multi-wire branch neutral

Status
Not open for further replies.

buzzlectric

Member
Location
Iowa
i can't find the art. # to solve problem.
i say in a 208/120 system, when you pull all 3 lines/phases and 1 neutral you have to have a 3pole breaker, all loads are 120 volt no load uses more than 1 line and a neutral.

co-worker says they don't need to be on a 3pole breaker or be tied togrther neutral is neutral no matter were you get it.
 
Re: multi-wire branch neutral

Originally posted by buzzlectric:
...i say in a 208/120 system, when you pull all 3 lines/phases and 1 neutral you have to have a 3pole breaker, all loads are 120 volt no load uses more than 1 line and a neutral...

And I say you are wrong. :)
 
Re: multi-wire branch neutral

See 210.4. You will not need a three pole breaker or handle ties unless all three ungrounded conductors land on one yoke or piece of equipment.

Roger
 
Re: multi-wire branch neutral

Try Article 100. The definition of Brnch Circuit, Multiwire" fits the situation you have described, and does not prohibit the use of separate breakers. The breakers do not even have to be side-by-side-by-side-(by Sondheim). They do, however, have to be on different phases.
 
Re: multi-wire branch neutral

Originally posted by roger:
See 210.4. You will not need a three pole breaker or handle ties unless all three ungrounded conductors land on one yoke or piece of equipment.
Well, any two or all three.

Plus, if this is a feeder, then the 3-pole breaker is a must. Buzz didn't specify that this is a group of branch circuits.

What's more, he should also pigtail tyhe neutral, and not depend on device connections for its continuity.
 
Re: multi-wire branch neutral

Originally posted by LarryFine:
Buzz didn't specify that this is a group of branch circuits.
I think that the phrase "all loads are 120volt covers that.

Originally posted by LarryFine:

What's more, he should also pigtail tyhe neutral, and not depend on device connections for its continuity.
I agree here.
 
Re: multi-wire branch neutral

Originally posted by LarryFine:
Buzz didn't specify that this is a group of branch circuits.
Larry, did you read the title of this thread?

I'm not familiar with the term Multi-wire branch feeder. ;)

What's more, he should also pigtail tyhe neutral, and not depend on device connections for its continuity.
This is not a "should" situation, it is a must, see 300.13(B)

Roger

[ December 02, 2005, 03:38 PM: Message edited by: roger ]
 
Re: multi-wire branch neutral

General Electric at one time made a 120Y208 panelboard that would accept half thick mini breakers. The circuit breaker phasing would then be AABBCC when using 6 mini breakers in a row. I wonder how many neutrals got toasted because 1 shared neutral was AAB and the other BCC!
 
Re: multi-wire branch neutral

Probably none since 99% here is theory.Well maybe 90%.Oh boy am I going to get jumped on for this post :eek:
 
Re: multi-wire branch neutral

allen, suprised nobody pounced yet..must be too early, so allow me :) If you mean the shared neutral problem is 90% theory, I will disagree.
In my experience I have found a significant number of "toasted" neutrals from improper phasing of the branch circuits. Most often in small industry where "mr electrician" has moved breakers in a panel.
 
Re: multi-wire branch neutral

Jw thanks that was alot less painfull then i thought it would be :D As far as finding a neutral no matter where it comes from :p
 
Re: multi-wire branch neutral

I know where there are some conduits that make nice hand warmers because someone thought this to be nothing more then theory
 
Re: multi-wire branch neutral

That`s a pretty good one :D I did res. service work for quite a few years in N.Y.C. where it was quite common to find just this ,the ground used as a neutral.That wasn`t bad enough but old style bx used the armor casing as a ground path,that and a piece of about #24 ga maybe smaller bare ran inside the armor.Most of it was quite old and well past its prime.
It was quite common to find insulation baked to the point that mearly touching it the insulation would crumble away.Most of the service work was in apt buildings where there was 1 fuse in the basement by the meter.# 14 wire 150 > 200 ft HR to an apt. and kitchen, bath,a/c,everything ran on that one circuit.Until fusestats came along or installed at all a penny got the a/c running during 100 + days.
It was all to common to find the charred neutral crammed in a box and swapped at the fuse panel where the almighy case ground took the place of a neutral,that was if there was continuity in the case ground at all in that case I have found ground clamps on the cold water pipe and ran into a box to get a ground.
It amazed me but this was not just isolated cases it was everywhere.By now most of those old rentals have turned condo/co-op and have been rewired by now.But some of it was just scary.
 
