Numbering of circuit breakers

[zam]

I have two electrical panels, A and B. Panel A is a 42-poles panel. Panel B is a 30-poles sub-panel being fed-off from circuit breakers (37,39,41) of Panel A. The circuit breakers on Panel A are numbered from 1 to 42. The circuit breakers on the 30-poles Panel B is numbered from 43 to 72 instead of 1 to 30, even though this is not the typical panel-section 1 and panel-section 2 setting. Does the NEC have any guidelines/rules concerning the numbering of circuits? Thank you.

 

[dkidd]

No. I have seen some bizarre systems.

 

[Chamuit]

I have seen load centers side by side numbered that way.

 

[petersonra]

I have two electrical panels, A and B. Panel A is a 42-poles panel. Panel B is a 30-poles sub-panel being fed-off from circuit breakers (37,39,41) of Panel A. The circuit breakers on Panel A are numbered from 1 to 42. The circuit breakers on the 30-poles Panel B is numbered from 43 to 72 instead of 1 to 30, even though this is not the typical panel-section 1 and panel-section 2 setting. Does the NEC have any guidelines/rules concerning the numbering of circuits? Thank you.

isn't this better than reusing circuits numbered 1-30?

 

[infinity]

Since these are two separate panels I would use numbers 1-30 on the sub. If it were a feed through then I would use the sequential numbers.

 

[charlie b]

I agree with Rob. A circuit on the top line of panel B should be designated B/1, not B/43. If you had a feed-through or a double lug installation, a circuit on the top line of the second section would be designated A/43. That said, this is not a code issue, but rather a design choice.