good idea.
hurk27
Senior Member
- Location
- Portage, Indiana NEC: 2008
Re: meter banks
I agree Bob
But using exception 2. on a church that may be fine with a 600 amp service which would not require seperated disconnects to me should not be allowed to use exception 2. as it states in 230.2(B)(2):
Not one service drop/latteral which is defined as one service. One service = also one set of service entrance conductors as it clearly says in 230.40 :
I agree Bob
But using exception 2. on a church that may be fine with a 600 amp service which would not require seperated disconnects to me should not be allowed to use exception 2. as it states in 230.2(B)(2):
Two or more service's means two or more service drops and/or latterals!
Not one service drop/latteral which is defined as one service. One service = also one set of service entrance conductors as it clearly says in 230.40 :
Unless you can meet one of the five exceptions.
dnbob
Senior Member
- Location
- Rochester, MN
Re: meter banks
Hurk27
Are you trying to say that since I only have 3 mains, 230.40 exc. 2 should not be allowed?
My reason for it was to save the customer $$$$'s since I could have used an 8" nipple to feed the panel, instead of running a feeder 100 or so feet back overhead to feed the panel at that location.
Bob
Hurk27
Are you trying to say that since I only have 3 mains, 230.40 exc. 2 should not be allowed?
My reason for it was to save the customer $$$$'s since I could have used an 8" nipple to feed the panel, instead of running a feeder 100 or so feet back overhead to feed the panel at that location.
Bob
hurk27
Senior Member
- Location
- Portage, Indiana NEC: 2008
Re: meter banks
No What I 'm seeing is the code only allows the disconnect's to seperated when there is more than one service to a building as allowed in 230.2(B)(2) or 230.2(C)(1) or (2) you only have one service drop to the church which would indicate that you only have one service as per 230.2
the exception 2 to 230.40 states:
Now I agree I might be wrong and would love to hear where I'm going wrong on this as I'm here to learn as much as I can.
No What I 'm seeing is the code only allows the disconnect's to seperated when there is more than one service to a building as allowed in 230.2(B)(2) or 230.2(C)(1) or (2) you only have one service drop to the church which would indicate that you only have one service as per 230.2
the exception 2 to 230.40 states:
which to me would inicate that the disconects would have to be grouped at one location.
Now I agree I might be wrong and would love to hear where I'm going wrong on this as I'm here to learn as much as I can.
physis
Senior Member
Re: meter banks
I've just read What I was sent By Carlie E. Thank you Charlie.
I had undersdtood it that there were only six disconnects allowed per service drop. And to have additional disconnects you need another service drop.
So would it be correct to change my thinking to:
You do not need more than one service drop for more than six disconnects? You can have more than six service entrance conductor sets feeding more than six disconnects with one service drop.
I've just read What I was sent By Carlie E. Thank you Charlie.
I had undersdtood it that there were only six disconnects allowed per service drop. And to have additional disconnects you need another service drop.
So would it be correct to change my thinking to:
You do not need more than one service drop for more than six disconnects? You can have more than six service entrance conductor sets feeding more than six disconnects with one service drop.
hurk27
Senior Member
- Location
- Portage, Indiana NEC: 2008
Re: meter banks
Sam Exception 1. will permit it. As Charlie said in exception one you can tap off the service drop/laterals with as many SEC's you need and at the end of each of these SEC's you are allowed to have 6 disconnects with or without meters. Like I said before think of a strip mall with 12 units then each unit was separated to be 6 offices. In this case you would have one drop to the building 12 service entrance conductor set's run to each unit then 6 meters with disconnects for each office. Thats 72 meters and disconnects.
All I was saying that I don't get how exception 2 will allow the same thing on a single building that only has one occupancy because the wording seem's not to allow the separation of the disconnect's? I was hoping Charlie would clear this up so I could understand it.
Even with how it is wrote in the Indiana 2002 code it's hard to understand this point unless it means that the one service drop connects to (up to 6) disconnects then they can feed as many other disconnects as needed but the code already allows for that so I geuss I'm just cornfussed.
Exception 1. is easy. as each occupancy is allowed to have one set of service entrance conductors for each service fo different characteristics. Which would just mean each unit can have one normal set, one for fire pump, one for emg. back up, Etc... And then each normal set can have up to 6 disconnects. Then each emg. set can have 6 disconnect's and now the back wall of the building does not need to be painted any more as it now has nice steel siding with little handles sticking out.
Sam Exception 1. will permit it. As Charlie said in exception one you can tap off the service drop/laterals with as many SEC's you need and at the end of each of these SEC's you are allowed to have 6 disconnects with or without meters. Like I said before think of a strip mall with 12 units then each unit was separated to be 6 offices. In this case you would have one drop to the building 12 service entrance conductor set's run to each unit then 6 meters with disconnects for each office. Thats 72 meters and disconnects.
All I was saying that I don't get how exception 2 will allow the same thing on a single building that only has one occupancy because the wording seem's not to allow the separation of the disconnect's? I was hoping Charlie would clear this up so I could understand it.
Even with how it is wrote in the Indiana 2002 code it's hard to understand this point unless it means that the one service drop connects to (up to 6) disconnects then they can feed as many other disconnects as needed but the code already allows for that so I geuss I'm just cornfussed.
Exception 1. is easy. as each occupancy is allowed to have one set of service entrance conductors for each service fo different characteristics. Which would just mean each unit can have one normal set, one for fire pump, one for emg. back up, Etc... And then each normal set can have up to 6 disconnects. Then each emg. set can have 6 disconnect's and now the back wall of the building does not need to be painted any more as it now has nice steel siding with little handles sticking out.
- Status