Re: multi-wire branch neutral

Originally posted by allenwayne:
. . . old style bx used the armor casing as a ground path,that and a piece of about #24 ga maybe smaller bare ran inside the armor.
That thin strip wasn't meant to be used as an end-to-end conductor, but only to short adjacent turns of the casing together, to minimize inductance during a high-current fault.
 
Shared Neutral Branch Circuits

Shared Neutral Branch Circuits

Pulling two homeruns in one shot, we can all agree is necessary with the cost of copper. Is it safe? Yes. Does it need to be fed on a two pole breaker if both circuits do NOT terminate on the same yoke 210.4(b)? No. For the safety of the idiot who thinks he knows what he's doing, should the electrician guarantee that if only one breaker (two single poles) is off, that the homeowner, handyman, drunk cousin, etc. doesn't get killed from contact with the load neutral of the remaining, live circuit? Why not? Other than when you are shutting off someone's life-support, when is it that much trouble to turn off one extra circuit?
The problem with installing a two pole breaker when terminating at seperate yokes is that when one breaker surpasses it's load capacity it has to throw a breaker that hasn't surpassed capacity. In other words, instead of tripping at 20 amps, it might take 24 amps to trip the troubled circuit.
This practice of using 3 wire when pulling homeruns was never an issue in Southwest Florida, an area that is more strict about safety than stereotypes on "Southern Construction" lets on.
I'm now in Northwest Georgia and while we pulled disposals and dishwashers with 12-3 in FL, we use 12-2 on the dishwasher and 14-2 to the disposal. The required size may only depend on the few factors we were taught on day 1 (draw, temp, raceway, etc.), doesn't the disposal count as a Small Appliance? Besides, having the capacity to add a small On-Demand or Insta-Hot without knocking down half the house sound good to you?
Anyway, as long as neither circuit is Arc-Fault or GFCI (they DO make 14-2-2 and 12-2-2), sharing the neutral should be accepted by code and common sense in all regions as long as the electrician has done the math and the gauge is within spec.
 
Re: Shared Neutral Branch Circuits

Re: Shared Neutral Branch Circuits

Mike The Mute said:
For the safety of the idiot who thinks he knows what he's doing, should the electrician guarantee that if only one breaker (two single poles) is off, that the homeowner, handyman, drunk cousin, etc. doesn't get killed from contact with the load neutral of the remaining, live circuit?
Yes, by pigtailing any neutral connection in two (or three) circuits fed by non-handle-tied breakers. Besides, at least in theory, a neutral "should" be incapable of providing a voltage-to-earth high enough to cause a shock.
Other than when you are shutting off someone's life-support, when is it that much trouble to turn off one extra circuit?
Only the pro would likely consider the need to do this, which is why the neutral pigtailing is necessary.
The problem with installing a two pole breaker when terminating at seperate yokes is that when one breaker surpasses it's load capacity it has to throw a breaker that hasn't surpassed capacity. In other words, instead of tripping at 20 amps, it might take 24 amps to trip the troubled circuit.
If you're suggesting it takes more current to operate half of a 2-pole or handle-tied breaker pair because of the force needed to operate the non-overloaded pole, that's incorrect. Even a breaker handle glued in the on position will not affect the automatic operation; it'll still trip at the same current/time level.
 
Really? The breaker will open, even with the handle locked in the closed position? Guess I should bust one open and look for the clutch.
Anyone know if there is a device that can be attached to a breaker (1, 2, or 3 pole), with the ability to "dial in" load? The purpose would be to test the reliability of the breaker.
I know someone out there has seen some old breakers (won't name names) that you could literally weld steel to ground without tripping the circuit.
One more thing. Not sure of where to find it, but an experienced electrician told me that the holding time of breaker is relevent to the load. I.E. 20 amp breaker will hold 20 amp load for 1 hour, 18 amp load for 3. Don't quote me on those numbers, you get the meat of what I'm saying.
Is this true or is it "Dazzle 'Em With Details or Baffle 'Em With Bull...."? Where can I find the table or formula?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top