Number of outlets allowed on one circuit for office

[FionaZuppa]

so what about a two gang box, with a receptacle in one gang and, i dont know, something else that is not a receptacle in the other gang, maybe a switch with a pilot light. Is that entire box an receptacle outlet or just the one gang?

One of these (pic), with one BC in the box? One outlet. Two BC's in that box, one for the duplex and one for the switch, it's then two outlets in that box.
I'll argue that the NEC verbiage supports taps to, because a switched leg is basically a tap with a inline disco. Anything aft of the switch is pulling power off the BC that is inside that box. Just a single switch box, is still an outlet.

A twist? Lets say the switched leg wiring gets terminated/capped 15ft away in a blank covered jbox. Well, the switch yoke to BC is still an outlet because there exists the opportunity to pull power, just need to attach a load, just as a plug (load) is needed on a recept to be able to pull power off the BC wiring.

Almost anything with a yoke that attaches to the BC wiring will be an outlet point.

 

[LarryFine]

A twist? Lets say the switched leg wiring gets terminated/capped 15ft away in a blank covered jbox. Well, the swithc yoke to BC is till an outlet because there exists the opportunity to pull power, just need to attach a load, just as a plug (load) is needed on a recept to be able to pull power off the BC wiring.

We often call that a lighting outlet.

 

[FionaZuppa]

Not that I'm aware of, as long as both circuits on each yoke open simultaneously.

Would this mean two ocpd's side-by-side handle tied (a typical 240v ocpd) that fed an unstrapped duplex yoke? This would be like the MWBC rule, yes?

I was not aware of this rule. TY for that.

 

[FionaZuppa]

We often call that a lighting outlet.

1 switch and 1 duplex recept in one box pulling power from one BC, is still just a single outlet. Using adjectives like "receptacle" or "lighting" only describes what's installed at that one outlet.

 

[LarryFine]

Would this mean two ocpd's side-by-side handle tied (a typical 240v ocpd) that fed an unstrapped duplex yoke? This would be like the MWBC rule, yes?

Exactamundo.

 

[LarryFine]

1 switch and 1 duplex recept in one box pulling power from one BC, is still just a single outlet. Using adjectives like "receptacle" or "lighting" only describes what's installed at that one outlet.

Ditto.

 

[synchro]

To me the scope of what constitutes an outlet is somewhat vague in its NEC definition:
“A point on the wiring system at which current is taken to supply utilization equipment”.

Now "the wiring system" could certainly include many circuits so that part of the wording is very broad.
But the word "point" can have different meanings which vary in how narrowly localized they are. From Merriam-Webster, among other things a point could be:
1. "a geometric element that has zero dimensions"
2. "a narrowly localized place having a precisely indicated position"
3. "a particular place : locality"

#3 is certainly broad enough that the inside of an electrical box containing multiple devices could qualify as an outlet. Obviously #1 is an abstraction at the extreme end of things, but these definitions show that the word point could indicate a very small and localized place when it's used in the definition of another term. Which would imply that you could have more than one outlet within a box.

 

[FionaZuppa]

I think those definitions describe it very well.

It's my understanding that the "system" is service xfrmr-->disco-->distro-->ocdp--> and all the BC wiring aft of that. We don't take power (perhpas "tap" is a better word) from service, disco, distro, or ocpd.

To me, it all aligns perfectly.

Cheers.

 

[charlie b]

Let's start over. Is the box itself the outlet or not?

I am having a hard time following this discussion. So let me just say that my answer to my question is "no." Put another way: when the rough-in is done, and there are conduits and boxes throughout the building, but no wires yet, the box that will eventually have a duplex installed within it is certainly not an outlet. I believe it never will be. You don't take current from the box; you take current from something inside the box.

 

[FionaZuppa]

I am having a hard time following this discussion. So let me just say that my answer to my question is "no." Put another way: when the rough-in is done, and there are conduits and boxes throughout the building, but no wires yet, the box that will eventually have a duplex installed within it is certainly not an outlet. I believe it never will be. You don't take current from the box; you take current from something inside the box.

