A single receptacle has to be required before an AHJ can enforce that. As I've already pointed out, nothing in Code says an individual branch circuit cannot have more than one outlet or more than one receptacle. Quit perpetuating the myth.
MICROWAVE RECEPTACLE
- Thread starter BRIAN MEDWATZ
- Start date
- Status
FionaZuppa
Senior Member
- Location
- AZ
- Occupation
- Part Time Electrician (semi retired, old) - EE retired.
you change the argument.
post #19, you cannot take a duplex and turn it into a single. a duplex will always remain a duplex whether you break off the tabs or not, etc. maybe you meant to say ".... cannot ....".
Not changing anything from my point of view. All I'm saying is there is no requirement that an individual branch circuit and single receptacle must go hand in hand. 210.21(B)(1) is titled Single Receptacle on an Individual Branch Circuit, and that just says the receptacle cannot be rated less than the branch circuit. It does not say an individual branch circuit can only power a single receptacle.
FionaZuppa
Senior Member
- Location
- AZ
- Occupation
- Part Time Electrician (semi retired, old) - EE retired.
you did change the argument, here's your original post
what i am calling out is your statement in bold. maybe you meant to say "... one cannot remove ..." ??
i dunno what you meant, but art-100 says you cannot do what you said in bold, etc.
kwired
Electron manager
- Location
- NE Nebraska
- Occupation
- EC
If I am wiring a dwelling I am not likely to ask the owner to see their hair dryer so I can include it's nameplate value in any load calculations I do.
I also am not going to ask to see the nameplate of the refrigerator, the range , the dishwasher, a microwave.... at least not a common freestanding 30 inch range, up to 36 inch wide refrigerator, or typical 24 inch wide dishwasher.... these items all get replaced at some time and may or may not be similar rating, and sometimes they haven't even selected the exact model they will be using at rough in time either.
I also am not going to ask to see the nameplate of the refrigerator, the range , the dishwasher, a microwave.... at least not a common freestanding 30 inch range, up to 36 inch wide refrigerator, or typical 24 inch wide dishwasher.... these items all get replaced at some time and may or may not be similar rating, and sometimes they haven't even selected the exact model they will be using at rough in time either.
- Location
- Chapel Hill, NC
- Occupation
- Retired Electrical Contractor
Where in article 100 does it state you cannot break the tabs of the receptacle? If the tabs for the lower part are not energized then you have a single receptacle
kwired
Electron manager
- Location
- NE Nebraska
- Occupation
- EC
And if you run two circuits to it you have two receptacles and two circuits, or possibly one multiwire circuit. Then comes the handle tie rule, but you still could have two hots, two neutrals, the handle tie is only necessary because they are landed on same device.
wwhitney
Senior Member
- Location
- Berkeley, CA
- Occupation
- Retired
The article 100 definition of receptacle says "A single receptacle is a single contact device with no other contact device on the same yoke." So breaking the tabs on a duplex receptacle does not give you a single receptacle.
Cheers, Wayne
kwired
Electron manager
- Location
- NE Nebraska
- Occupation
- EC
Yes, but that is only a part of what is mentioned in that definition.
We have here a little bit of conflict or confusion between definition (sort of a sub - definition) of "single receptacle", "individual branch circuit" and "outlet".
Can one not have two individual branch circuits land on a duplex receptacle and happens to be supplying two "outlets" but is not supplying any "single receptacles"?
I think he is betting his opinion on the word "yoke"- and that the single rec (per art 100 definition) would only have one receptacle per yoke. But I agree w/you- that in effect when those tabs are split and one half isn't energized, then you do have a single rec. The dead half imo is no longer a receptacle/contact device as it is not connected to power and so there would then be only the one rec(the energized half) on that yoke.- How would the NEC apply to the dead equipment?
Last edited:
kwired
Electron manager
- Location
- NE Nebraska
- Occupation
- EC
Or you can look at it as you don't have a single receptacle but still have an individual branch circuit. The word receptacle doesn't appear in the definition of "branch circuit, individual" all it mentions is one utilization equipment - which must have an "outlet", but not necessarily a "receptacle outlet".I think he is betting his opinion on the word "yoke"- and that the single rec (per art 100 definition) would only have one receptacle per yoke. But I agree w/you- that in effect when those tabs are split and one half isn't energized, then you do have a single rec. The dead half imo is no longer a receptacle/contact device as it is not connected to power- how would the NEC apply to the dead equipment?
This is also true.:thumbsup:
To elaborate a little on my earlier point in post #30-
A receptacle is a contact device installed at the outlet. The outlet is a point on the wiring system at which current is taken to supply utilization equipment. If the tabs are broken on a duplex, and only one half is connected to the outlet, the other half is not a rec per the art 100 definition, b/c it isn't connected to the outlet.
jumper
Senior Member
- Location
- 3 Hr 2 Min from Winged Horses
:happyno:
Definition does not say it has to be connected.
Receptacle. A receptacle is a contact device installed at the
outlet for the connection of an attachment plug. A single
receptacle is a single contact device with no other contact
device on the same yoke. A multiple receptacle is two or
more contact devices on the same yoke.
But when the tabs are broken, and you are only feeding one half, the other half is not connected to the outlet and you can't have a receptacle with no outlet per article 100-I do see what you're saying though, and I do concede that installed at could very well mean something different than connected .
kwired
Electron manager
- Location
- NE Nebraska
- Occupation
- EC
A receptacle is not an outlet, an outlet may be located at a receptacle.But when the tabs are broken, and you are only feeding one half, the other half is not connected to the outlet and you can't have a receptacle with no outlet per article 100-I do see what you're saying though, and I do concede that installed at could very well mean something different than connected .
A duplex receptacle is not a single receptacle, but may have two utilization equipment plugged into it - if so isn't there two outlets involved whether you consider them to be at the receptacle or not?
My point was that you cannot have a duplex receptacle unless both receptacles are connected (though I did concede earlier that installed vs. connected could mean different things) to an outlet (point along wiring system at which current is taken....)- if the tabs are broken and only one half is connected to an outlet, the other non connected half would not be considered a receptacle- you have to have an outlet for there to be a receptacle in the first place- if the tabs are broken, there is no connection to the outlet for that one dead half, so you would then only have one code defined receptacle (the connected half) on the yoke- the dead half of the duplex is nothing at that point, just extra weight.
Last edited:
wwhitney
Senior Member
- Location
- Berkeley, CA
- Occupation
- Retired
This.
Also, the definition of 'single receptacle' says no other 'contact device' installed on the yoke. It doesn't say no other 'receptacle' installed on the yoke. So whether that other contact device might not be considered a receptacle because it is not energized is moot. There is still another 'contact device' installed on the yoke.
Cheers, Wayne
Note in what you bolded I said "one receptacle". I did not say "single receptacle". If you are taking both terms to mean exactly the same, then the construing of terms is your fault, not mine.
In addition, a call by the manufacturer to put a microwave on an individual branch circuit is not a call for a single receptacle (simplex). The definition of individual branch circuit does not limit the circuit to one receptacle, one outlet, or even a single receptacle. It simply limits the branch circuit to the supply of one utilization equipment... and last time I checked a receptacle or an outlet is not utilization equipment.
And by contact device, they would mean receptacle, of which..... ah never mind.
I've already encouraged enough depth into an endless rabbit hole, chicken/egg argument.
The only way a single may be required in the case of the microwave is if a manufacturer would explicitly require one (which I have never heard of). The manufacturer recommending/requiring an IBC is not the same as req the simplex.
- Status