More controversy, maximum recept on a 20 amp circuit

Status
Not open for further replies.
e57 said:
YES - IMO

The residential no-holds-barred approach is out-dated, and IMO dangerous. (cut)
Click to expand...
Say one house is wired code minium number of receptacles, but keeping with your receptacle limit.

The same floor plan next door is wired with the same number of circuits, but they used 12" wiremold and has 200 receptacles.

I suspect both houses will have the same load - the number of receptacles doesn't matter. House 'A' people plug in the same stuff as house 'B' family. And if the house B run out of receptacles, they will add 6 outlet taps until they have enough for the stuff they want to plug in. The extra receptacles in house 'A' don't add to the load.

My translation of your issue is, 'Not enough circuits', not necessarily, 'Too many receptacles per circuit'.

Maybe a change to:
rockyd said:
Resi 3va per square...[/quite]
is needed.

cf
Click to expand...
 
roger3829 said:
Where does the code say that?
~~~~~~

Is it good practice, no.

Is it allowed by code, yes.
Click to expand...
As for Resi.... It doesn't and thats the point. Sure the code being written as a minimum - Good practice - hell no... Allowed by code - sure it is. Should it be? IMO - NO! You could go to many homes today and find that a certain percentage have that one or two circuits that trip due to over-load. Most of them were wired by people who took no common sense in the circuit design because they are not required to. Or they were wired for the appliances and uses of the day the were wired - in say 1930.... One outlet per room, all from the same lighting and outlet branch. Sure they worked great in 1930 - but people are using and will continue to use more. And the day the OCP fails - they call the cause of the fire "electrical in nature".

As said before:
Some consideration should be taken in designing circuits if the NEC as a minimum is not mandating it - you should pick a number.... Based on your gut feeling..... :rolleyes: A "home office" would need a few circuits, a hallway is only going to need a GP from someplace else...
Click to expand...

Maybe its just me - I have little trust for the common molded case CB to do what it is supposed to for limiting current. All too often do I find that they will hold far in excess of the rating of the conductors on them for long periods of time. 15's and 20's pulling 30, and in some cases 40A for hours without tripping. The trip time for shorts is much better - but as a means of limiting current to levels required of 310.16 - I have little optomism. Whats worse is the more they trip, the longer it seems for them to take to trip after each time.
 
Cold Fusion said:
My translation of your issue is, 'Not enough circuits', not necessarily, 'Too many receptacles per circuit'.

cf
Click to expand...
You don't see that as the same thing???? If you give 'em outlets - they will use them.... Get 4 kids together with gift cards from Best Buy and look what they come home with. If all four of those kids room were on the same circuit as allowed, along with the living room, and the den, and the hall, and the master bed room, and the rest of it. The code doesn't mandate that you use any sense whatsoever in the design - and I think that it is a problem. Especially since it has been some time now that I have done a home that was 3va per sq' with NOTHING plugged in at all.....
 
Sure how man times hav I wanted to plug something but didn't because the recepts are full....ha


e57 said:
You don't see that as the same thing???? If you give 'em outlets - they will use them.... Get 4 kids together with gift cards from Best Buy and look what they come home with. If all four of those kids room were on the same circuit as allowed, along with the living room, and the den, and the hall, and the master bed room, and the rest of it. The code doesn't mandate that you use any sense whatsoever in the design - and I think that it is a problem. Especially since it has been some time now that I have done a home that was 3va per sq' with NOTHING plugged in at all.....
Click to expand...
 
e57 said:
You don't see that as the same thing???? (cut).
Click to expand...
Considering what I just wrote - apparently not.

e57 said:
(cut)If you give 'em outlets - they will use them...(cut)
Click to expand...
Again, considering what I just wrote: No, I think they will plug-in what ever they will, no matter the number of receptacles.

e57 said:
(cut)The code doesn't mandate that you use any sense whatsoever in the design (cut)
Click to expand...
Yes that's true - 90.1.B

e57 said:
(cut)and I think that it is a problem. (cut)
Click to expand...
And I agree with you. But it is still a design issue, not a code issue.

cf
 
Cold Fusion said:
Again, considering what I just wrote: No, I think they will plug-in what ever they will, no matter the number of receptacles.


And I agree with you. But it is still a design issue, not a code issue.

cf
Click to expand...
If you self-impose a limit to the number of outlets to some realistic number - it would matter less than just short of the whole house on one circuit - as is allowed now. IMO the code not mandating some common sense design as they do in commecial (Which I stated is a little low) is a problem with the code - and should be updated.
 
e57 said:
Sure - Yes - I have a feeling you're going to say that the OCP will operate for sure... That you can trust a breaker will limit the current on the circuit after the 50th time it tripped?
Click to expand...
It's been my experience that a breaker that has tripped that many times tends to be more sensitive than stubborn....:rolleyes:

More nuisance trips than actual overloads! :grin:
 
e57 said:
Some yes - some not. Point being I'm sure the trip curve changes...
Click to expand...
There are absolutely no published values for adjusting the trip curves of breakers based on operation. The bi-metal in breakers do not flex far enough to be damaged by multiple operations, just like the ones in thermostats don't change after a couple of days in operation. It is possible for the latching mechanism to wear out which is why they may appear to become more sensitive.

In general most OCPDs, fuses and breakers, will carry 133% for an extremely long period of time. If the ambient air around an OCPD stays below 40?C (104?F) they will take an even longer time to trip.
 
the only reason i would think that the code would put a limit on other than dwelling receptacles is that in a dwelling, you probaly wouldnt find much of a load on any one circiut on a receptacle, but say for instance in a commercial building, you may find much larger loads on the same 120 volt circuit. non dwelling can cover alot of different kinds of businesses and factories, and what not. you just gotta do the math.
 
jim dungar said:
In general most OCPDs, fuses and breakers, will carry 133% for an extremely long period of time. If the ambient air around an OCPD stays below 40?C (104?F) they will take an even longer time to trip.
Click to expand...

And I am willing to bet that the ratings in table 310.16 take that into account. :smile:
 
e57 said:
You don't see that as the same thing????
Click to expand...

I know that I do not see it as the same thing at all.


Home owners do not buy electrical equipment based on the amount of circuits or outlets that we provide.

And if you do not trust breakers to do there job I don't see how you can do this work at all?:confused::confused:
 
I submitted a proposal for the 2011 Code suggesting a FPN after Section 220.14(I) stating that the intention of this section is not meant to limit the number of receptacles on a circuit. With a little luck, the discussion will end with the next ROP
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top