Charlie,
You are correct, but it needs clarity. "The point" at which power is taken, has to be a physical location, and that is usually, almost always, likely required by NEC, inside some type of enclosure, be it a wall box, or the "box" in the microwave where the micro wires tie to the ends of the BC wiring. There's always some sort of enclosure or "box" where the BC wiring is "tapped" into, either via wire caps, crimps, term block, etc.

So yes,,,, the box itself is not an outlet, just as the receptacle in "Receptacle Outlet" is not an outlet. "Receptacle Outlet" simply says, "because I installed, or plan to, one or more receptacles and I will created an outlet there, we'll call that location a 'receptacle outlet' ".

Another stab at it: Your rough-in has just conduit and boxes everywhere. Ok, I can walk in there and ask someone (supe, proj head, master electricain on the job, etc), "so, what boxes will be outlets?". I would only be asking for the locations where power will be taken from the BC wiring. What box locations will not be outlets? The ones where no power is taken form the BC wiring, like a jbox of some sort. I didn't even ask yet which ones will be "receptacle outlets", but if I did I would be told the locations (usually a pointing finger at a box mounted someplace) and would know that 1 or more receptacle would be installed there.
Just like the definition says.

Art 100: Receptacle Outlet: AN OUTLET where one or more receptacles are installed.

What's the fix to all the confusion? Ditch the darn definition of "recept outlet", toss it into the pool where it can get shocked by stray volatge.

It's Miller Time !!!

 

[Dennis Alwon]

What you are missing is that the NEC does not care how many devices there are on a yoke. A 3 yoke device is still considered 180V which is the same as a duplex receptacle or a single receptacle

(H) Fixed Multioutlet Assemblies. Fixed multioutlet assemblies
used in other than dwelling units or the guest rooms or
guest suites of hotels or motels shall be calculated in accordance
with (H)(1) or (H)(2). For the purposes of this section,
the calculation shall be permitted to be based on the portion
that contains receptacle outlets.
(1) Where appliances are unlikely to be used simultaneously,
each 1.5 m (5 ft) or fraction thereof of each separate and
continuous length shall be considered as one outlet of
not less than 180 volt-amperes.
(2) Where appliances are likely to be used simultaneously,
each 300 mm (1 ft) or fraction thereof shall be considered
as an outlet of not less than 180 volt-amperes.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

Now that Jamesco deleted his post my post above makes no sense

 

[LarryFine]

Now that Jamesco deleted his post my post above makes no sense

Don't sweat it; we'll be your witnesses.

 

[Jamesco]

What you are missing is that the NEC does not care how many devices there are on a yoke. A 3 yoke device is still considered 180V which is the same as a duplex receptacle or a single receptacle

Sorry Dennis the PDF for the NEC Hand Book 2014 was blocked. Apparently a copyright infringement.

Here's a back door. You can disregard the forum if you so choose. Scroll down to the first answer that shows the page from the NEC hand book 2014.

Is a duplex receptacle counted as one or two outlets for branch calculations?

When counting receptacles or outlets for a branch circuit (where the limit is typically 10 or 12 outlets), does a typical duplex receptacle count as one or two? It seems that they each count as two...

diy.stackexchange.com

//////////////////

From my deleted post:

Looking at exhibit 220.4 for maximum number of outlets on a 20 amp circuit.

Maximum number of outlets 13.

Now count the maximum number of receptacles. 26

What if the single receptacles in the exhibit were replaced with duplex outlets? Count of receptacles would be 30. What if all the 13 outlets had three receptacles on a common yoke? 13 outlets, 39 receptacles.

What am I missing here?

What you are missing is that the NEC does not care how many devices there are on a yoke. A 3 yoke device is still considered 180V which is the same as a duplex receptacle or a single receptacle

Yes I see that now. For years I used a duplex outlet as Mike Holt used in his posted example. 13 outlets, 26 receptacles max. I also see whether 1 or 2 or 3 receptacles are on a single yoke it is counted as one outlet as FionaZuppa has been saying.

 

[FionaZuppa]

What you are missing is that the NEC does not care how many devices there are on a yoke. A 3 yoke device is still considered 180V which is the same as a duplex receptacle or a single receptacle

The NEC words seem to say "per ckt per yoke".
180VA, yes?