Opinion needed on what I believe to be a flawed question.

Status
Not open for further replies.
jumper said:
Well of course it is only in the 2008 ROP, that is when that section was changed. No more "lighting and appliance" panel boards with a 42 circuit max.



Ya gotta be kidding me.:huh: Ain't ever gonna be perfect.



Teach them to deal with what it is, not what you want it to be.
Click to expand...

Trust me, after 36 years I understand that it's not perfect! But I can't ask a question to the code, if the code doesn't reference it.......
I don't want to teach them inaccuracy......
 
Sometimes the Apprentices can teach us old farts a thing or two about the code because they read it for what it is and not what we've done by repetition over the years.

Biggest problem would be getting us to listen long enough for it to even sink in. :)

JAP>
 
Fanchier said:
Trust me, after 36 years I understand that it's not perfect! But I can't ask a question to the code, if the code doesn't reference it.......
I don't want to teach them inaccuracy......
Click to expand...
In this case it is not inaccurate. It just requires a logical deduction. The exception cannot apply to anything other than a split bus panelboard. Where else can a panelboard have more than one main breaker?

This question should be removed from a test that is supposed to be testing >>>GENERAL KNOWLEDGE<<<.
 
Smart $ said:
In this case it is not inaccurate. It just requires a logical deduction. The exception cannot apply to anything other than a split bus panelboard. Where else can a panelboard have more than one main breaker?

This question should be removed from a test that is supposed to be testing >>>GENERAL KNOWLEDGE<<<.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your $0.02 everyone!!

This is a point I'm trying to make to my partner...... General knowledge question from a 2008 NEC change & ROP shouldn't be given to a third year apprentice who has only been exposed to the 2014 NEC.... The only thing I see split bus panelboards used for these days is back up power (generators).. To be honest, I can't say that I've run across them for any other application, even though I'm sure there's plenty other applications out there....
 
Fanchier said:
Thanks for your $0.02 everyone!!

This is a point I'm trying to make to my partner...... General knowledge question from a 2008 NEC change & ROP shouldn't be given to a third year apprentice who has only been exposed to the 2014 NEC.... The only thing I see split bus panelboards used for these days is back up power (generators).. To be honest, I can't say that I've run across them for any other application, even though I'm sure there's plenty other applications out there....
Click to expand...
IMO, a general knowledge question should never rely on an Exception to answer correctly.
 
General knowledge questions were taken out of the test for this reason exactly....too many debates!

My favorite gen know question is where they ask what the proper way to clean the burr off of a freshly cut end on a piece of conduit (more eloquently put obviously)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
bristlepad said:
My favorite gen know question is where they ask what the proper way to clean the burr off of a freshly cut end on a piece of conduit (more eloquently put obviously).
Click to expand...
Duh. Obviously, you scrape the cut end on a concrete sidewalk. :D
 
Smart $ said:
In this case it is not inaccurate. It just requires a logical deduction. The exception cannot apply to anything other than a split bus panelboard. Where else can a panelboard have more than one main breaker?

This question should be removed from a test that is supposed to be testing >>>GENERAL KNOWLEDGE<<<.
Click to expand...

I agree and I have what I consider an even stronger answer. We are teaching adults. They don't need to know things they have no need of knowing. If the exception is applying to the type panelboard in question then they have no need to know that. You would not be able to buy a split bus panel anyway. So why make them learn something they don't need?
 
Fanchier said:
IMHO this is four single pole breakers tied together mechanically. You have two parallel breakers per phase.

It has been a considerable time, but I have seen panelboards with parallel fuses on each phase......
Click to expand...

I actually doubt that is true. Anecdotally, I have a GE 2 pole THQB breaker. Physically it has two trip handles that are tied together with a tie bar. However, you can't take the individual poles apart. On top of that, the tie handle is stamped, "internal common trip" So I contend that this 4 pole breaker could be exactly the same thing. One would have to do some investigating before assuming it is four separate breakers.
 
The answer is simple, don't teach general knowledge. Tell them to buy Tom Henry practice journeyman tests and time them. The rest comes with experience in the field. Also, make them do a bunch of series parallel circuits and single/ 3 phase transformers


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Strathead said:
I actually doubt that is true. Anecdotally, I have a GE 2 pole THQB breaker. Physically it has two trip handles that are tied together with a tie bar. However, you can't take the individual poles apart. On top of that, the tie handle is stamped, "internal common trip" So I contend that this 4 pole breaker could be exactly the same thing. One would have to do some investigating before assuming it is four separate breakers.
Click to expand...

If you pull this breaker apart you will find four identical 100 amp single pole breakers linked by an internal trip bar. It's simply a cost saving move.
 
iwire said:
If you pull this breaker apart you will find four identical 100 amp single pole breakers linked by an internal trip bar. It's simply a cost saving move.
Click to expand...

I agree, but it appeared that some were thinking that the handle tie was what created the common trip.
 
Fanchier said:
I have played with these in the past (I used to like to dissect things), & the handle bar IS what ties them together.. You CAN trip one without tripping the other...
Click to expand...
If that's the case, then some are, some aren't common trip. Independent trip breakers are required to be marked “Independent Trip” or “No Common Trip.”

https://www.schneider-electric.us/d...d-standards/circuit-breaker-markings-iaei.pdf

Regardless, it is still a manufactured unit and to be installed as a 2-pole unit, so still just one breaker as far as Code application goes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top