Outdoor Kitchen----Residential

[iwire]

all buildings are structures, not all structures are buildings, etc.

Which is the same as the NEC so I guess your point alludes me.

 

[FionaZuppa]

Which is the same as the NEC so I guess your point alludes me.

the point is, nec should not use a broad brush in this case. an outdoor kitchen island is way different than say a barn/workshop structure in their use of power, etc. you cannot say why three BC's to a stand-alone island kitchen is not safe, you can only say it's not to nec current code.

eg; why not restrict stand-alone outdoor kitchens to no more than 60A worth of gfi'd ocpd w/ max ocpd size of 20A? three 20's, four 15's ? and allow feeder. something like that?

 

[iwire]

the point is, nec should not use a broad brush in this case. an outdoor kitchen island is way different than say a barn/workshop structure in their use of power, etc. you cannot say why three BC's to a stand-alone island kitchen is not safe, you can only say it's not to nec current code.

eg; why not restrict stand-alone outdoor kitchens to no more than 60A worth of gfi'd ocpd w/ max ocpd size of 20A? three 20's, four 15's ? and allow feeder. something like that?

I cannot say more than 3 circuits to any building or structure is unsafe so your point falls flat.

As far as your suggestions those are as arbitrary as any NEC codes

 

[kwired]

Well given your description the AHJ did not interpret the code they simply ignored it.

Clearly the kitchen is built or constructed.

And it is also built or constructed if it is part of another structure.

The question is whether it is a separate structure or not. Does it need to have a common roof or wall as another structure to call them same structure or can it just be connected by floor, walkway or other less discrete means and still be considered part of the main structure?

I don't think there is a single right answer.

 

[FionaZuppa]

I cannot say more than 3 circuits to any building or structure is unsafe so your point falls flat.

As far as your suggestions those are as arbitrary as any NEC codes

earlier i asked why you thought multi BC's to a outdoor kitchen island was not safe, you said "its not nec compliant"
so from that safety/hazard view of nec, why is feeding such a structure with multi BC's not safe (less the mwbc method) ? twenty BC's all on gfi ocpd's does not seem like a safety issue, unless nec believes that because one ocpd tripped they all should trip ?

my example was "as example". it does however allow more than one bc, perhaps restricts to one feeder, but at same time restricts the amount of power under the multi BC method. if an outdoor kicthen (a unique type "structure") needs ~100A then that should be feeder, but if it only needs 35A then two BC's (20 & 15) shall suffice.

i think you understand my point, so no need to keep referencing back to the nec pitfalls.

nec is nec, and in MH's own words, some of it it clumsy......

Sidebar: What's a Feeder?
Article 100 defines feeders as: “All circuit conductors between the service equipment, the source of a separately derived system, or other power supply source and the final branch-circuit overcurrent device.” The clumsiness of this wording makes this definition hard to follow.

 

[kwired]

but the mailbox post is in concrete, this ufer is better than a ground rod

Does it have at least 20 feet of rebar, if not it isn't required to be used as an electrode, that doesn't mean in some situations it may still have lower resistance then a rod though.

To summarize:

It is not yet clear if this tripping is because of low (near threshold) leakage current, so that random noise causes tripping, or if there is some intermittent event (say a defrost timer) causing much larger leakage current. It is not yet clear if the fault is in the circuit (say because of water ingress) or in the appliance.

The OP might benefit from splitting the loads into multiple circuits, because the ground fault leakage of each appliance and device is cumulative, so the fewer things connected to each GF sensor, the less the chance of a 'nuisance' trip.

If the OP decides to split the loads, it depends upon the specifics of the construction and the local understanding of what a _separate_ structure is to determine if this means a feeder and subpanel are required at each island.

-Jon

If GFCI is at the supply end of the circuit it could just be capacitive leakage of a long circuit causing the tripping and if the GFCI protection were moved closer to the end load the problem might go away.

And it is also built or constructed if it is part of another structure.

The question is whether it is a separate structure or not. Does it need to have a common roof or wall as another structure to call them same structure or can it just be connected by floor, walkway or other less discrete means and still be considered part of the main structure?

I don't think there is a single right answer.

I see there was more posts I hadn't read at the time I posted this.

I will just say that even though that kitchen is possibly somewhat "stand alone" it is probably more a part of the dwelling then it has a chance of even existing if there were no dwelling.

 

[FionaZuppa]

Does it have at least 20 feet of rebar, if not it isn't required to be used as an electrode, that doesn't mean in some situations it may still have lower resistance then a rod though.

almost all of my comments around ufers are in joking manner. if i use a icon, i am likely joking around.

I will just say that even though that kitchen is possibly somewhat "stand alone" it is probably more a part of the dwelling then it has a chance of even existing if there were no dwelling.

its not attached = standalone structure, no ?? i not following your logic, or, is your logic in nec verbiage?

 

[kwired]

almost all of my comments around ufers are in joking manner. if i use a icon, i am likely joking around.



its not attached = standalone structure, no ?? i not following your logic, or, is your logic in nec verbiage?

What is requirement to call it "attached"? So far roofs, walls have been mentioned, but isn't a floor/walkway also going to link the two to some extent? If absolutely not then every patio out there needs either a single branch circuit or a service or feeder supplying it and no other interconnections to the main structure.

I realize this is a bit of a judgement call and that a sidewalk out to an otherwise detached garage will complicate things I just said, but this is likely a patio that is associated with the house more so then it is associated with say a separate garage.

At same time it would not be a violation to run a feeder to every major component of this patio, just like you could run a feeder throughout the house and tap branch circuits to it at each point of usage instead of centrally located loadcenters as is typical.

 

[FionaZuppa]

my concrete patio (50 x 19) butts up to the house slab, it is not attached. my patio cover (50 x 19) is perm attached to the house, my outdoor kitchen is attached to one patio cover support pier. but lets just say the kitchen was in middle of patio, it would be non-attached. the patio concrete is isolated from cover support piers, thus not attached to existing dwelling structure. how items are tied into the existing structure is what counts. the whole patio is "outdoor wet location". i guess you might argue that the kitchen tied to pier and concrete makes concrete tied to pier too. but for standalone kitchen just in the yard, is a separate structure.