A and B both will meet the NEC requirement.Originally posted by physis:
If a range had a fault to the chassis would you:
A: Remove only one pole leaving the other energized.
B: Remove both poles.
C: Do the Hokie Pokie.
I would say this is just to protect the unqualified from flipping just one pole off and thinking all the power is off.Originally posted by physis:
Why does the NEC care if both poles open when manually tripped but not if fault tripped?
I personally would do B then C. But that's just me.If a range had a fault to the chassis would you:
The use of handle ties does not make a breaker into a common trip breaker. Common trip breakers have an internal trip that releases all poles of the breaker on a fault. Because breakers are required to be have "trip free" handles, it is unlikely that a handle tie will open the other poles when a single pole it tripped because of a fault. "Trip free" means that even where the external handle of a breaker is physically locked in the one position, that the breaker will still open under fault or overload conditions.Bob, I've been under the impression that one of the reasons for handle ties is to interrupt both poles of a 220 circuit in case of a fault.
Very true. This fact resulted in one of my most embarrassing trouble-shooting sessions, and a lesson learned, many years ago.Because breakers are required to be have "trip free" handles, it is unlikely that a handle tie will open the other poles when a single pole it tripped because of a fault.
It most likely is a common trip breaker, look on the side and check for the words "Internal Common Trip"Originally posted by physis:
Wow, I thought a two pole breaker with factory handle ties was a common trip breaker.
